Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to Sanctuary Cities: 

You Will ‘Comply With the Law’

SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/item/24725-texas-governor-abbott-to-sign-law-banning-illegal-alien-sanctuary-citiesrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Texas Governor Greg Abbott (shown) has said he’ll sign a law banning sanctuary cities in the Lone Star State. In a November 27 reply to an inquiry from a Twitter user who asked whether he would respond to overtures from political candidates who want Travis County to stop cooperating with ICE agents and make Austin a sanctuary city, Abbott tweeted back: “I’m going to sign a law that bans sanctuary cities. Also I’ve already issued an order cutting funding to sanctuary cities.”
Abbott criticized Dallas County Sheriff Lupe Valdez in October 2015 after she said she would no longer comply with immigration hold requests for people accused of minor offenses, saying: “Your decision to not fully honor ICE’s requests to detain criminal immigrants poses a serious danger to Texans. These detainers provide ICE with the critical notice and time it needs to take incarcerated immigrants into federal custody.”
Sanctuary cities essentially are those that refuse to cooperate in enforcing federal immigration law and refuse to hold illegal aliens arrested on minor charges until ICE agents can pick them up. Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) may issue an immigration detainer to another federal, or to a state or local law-enforcement agency, to inform the agency that ICE intends to assume custody of an individual and to request that the agency notify ICE prior to the time when the individual would otherwise be released. It is this type of cooperation that the sanctuary cities refuse to engage in.
On November 15, Texas State Senator Charles Perry (R-Lubbock) filed a bill (S.B. 4) to end “sanctuary cities” in Texas and force compliance with Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainers.
Courthouse News Service (CN) reported on November 18 that S.B. 4 requires local law-enforcement officers to provide notice to a judge or magistrate that an arrested person is in the country illegally if he or she cannot prove a legal right to be in the country within 48 hours.
The law would allow people to file complaints with the Texas attorney general if local authorities carry out sanctuary city policies that discourage enforcement of federal immigration laws.
The attorney general would then have authority to pursue the alleged violations in court, and the local municipality would be denied state grant money for the following year.
Perry explained his bill as follows:
Put simply, sanctuary city policies are any policies that prevent law enforcement from enforcing immigration laws already on the books. This can include, but is not limited to, prohibiting officers from inquiring about immigration status of suspected criminals or ignoring immigration detainers in our corrections system
CN cited Perry’s statement that more than 204,000 criminal aliens were in Texas jails between June 1, 2011 and October 31 this year.
“Of those, 66 percent were identified as being in the U.S. illegally at the time of their last arrest,” Perry said. “These arrests include 1,101 homicide charges, 65,118 assault charges, and 5,745 sexual assault charges.”
The Texas Tribune reported on August 31 that the Democratic candidate for Travis County sheriff, Constable Sally Hernandez, had promised to remove U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, from the county jail. She promised that, if elected, she would not hold illegal-alien inmates for ICE when the federal agency seeks to deport them.
“I just don’t think you solve the criminal justice process by deporting them,” Hernandez told the Texas Tribuneduring an interview in her office during the last week of August. “We talk about being progressive. I believe we need to lead the way.”
Hernandez’ Republican opponent, Joe Martinez, favored cooperating with ICE by holding immigrants the agency wants, as did the current sheriff of Travis County, Democrat Greg Hamilton.
“How can you release somebody back into the population to do more harm? Where is it going to stop? When you hurt or maim and kill somebody? An American citizen or another immigrant? The federal government has a job to do,” the Tribune quote Martinez as saying. “Let’s let them do their job.”
However, Hernandez won the race for Travis County Sheriff, whose jurisdiction includes the city of Austin, by a landslide, winning 60 percent of the vote to Martinez’ 32 percent.
It was probably this event that prompted the individual who tweeted Abbot to ask what he intended to do about Texas cities who declared themselves to be “sanctuary cities.”
The rise of sanctuary cities is a phenomenon that has appeared across the United States, especially in areas dominated by liberal Democratic-controlled city governments. A November 15 AP report noted several mayors who said they will resist President-elect Donald Trump’s plan to increase deportations of illegal aliens and refuse to cooperate in enforcing federal immigration laws. These include New York’s Bill de Blasio, Chicago’s Rahm Emanuel, and Seattle’s Ed Murray.
“Seattle has always been a welcoming city,” the report quoted Murray as stating on November 14. “The last thing I want is for us to start turning on our neighbors.”
Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck told the Los Angeles Times that he will stick to a longtime hands-off policy on immigration issues. L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti supports that position, but stopped short of calling L.A. a sanctuary city because he said the term is “ill-defined.”
And, noted AP, Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney restored sanctuary status to the city when he took office in January and said last week that the city would “protect” its residents, presumably from federal enforcement measures.
During the presidential campaign, Trump gave a speech in which he promised to “end the sanctuary cities” and said those “that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities will not receive taxpayer dollars.” He blamed such policies for “so many needless deaths.”
While Trump’s promise to enforce our nation’s immigration laws is commendable, there is a good chance that most of those taxpayer dollars he threatened to withhold should not have been sent to the states anyway. If Trump aspires to be a constitutionalist president, he will do well to remember the words of James Madison, who has been called the father of our Constitution:
The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. … The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State.
An ideal solution to ending sanctuary cities, therefore, might be to forget about granting or withholding federal funds to them, and supporting governors such as Greg Abbott who will do what needs to be done at the state level.
Related articles:


SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/24724-clinton-supporters-threats-to-electors-are-escalatingrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The “tolerant” Left continues to flail in the weeks following the presidential election. Clinton supporters have already made headlines over their petulant and in some cases violent reactions to the election results, but after their kicking and screaming has failed to make any change, they’ve resorted to bullying and threats. According to WND.com, disgruntled individuals and groups have reached out to Electoral College voters not only to persuade them to switch their votes to Hillary Clinton, but also to threaten them with violence if they refuse.
The Electoral College will convene on December 19 so that the electors can cast their votes for Trump or Clinton, and all electors have pledged to vote for the candidate elected by their state.
But Clinton’s supporters are reaching out to the electors in states wherein it is not illegal for electors to change their votes. WND writes, “If Clinton’s supporters can get enough of the 163 electors from states where Trump both won and votes can legally be switched on Dec. 19, Hillary Clinton becomes the next president of the United States.”
In the history of the Electoral College, it is extremely rare for electors to vote against the candidate elected by their state. According to Fairvote.org, there have been 157 electors since the founding of the Electoral College who changed their vote, of which 71 were changed because the original candidate died before the Electoral College cast its votes, and three chose to abstain from casting their vote for any candidate. No faithless elector has changed the outcome of an election.
Therefore, Clinton’s supporters are resorting to escalating threats to convince electors to violate their duties to vote for the candidate chosen by the state. According to BuzzFeed, the #NotMyPresident Alliance released the personal information of dozens of Electoral College members in states that went to Trump in an effort to encourage disgruntled people to reach out to and sway the electors.
One such harassed elector is Michael Banerian of Oakland County, Michigan, who told the Detroit News that he has received numerous threatening e-mails demanding that he vote for Clinton instead of Trump, despite it being illegal for Banerian to change his electoral vote in Michigan. “You have people saying ‘you’re a hateful bigot, I hope you die,’” he said. “I’ve had people talk about shoving a gun in my mouth and blowing my brains out. And I’ve received dozens and dozens of those emails. Even the non-threatening-my-life emails are very aggressive.”
“I’ve just gotten a lot of ‘you’re a hateful bigot and I hope you die,’ which is kind of ironic,” Banerian said, “that they’re calling me hateful and yet wishing for my death. They don’t even know me.”
Banerian is not the only one, according to the Michigan Republican Party. “Hearing from them that they are also receiving threats, I’m interested in getting a consensus from the group … and seeing if it’s something that we should report to the police,” Sarah Anderson, the Michigan Republican Party spokeswoman, told theNews. “It’s obviously something that we’re taking very seriously.”
Electors in Arizona are also being harassed, Fox News reports. “Arizona’s presidential electors are reportedly being hit by a flood of emails and phone calls demanding they defy the voters in their state and choose Hillary Clinton instead of President-elect Donald Trump — as part of a last-gasp bid to overturn the election,” Fox reported.
Georgia’s electors too are being bullied and threatened by Clinton supporters, as indicated in a statement by Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp. “The Presidential election is over but, unfortunately, the vitriol remains,” said Kemp. “Our office has received numerous reports of individuals hurling insults and threats at Georgia’s Electors because they are unsettled with America’s choice for President of the United States. This is absolutely unacceptable and those participating in or encouraging these efforts should stop. The electoral process in America has worked, and everyone — Republicans, Democrats, Independents, and others — should respect the will of Georgia’s voters and the Electors who represent them.”
In Texas, Republican Alex Kim said he and his fellow electors have been bombarded with e-mails and phone calls asking them to switch their votes to Clinton. “At first, everyone was kind of enchanted by it,” Kim told NBC5 in Dallas-Fort Worth. “Now all the electors are starting to get beaten down. There are some electors who have been threatened with harm or with death.”
Two Democratic electors are leading a movement called #HamiltonElectors to encourage members of the Electoral College to “vote their conscience” and dump Trump, the Washington Times reports.
Additionally, over four million people have signed a petition on Change.org asking all of the 538 electors to vote for Clinton instead of Trump. The petition reads like the rant of an angry bunch of sore losers:
On December 19, the Electors of the Electoral College will cast their ballots. If they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win. However, in 14 of the states in Trump’s column, they can vote for Hillary Clinton without any legal penalty if they choose.
We are calling on the 149 Electors in those states to ignore their states’ votes and cast their ballots for Secretary Clinton. Why?
Mr. Trump is unfit to serve. His scapegoating of so many Americans, and his impulsivity, bullying, lying, admitted history of sexual assault, and utter lack of experience make him a danger to the Republic.
Secretary Clinton WON THE POPULAR VOTE and should be President.
 Hillary won the popular vote. The only reason Trump “won” is because of the Electoral College.
But the Electoral College can actually give the White House to either candidate. So why not use this most undemocratic of our institutions to ensure a democratic result?
There is no reason Trump should be President.
“It’s the ‘People’s Will'”
No. She won the popular vote.
“Our system of government under our Constitution says he wins”
No. Our Constitution says the Electors choose.
“Too many states prohibit ‘Faithless Electors'”
24 states bind electors. If electors vote against their party, they usually pay a fine. And people get mad. But they can vote however they want and there is no legal means to stop them in most states.
The irony, of course, is that the petition calls Trump a bully when the same people who support the petition are in fact bullying electors to vote for the person they want.
Meanwhile, the ire over the Electoral College as seen in the petition results from a fundamental lack of understanding of what it means to be a constitutional republic versus a democracy. It is a sad testament to the fact that public and higher education is failing to teach Americans the history of the republic and the government that was created by the Founding Fathers. Those who support the Electoral College understand that it was designed to protect the smaller states from being dominated by the more heavily populated ones.
For some, however, it’s more important to get their way than to protect everyone under the Constitution. They are still reeling from the fact that their safe spaces have failed to protect them from the blow that the election dealt.


John Allison

Trump’s Pick Could End the Fed

Published on Nov 30, 2016
Now is not the time to go to sleep. Trump’s cabinet picks — the good, bad, the ugly — could make America great, or let the establish co-opt the new administration. On Monday, Trump interviewed a former CEO of regional bank BB&T & member of Cato Institute’s Board of Directors. Hopefully, Trump will pick Allison, but even if he doesn’t, Allison deserves to be heard. Here’s a sample of what he said…



EXCERPT: Art Sisneros had a plan when he signed up to be a Republican elector from Texas: “causing chaos.” A self-described member of the “liberty movement,” Sisneros says he was recruited precisely to cast his electoral vote against Donald Trump. He told POLITICO he considered casting his electors vote for Trump’s running mate Mike Pence, a creative way to subvert the process while still fulfilling the oath he took to support the “Trump-Pence” ticket. But he shelved the plan when other like-minded elector candidates failed to win GOP seats. Part of his effort, he said, was to highlight the fact that the Electoral College has been reduced to “rubber-stamping” the popular vote rather than its original intent: the body constitutionally charged with selecting presidential candidates in the first place.”


“If Trump is not qualified and my role, both morally and historically, as an elected official is to vote my conscience, then I can not and will not vote for Donald Trump for President. I believe voting for Trump would bring dishonor to God. The reality is Trump will be our President, no matter what my decision is. Many are furious that I am willing to have this discussion publicly. Personally, I wish more civil officers would be honest about their convictions. Assuming a Trump Presidency is their ultimate goal, they will get that. The problem is, that isn’t what they want. They want a democracy. They will threaten to kill anyone who challenges their power to vote for Skittles for dinner. That is evidence alone to prove that our republic is lost. The shell may remain, but in the hearts of the people and functionality of the system our republic is gone. I also believe that a pledge is a man’s word that he will follow through on something he committed to. God’s Word is clear we should all “let our ‘yes’ be ‘yes’ and our ‘no,’s ‘no.”[20] I believe to resign is to honor the intent of the pledge as it relates to the people of my district. Since I can’t in good conscience vote for Donald Trump, and yet have sinfully made a pledge that I would, the best option I see at this time is to resign my position as an Elector.”
SEE: http://christiannews.net/2016/11/29/texas-elector-to-resign-rather-than-vote-trump-i-do-not-see-how-donald-trump-is-biblically-qualified/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
DAYTON, Texas — An elector in Texas has announced that he has chosen to resign his position rather than vote for Donald Trump as an electorate.
“I do not see how Donald Trump is biblically qualified to serve in the office of the presidency,” Art Sisneros wrote on Saturday in his blog “The Blessed Path: Delighting in the Law of the Lord.” “Of the hundreds of angry messages that I have received, not one has made a convincing case from Scripture otherwise. If Trump is not qualified and my role, both morally and historically, as an elected official is to vote my conscience, then I cannot and will not vote for Donald Trump for president.”
Sisneros had also outlined earlier this month that he does not believe in voting for the lesser of two evils, and pointed to the biblical qualifications for rulers as outlined in Exodus 18:21, 2 Samuel 23:3 and Deuteronomy 1:13.
“God has given us a standard for our civil rulers. They are to be men that fear Him and are to rule justly according His law. This has implications for both the rulers and those choosing them,” he wrote. “The Bible knows nothing of situational ethics; God and His Word do not change. If God tells us we must choose (vote for) a righteous man that fears Him, we are not free to attach an ‘unless’ to the end of that command.”
According to reports, Sisneros had previously been considering being a “faithless elector” after expressing objection to Trump, meaning that he would not cast his vote for Trump despite the candidate’s victory in the state. But he recalled that he had signed a pledge that he would vote for the winner, and regretted doing so, stating that it is “immoral” and “unlawful” that the GOP makes electors sign such an agreement.
“I was wrong in signing this pledge and not communicating to the body when I ran that my conscience would not be bound by it,” Sisneros wrote. “I honestly did not have the convictions about the original purpose of the Electoral College or the biblical qualifications until after I was an elector. The Bible calls this a rash oath and warns against making them.”
“The heart of this issue now is, does honoring the pledge cause me to sin? If it does, then I am obligated not to honor it. If it doesn’t, then I am obligated to honor it,” he said.
Sisneros concluded that the best choice would be to resign since he has objections to the way the Electoral College is run, and believes that it would be dishonoring to God for him to vote for Trump.
“Since I can’t in good conscience vote for Donald Trump, and yet have sinfully made a pledge that I would, the best option I see at this time is to resign my position as an elector. This will allow the remaining body of electors to fill my vacancy when they convene on Dec 19 with someone that can vote for Trump,” he wrote. “The people will get their vote. They will get their Skittles for dinner. I will sleep well at night knowing I neither gave in to their demands nor caved to my convictions. I will also mourn the loss of our republic.”


Published on Nov 28, 2016
On December first, 2016 the Spy State will slip a 4th Amendment violating procedure into the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Notice the term procedure. According to an article released by the Electronic Frontier Foundation back in April “the amendment to Rule 41 isn’t procedural at all. It creates new avenues for government hacking that were never approved by Congress.

The proposal would grant a judge the ability to issue a warrant to remotely access, search, seize, or copy data when “the district where the media or information is located has been concealed through technological means” or when the media are on protected computers that have been “damaged without authorization and are located in five or more districts.” It would grant this authority to any judge in any district where activities related to the crime may have occurred. The first part of this change would grant authority to practically any judge to issue a search warrant to remotely access, seize, or copy data relevant to a crime when a computer was using privacy-protective tools to safeguard one’s location.”

All of those using a vpn service or those denying GPS location of their devices through a map app for example are subject to be implicated by the little known procedural amendment. And while Federal Hackers are hacking your device or computer with malware, malicious hackers with far better experience hacking bot net devices will be hacking the Federal government. Causing any and all of your private data to be exposed simply because you were exercising your right to privacy. Which is apparently a crime now. And all of it done with zero public debate.



Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely

Convicted Criminal David Petraeus to Represent US at Bilderberg
Published on Nov 29, 2016
After Trump voters appealed to Trump NOT to select Romney as Sec of State, Trump met with General Petraeus today as Trump’s team said he was a strong contender for the position. Trump needs to hear quickly from his supporters about this globalist successor to Kissinger & Brzezinski.

“After America Comes North America,” 

Gen. Petraeus Boasts


Gen. Petraeus Reveals ‘North American Union’ Progress
Published on Jun 30, 2014
JBS CEO Art Thompson’s weekly news video update for June 30 – July 6, 2014. In this week’s analysis behind the news video, JBS CEO Art Thompson discusses how Gen. Petraeus is openly revealing just how far along we’ve progressed regarding the merger of the United States with Mexico and Canada to form the North American Union; how contradictory U.S. policy appears to be in the Mideast; and how the Christians in the Mideast have been the big losers from U.S. military and diplomatic intervention in Iraq and other Mideast countries.
Petraeus: North America: “Time for a New Focus”

EXCERPT: Former CIA Director David Petraeus is in attendance at the 2013 Bilderberg Group conference to help construct the “big data” spy grid, which is set to become the new frontier of clandestine statecraft as Internet connectivity becomes ubiquitous.” “Petraeus had previously hailed the “Internet of things” as a transformational boon for “clandestine trade craft”. In other words, it will soon be easier than ever before to keep tabs on the population since everything they use will be connected to the web, with total disregard for privacy considerations. The spooks won’t have to plant a bug in your home or your vehicle, you will be doing it for them.” (through your dishwasher).
Petraeus with Paula Broadwell in July 2011.
“In April former CIA director and retired general David Petraeus pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of handing over classified information to his mistress and biographer, Paula Broadwell. He was sentenced to two years probation and a $100,000 fine. Petraeus had passed on several 5-by-8 inch black notebooks containing classified information to Broadwell. Despite his conviction, the former general remains a trusted adviser to the White House on its strategy in Iraq.”
EXCERPT: (Bilderberg summit): Of course, key establishment media operatives are also invited to attend, but only under conditions of strict secrecy. Along with the “journalists,” editors, propagandists, and media magnates were prime ministers, foreign ministers, defense ministers, top globalist bureaucrats, a president, CEOs, royalty, and even some convicted globalist criminals (anti-U.S. sovereignty fanatic Gen. David Petraeus) for good measure.”   




General David Petraeus- American or Globalist?


Petraeus Affair: CIA Director, Biographer Paula Broadwell, Jill Kelley Affair Sex Scandal


Socialite Who Revealed Petraeus Affair Scandal Finally Breaks Her Silence


Jill Kelley Opens Up on Gen. David Petraeus, CIA Sex Scandal



SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/item/24713-anticipating-trump-crackdown-on-illegals-central-americans-surge-to-borderrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Officials in several Central American countries have said that Donald Trump’s victory in the recent presidential election has prompted a new surge in migrants from their countries headed toward the U.S. border. The migrants, who fear that Trump will follow through on his promises to secure the border and to deport illegal immigrants, hope to enter the United States and apply for asylum before the new president takes office on January 20.
The story was reported by the Reuters news service, which quoted a statement from Maria Andrea Matamoros, Deputy Foreign Minister of Honduras. “We’re worried because we’re seeing a rise in the flow of migrants leaving the country, who have been urged to leave by coyotes telling them that they have to reach the United States before Trump takes office,” said Matamoros. “Coyotes” is the name given to criminals who smuggle people for profit.
Reuters also interviewed Carlos Raul Morales, Guatemala’s foreign minister, who said people were leaving Guatemala in large numbers before Trump becomes president.
“The coyotes are leaving people in debt, and taking their property as payment for the journey,” said Morales.
Humberto Roque Villanueva, Mexico’s deputy interior minister for migration, told Reuters the day after the U.S. presidential election that Mexico is prepared to lobby the U.S. Congress or use other “legal means” to oppose Trump’s plan for blocking remittances being sent home by Mexican citizens living in the United States. Trump has suggested impounding those remittances as one way to pay for building a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border to keep out illegal immigrants.
The foreign ministers of Mexico, El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala met in Guatemala City on November 21 to plan a strategy to protect migrants from their countries living in the United States.
At the meeting, the foreign ministers asked the Mexican government for assistance in creating a migrant protection network, to act in a liaison capacity between the countries and U.S. authorities, and to meet regularly for regional talks.
Mexico and Guatemala announced plans to expand immigration services at their many offices in the United States.
In a joint statement directed the illegals in the United States, the nations of the “Northern Triangle” — El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras — said:
The foreign ministers made a call to Guatemalans, Salvadorans and Hondurans, to continue observing and respecting the laws of [the United States], to stay calm and not make hasty decisions that endanger their personal safety, carry the necessary documents and approach their consulates for services and consular protection.
Mexico is apparently offering diplomatic services to nationals of those nations in the United States, according to the Spanish news site El Pais, which stated: “The Northern Triangle countries will rely on … Mexico [to serve] its nationals in the 50 consulates [it has] in the United States.”
A report in the Washington Examiner on November 25 summarized the above strategy being planned by Mexico and the “Northern Triangle” nations as follows:
Foreign ministers of Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras met this week to address concerns about President-elect Trump’s plan to deport illegals, mostly those with criminal records. Their goal: Calm the fears of illegals, help them avoid deportation, and keep the flood of money they send home going.
As Mexico and the Central American countries plan to help illegal aliens in the United States from south of the border, representatives of several groups that have advocated for legal status for illegal immigrants met with Obama White House officials last week to lobby for the release of thousands of Central American women and children who have been detained for entering our nation illegally.
As we reported in our article posted on November 22, a Bloomberg report cited the Women’s Refugee Commission and the American Immigration Lawyers Association as being among the groups whose representatives met with Obama administration officials. The report stated that one of the issues discussed was the fate of about 4,000 Central American detainees who crossed the border illegally after fleeing violence in their home countries. The detainees have been housed in detention centers in Texas and Pennsylvania, some for more than a year, as they wait for immigration officials to process their asylum applications.
Immigration advocates asked the president to either end the practice of detaining families altogether or to direct Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to release families on their own recognizance after issuing them a “notice to appear” before a judge.
During fiscal year 2016, the United States detained nearly 410,000 people along the border with Mexico, a number that is up by about one quarter from the previous year. The vast majority of these illegal migrants came from Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras.
Trump’s announcement that he will nominate Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) for attorney general confirms that he intend to follow though on the tough stand on illegal immigration that was a cornerstone of his campaign for the White House.
During his time serving as a senator, Sessions has been one of the most outspoken members of Congress on the subject of the Obama administration’s loose immigration policies and lack of border enforcement.
“Instead of removing illegal immigrants, the President has expended enormous time, energy, and resources into settling newly arrived illegal immigrants throughout the United States,” Sessions wrote in a January 2015 “immigration handbook” for Republicans.
Sessions has repeatedly blamed the non-enforcement and amnesty policies of the Obama administration for the uncontrolled surge invasion of illegal aliens coming across our borders. In response to that surge, he posted a statement on his Senate webpage on June 3 carrying the headline: “President Obama is personally responsible for ‘rising crisis’ at border.” His message began:
The rising crisis at the border is the direct and predictable result of actions taken by President Obama. He and his Administration have announced to the world that they will not enforce America’s immigration laws, and have emphasized in particular that foreign youth will be exempted from these laws. The world has heard the President’s call, and illegal immigrants are pouring across the border in pursuit of his promised amnesty. President Obama is responsible for this calamity, and only by declaring to the world that our border is no longer open — and that the law will be restored — can this emergency be stopped. 
There is little wonder that illegal aliens in the United States and potential illegal border crossers still in their home countries have seen the handwriting on the wall and are worried that the free pass across U.S. borders will end, come January 20. 
Related articles: 


SEE: http://pamelageller.com/2016/11/obama-fast-track-1800-muslims-rejected-australia.html/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Obama will continue to destroy and dismantle until his very last day in power. Obama is expediting the importation of Muslims who were rejected by Australia.
Let’s hope Trump sends these invaders back to their jihad lands.


News Now, November 26, 2016 (thanks to Religion of Peace):
Fast-tracking the Obama administration’s plan to accept hoards of Islamic migrants from terrorist nations who were turned down by Australia, United States Secretary of State John Kerry worked out a covert deal to bring around 1,800 illegal aliens to the U.S. – ahead of schedule.
Many high-ranking government officials are upset over the secret negotiations that many believe will put American citizens in danger – and be unlawful.
“The chairmen of the House and Senate judiciary committees are demanding the Obama administration provide details of a secret resettlement deal in which the U.S. has agreed to take up to 1,800 mostly Muslim asylum seekers who have been rejected by Australia as illegal aliens,” WND reported. “Congress only learned of the deal through media reports two weeks ago and – according to a letter sent to administration officials by [lawmakers] Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), and Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) – the deal is not only a matter of grave national security concern, but it could be illegal.”
When held up to the U.S. Constitution the lawlessness of the clandestine dealings becomes clear.
“[The deal] amounts to an international treaty that Secretary of State John Kerry negotiated without consulting or notifying Congress, according to Article II, Section II of the U.S. Constitution, according to the letter, sent by [Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and House Judiciary Committee Chair Bob Goodlatte on] Nov. 22 to Kerry and DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson,” WND’s Leo Hohmann explained.
Inviting danger?
Many of the safety concerns are rooted in the fact that the origins of the rejected Islamic migrants are rooted in the jihadist hotbeds of Iran, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan and Sudan.
“Nearly 2,500 of them were interdicted off the coast of Australia in 2013, in accordance with that country’s policy of not accepting any of the wave of ‘refugees’ streaming out of the Middle East,” Hohmann pointed out. “Unlike Europe, Australia effectively said ‘no’ to the United Nations’ plan to open up Western democracies for millions of refugees fleeing not only the Syrian civil war, but conflicts in Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan and even countries like Pakistan that are not at war. Germany alone has accepted 1.5 million Muslim refugees and subjected itself to thousands of sexual assaults on its women and girls.”
Australian officials never extended the welcome mat to the Muslim migrants attempting to seek asylum in the Land Down Under.
“They were rescued by the Australian coast guard from their unsafe vessels and taken to off-shore camps on the islands of Papua New Guinea and Nauru, where they have remained ever since,” Hohmann informed.” The United Nations stepped in and is looking for countries that will take the asylum seekers.”
Knowing the Obama administration’s pro-Muslim stance, the U.N. successfully appealed to the U.S. to take in the potentially hostile illegal aliens.
“Kerry confirmed he had reached a deal to take an undetermined number of the 2,465 aliens for permanent resettlement in the United States,” WND announced. “Goodlatte and Grassley said they have since found out that up to 1,800 of the boat people could end up being distributed to U.S. cities and towns. But very little information has been released about the aliens – or how many will end up in which American cities.”
The lawmakers asserted in their letter that Kerry and the Obama administration acted above the law and beyond their authority by single handedly moving forward with the plan – essentially skirting the system of checks and balances by which they are obligated to abide.
“This situation is concerning for many reasons,” Grassley and Goodlatte’s letter reads. “First, your departments negotiated an international agreement regarding refugees without consulting or notifying Congress. Such information was not disclosed to Congress during the annual refugee consultation that occurred on September 13, 2016, even though your staff confirmed that the agreement had, at the time, been negotiated ‘for months.’ Second, the agreement and the number of refugees to be resettled has been deemed by your departments as classified, thus the American people are left in the dark as to the rationale for this agreement. Third, the individuals who will be resettled are coming from countries of national security concern. In fact, two of the countries are officially designated by the State Department to be State Sponsors of Terrorism. Finally, it begs the question why Australia and other countries refuse to admit these individuals, what other countries are doing to help alleviate the situation, what kind of precedent this sets for future refugees interdicted at sea by Australian forces and prevented from entering Australia, and how a similar situation will be prevented in the future.”
Blind acceptance
Shocking to both conservatives and liberals alike, the Obama administration went ahead and brokered the deal without knowing what they would get, as information about the incoming Muslim migrants was not sought until after the secretary of state signed the dotted line.
“No details have been released as to how many from each country would be considered for resettlement in the U.S., what cities or states they would be sent to, the breakdown of men, women and children, or the state of their health,” Hohmann stressed. “The U.S. sent teams to begin screening the aliens almost immediately after the deal was brokered by Kerry, according to the letter.”
Tougher under Trump
It is argued by Refugee Resettlement Watch’s Ann Corcoran that Congress’ hard stance against the Obama administration – as exhibited in the letter – is a huge indicator that it is being tougher on America’s lax acceptance of refugee. However, she notes that the U.S. shows no indication of being as hard on immigration as Australia.
“There are many important concerns in this letter, but one issue in particular caught my eye – the idea of setting a precedent, which is something I’ve been hammering for years,” Corcoran wrote in her blog.
The refugee watchdog emphasized that agreements like the one Kerry just signed to forward the State Department’s refugee program are by no means uncommon, as the U.S. is in the practice of regularly agreeing to accept migrants –migrants who more security-savvy nations outright reject.
Come on over …
Laying out the welcome mat for potentially dangerous migrants is a policy that the Obama administration has employed for some time.
“[The] U.S. has been accepting illegal African migrants from Malta for years,” Hohmann maintained. “For instance, the U.S. has for years been admitting Libyans and Somalis who arrive on the Mediterranean island of Malta.”
Corcoran says the security issues with accepting these illegal aliens are astronomical, insisting that the U.S. should not open its arms to the problems other nations are looking to pawn off on it – as it has done during the last two administrations.
“Surely these people are undocumented with only their personal stories to rely on,” Corcoran contends. “But we have been transforming them into refugees and placing them in your American towns ever since the Bush Administration. These are Europe’s illegal aliens and not our concern. Just as this new batch is Australia’s problem.”
“Congress and the new president can quickly plug this hole, and we must stop these foolish ‘deals’ wherever they are occurring.”
Of course, a “deal” implies that the United States will get something in exchange.
“But what we get is never clear,” Corcoran said.


SEE: http://newswithviews.com/Kepus/diane159.htmrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
By Diane Kepus
November 28, 2016
DeVos – Not NO, But Hell NO!
significance of the charter school/school choice issue is NOT related
strictly to educational choice. It is related to acceptance of a communist
system of governance where decisions are made by appointed, not elected
officials. Appointed officials cannot be removed from office by voters/taxpayers.

, January, 2011
all thy children shall be taught of the LORD; and great shall be the
peace of thy children.
—Isaiah 54:13 KJV
Trump issued the word “REFORM” in the same sentence with
Betsy DeVos I knew he was intending to back off of his promise to shut
down the Federal Department of Education.
HUNDREDS of Education researchers in this country he picks the rich
Bush Charter/Voucher women who if she cared one red penny about our
children she would have refused the offer. If confirmed we will now
see the rise in school-to-work education and confirmation that she is
not only a supporter of a New World Order but is also a socialist/communist
at heart.
anyone can endorse this woman for the top education position in our
country and not know what the true agenda of the Charter/Voucher push
is all about is a mystery to me.
Reagan was elected president of this country not because he was a great
man or because he was a movie star, but because he had stated he was
going to shut down the Federal Department of Education because in the
first place it was unconstitutional.
he brought in his worker bees, Terrell Bell, Bill Bennett, Senator Lamar
Alexander and others who whispered in his ear and said, you know we
really don’t have to do that – all the department needs
is some tweaking and everything will be just fine. What most Americans
don’t realize is that Reagan also signed no less than 2 treaties
with Russia during his presidency which was directly linked to the sharing
of education information.
around this country knew Mr. Trump was going to have to be educated
regarding Charter/Choice/Vouchers when he said he supported Choice.
With all the names that have been submitted for Education Secretary
– he picks the one the least qualified.
are the Non-Americans who recommended Betsy DeVos?
She has
no background experience to hold this position other than the money
she has given to ruin our children’s futures. Her kids went to
private schools! To prove my point Sen. Lamar Alexander stated on the
DeVos appointment “she is an excellent choice”.
Secretary of Education will the DeVos Foundation STOP and DESIST from
the funding of any organization/foundation of which has ANYTHING to
do with education or are we faced with another “pay to play”
using our children as the collateral?
Signing an agreement didn’t
work with Hillary in relationship to her appointment and the family
Trump this is one area that you OWE all the hard working Americans and
their children in this one appointment – one that is more important
than all the others.

nominating Betsy DeVos, the Trump administration has demonstrated just
how out of touch it is with what works best for students, parents, educators
and our local communities. Just this one time I agree with NEA President
Lily Garcia when she stated, “She (DeVos) has consistently pushed
a corporate agenda to privatize, de-professionalize and impose cookie-cutter
solutions to public education.’’
is EVERYTHING Donald Trump stated during the campaign process that is
wrong with America – she is an ultra-wealthy heiress who uses
her money to game the system and push a special-interest agenda that
is opposed by the majority of voters.
can these people continually get away with dis-honoring the First Amendment
when taking tax dollars to fund private/parochial schools? Once they
take that hard earned money of Americans they are no longer private
schools. How are they making up the deficit and loss in revenue by playing
the federal game?
You Need To Know About Betsy DeVos:

DeVos has NO background in Education other than funneling money to education
causes with the direction and relationship of those wishing to nationalize
our education system. The Clinton School –to-Work legislation
is not a joke.

Everything you read about Betsy DeVos is about her loyalty to the Republican
Party over everything else. How will that fit in with loyalty to what
is best for our children?

She attended Private school and earned a bachelor’s degree in business
administration and political science and was “involved with campus

She sits on the Board of Directors of Jeb Bush’s foundation ExcelinEd
which strongly supports
Common Core
, Charter, Choice and Vouchers for our children?

She also sits on the Jeb Bush foundation Excellence in Education which
was the first and foremost leader in the push and endorsement of Common

With her sitting on this board, it tells me she was fully aware of all
the backroom dealings that went on to get the CCSS in place along with
the Data Mining, National Sexuality Education Standards, standardized
testing and the treatment of our children as if they were all Common
“Human Capital” and alike.

She likes to explain her support of the CCSS as only endorsing the part
about high standards, strong accountability and local control. If this
is true than she has not read the documents and heard the speech’s
by the likes of Sen. Lamar Alexander and Marc Tucker to name two who
are pushing for nationalized cradle to grave control of our children.
You cannot have it both ways Betsy. American researchers have told parents
and politicians for over 30 years that every “dumb” and
“damaging” thing that has been done to the education system
was not for better education.

Elected Chairman of the Michigan Republican Party four times between
1996 and 2005.

Having myself realized during the Obama terms in office that there really
is no difference in the “D” and “R” parties
when it comes to the education of our children the statement regarding
DeVos being “a true believer in core Republican issues that leave
nobody in doubt on where she stands” rings very true.

She actively supported Marco Rubio for President and during one 56-day
period the summer of 2016 she donated $1.45 million to Michigan candidates,
state PAC’s and Republican Party organizations.

No American family has donated more money to the Republican Party than
the DeVos family having given $2.7 million through the 2015-2016 cycles.

DeVos is the Chair of the American Federation for Children, a group
that does nothing but support and fund the Charter school cause.
have no answers for all the Charter
school failures due to lenient legislation, fraud, corruption and unelected
school boards

DeVos belongs to Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan, and
is heavily influenced by Abraham Kuyper, a Dutch writer and Calvinist

Her brother Erik Prince founded Blackwater, the controversial and now
defunct security group that, according to The
Washington Times
, was a “mercenary firm” that “gained
infamy during the Iraq War for incidents involving civilian casualties.

Betsy DeVos supports clean energy/Climate Change/Sustainable Development
through their group the Windquest Group which invests in clean energy,
technology and manufacturing. In 2011, DeVos and her husband, via the
Windquest Group, invested in Energetx Composites, a wind energy company.

DeVos was appointed by President George W. Bush to the board of directors
of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in 2004, and served until
2010. While she was on the board, she and her husband funded a center
to teach arts managers and boards of directors how to fund raise and
manage their cultural institutions donating $22.5 million in 2010 to
continue the endeavor, which was given in the name the DeVos Institute
of Arts Management. At the same time, DeVos was informed by Kennedy
Center official Michael Kaiser’s observation that millions of dollars
are invested “in the arts, and training artists,” but not
in “training the leaders who hire the artists and run the organizations.”
The DeVos’ gift was intended to remedy this oversight. “We want
to help develop human capital and leverage that capital to the greatest
extent possible.

All of DeVos’ attention to education has been through Charter/Choice/Vouchers.
She has NO education background whatsoever
nor does she know by experience
what it is our children need to RETURN to the 1960’s and before
excellent education our children were enjoying.

DeVos served as chairwoman of the board of Alliance for School Choice
and she heads the All Children Matter PAC which she and her husband
founded in 2003 to promote school vouchers, tax credits to businesses
that give private school scholarships, and candidates who support these
causes. Over the years, DeVos and her husband have provided millions
in funding for the organization. Strange don’t you think that
she wouldn’t consider supporting parents who home school their
children yet still pay into the tax base which funds public education?

DeVos’ other activities toward public-school reform have included:
membership on the boards of directors of the Advocates for School Choice,
the American Education Reform Council, Education Freedom Fund, chaired
the boards of Choices for Children and Great Lakes Education Project
(GLEP) She described GLEP as being “focused on supporting candidates
who share a commitment to the issue of meaningful education reform,”
and CFC as being an “education reform watchdog organization”
that is “focused on raising public awareness as to the merits of
education reform.”

In 2013 DeVos was quoted that she was more optimistic than ever about
school choice noting that in 2012 “the number of students in educational-choice
programs grew by about 40,000.” She has offered no explanation
as to the fraud and corruption involving the Charter school system nor
has she offered what the difference between traditional and charter
public schools will be when all schools are to be charter with un-elected
school boards and to remind you is “TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION”.

She shows no support for teachers – only her money funding the
education she sees as being fit for our children.

DeVos and Joel Klein noted in 2013 how great the Main education was
going in regard to performance because they had reverted to the use
of the “easy-to-understand” report cards using A, B, C,
D, F designations. They argued the system truly motivates parents and
the community to get involved by simply taking information that education
officials have had for years and presenting it in a way that is more
easily understood.”
would like these 2 to explain to the country how if at all, the GOING
BACK to the ABC’s of grading increased the community involvement
or that of the parents.
across America soon found out how bad the Common Core Standards were
and to what end they would go to be able to gain control of our children’s
futures: where the money came from, money deals with friends, the lies,
politicians wallets and campaign coffers being filled, years of back
room long-time manipulation with the states being forced to play the
game when the state legislatures were in recess. Yet Betsy DeVos stated
that her being a member of Jeb Bush’s Foundation for Excellence
in Education whose stated goal is to “build an American education
system that equips every child to achieve his or her God-given potential”
totally supports her idea of education.
Foundation’s “guiding principles” are that “All
children can learn,” that “All children should learn at least
a year’s worth of knowledge in a year’s time”, and that “All
children will achieve when education is organized around the singular
goal of student success.”
all children are NOT learning Ms. DeVos, especially those that are now
being schooled in your supported Charter schools with the Charter School
Management companies in control, H1B and HB5 visas coming into the picture
supplying foreign teachers and dollars for funding. There is BILLIONS
of dollars of fraud being shown in the recently
released report
by the Office of the Inspector General of the Federal
and this report does not cover the fraud and corruption debt by all
the Charter schools.
they are not learning because men and women who know NOTHING about education
are continually meddling where they have no business being.
defy anyone supporting Charter/Choice/Vouchers to show America where
there has been this level of corruption in traditional public schools.
This is YOUR money America.
DeVos is NOT eligible for this position and America needs to be sure
to let their Senators know this is NOT their choice for the leader of
their children’s education.
School Trap- Tough Choices or Tough Times–Privatization of Education

2 – National
Education Strategy

3 – Community

4 – “No
Excuses” Education


Charlotte Iserbyt & Dr. Stan Monteith. Investigation of Tax Exempt Foundations
Published on Oct 6, 2014

Congress must resume investigation of tax-exempt foundations
including so-called conservative foundations

Yesterday I came across a three-page document which proves that the present charter school movement is spearheaded by no less than Chicago Communist Bill Ayers’ brother, John Ayers, who up until a few years ago was Vice President and Treasurer of The Carnegie Foundation the Advancement of Teaching in Stanford, California.http://abcsofdumbdown.blogspot.com/20

The government/corporations want their own education system and know that they must control all education in order to accomplish their lifelong global workforce training agenda. The reason they are going after public education is due to the fact that we still have elected local school boards, accountable directly to voters and parents. This is a major obstacle to their changing over our education system from an academic focus to a performance-based workforce training focus — with full implementation of a womb-to-tomb system of control of all Americans… This time around the tax-exempt foundations to be investigated should include the neoconservative Trotskyite tax-exempt foundations, such as Heritage Foundation, Eagle Forum, Family Research Council, Freedom Works, Pioneer, Gates, etc., which all support tax-supported school “choice.”http://abcsofdumbdown.blogspot.co.uk/…

Download the full report of the Reece Committee Hearings

The Traitors Decreed Choice, Vouchers and Charter Schools
Published on Jun 25, 2014
Charlotte gives the chronology of the origin and players in the Choice, Vouchers and Charter Schools movement that evades the oversight of elected local control over publicly funded education. Taxation without Representation!
Charlotte Iserbyt: Why Charter Schools 
are Dangerous
Published on Jul 12, 2013
Roger Fredinburg interviews Charlotte Iserbyt about Charter Schools: What’s the Problem? How the rightwing Republicans worked with the leftwing Democrats to lead us down the road to a “soviet” system ruled by top-down, authoritarian appointed councils easily recognized by people who live under communist governments. Showing documents dating from 1934, Charlotte traces the plan for massive social engineering through curriculum change and Pavlov/Skinnerian methods of behavior modification, generations of Americans have been dumbed-down. She explains how Ronald Reagan’s Soviet Education Exchange Agreement, facilitated by the Heritage Foundation, merged the Constitutional American system with the Soviet system leading to the planned destruction of public education so it could be replaced by the private sector, publicly-funded Charter School system.








SEE: http://newswithviews.com/Nelson/kelleigh374.htmrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
By Kelleigh Nelson

November 28, 2016
ordaining of laws in favor of one part of the nation, to the prejudice
and oppression of another, is certainly the most erroneous and mistaken
policy. An equal dispensation of protection, rights, privileges, and advantages,
is what every part is entitled to, and ought to enjoy.”
Franklin on Electoral College
Trump, I was disheartened to hear you say that we should do away with
the electoral college when you wouldn’t have won the election, despite
millions of illegal’s voting for Hillary, had we not been given the college
by our founders. What those wonderful and brilliant statesmen gave us
is crucial to preserve freedom and preventing a tyrant from getting elected.
These are some of the important reasons the founders gave us the electoral
college! Please refresh yourself on this important part of our Constitution
which has kept us from mob rule since 1787.
the preamble to the Constitution begins with “We the people,”
the word “democracy” (mob rule) is not mentioned in the Declaration
of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution, or the
Bill of Rights. Even the Pledge of Allegiance is “to the Republic
for which it stands.” We are supposed to be a nation of laws, “rule
of law” rather than “mob rule.” Read on…
of the Electoral College
Electoral College was created for two reasons.
first purpose was to create a buffer between population centers and the
rest of the country.
second, as part of the structure of the government that gave smaller less
populated states a voice in the selection of President.
the electoral college giving a voice to the smaller states, the large
populated areas (as those on both coasts) would always elect the president.
Today, those areas are heavily populated with welfare recipients, sanctuary
cities, and we cannot discount illegal alien voters, who vote largely
democratic for the free stuff they receive from the federal government.
The electoral college is a buffer that allows all states to have a voice.
is a Constitutional Republic Based on Laws
of the inherent weaknesses in a government based ONLY
on the will of the people is the potential for mob rule.
This was often the downfall of direct democracies, where all the people
decided on public matters directly rather than through representatives.
We were created as a representative Republic, NOT A DEMOCRACY!
In designing the electoral college, the founders sought to insulate the
selection of president from the convulsions of the multitudes. The college
was essentially an extra layer of security helping to guarantee that the
president would be a truly capable individual.
exiting the Constitutional Convention Benjamin Franklin was approached
by a group of citizens asking what sort of government the delegates had
created. His answer was: “A republic, if you can keep it.”
In creating
the basic architecture of the American government, the Founders struggled
to satisfy each state’s demand for greater representation while
attempting to balance popular sovereignty against the risk posed to the
minority from majoritarian rule from larger population states.
Constitution clarifies the Electoral College in Article
2, Section 1, Clause 2
, and in part states:
State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,
a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives
to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or
Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under
the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
product of the Founders’ compromise has been well balanced and enduring,
and we would be wise to leave it intact, despite what Soros and the Democrats
would like to do to it.
First Reason for the College
first reason that the founders created the Electoral College may be difficult
to understand today. The founding fathers were afraid of direct election
to the Presidency. They feared a tyrant could manipulate public opinion
and come to power. Alexander Hamilton wrote about it in the Federalist
papers. I know they were right!
defends the process for selecting the president. He argues that the system
of an electoral college ensures that “the sense of the people”
will play a key role in selecting the president, while, at the same time,
affording “as little opportunity as possible to tumult and disorder.”
It was believed that electing the president directly, without the intermediate
step of the electors, might lead to instability. Hamilton argues that
electors will be protected from bias since they do not hold any
other political office and are separated from electors from other states.

Hamilton believed that this system would best ensure that the president
was a man of great virtue and ability, which has not always been the case,
but has undoubtedly kept us somewhat protected.
believed that with the Electoral College no one would be able to manipulate
the citizenry. It would act as check on an electorate that might be duped.
Hamilton and the other founders did not trust the population to
make the right choice
. (We have seen this many times in the past,
which proved our founders right, and they didn’t have radio or television
influence in the late 1700s.)

founders also believed that the Electoral College had the advantage of
being a group that met only once and thus could not be manipulated over
time by foreign governments or others. Brilliant men of letters, oh how
I wish they were here today!
Second Reason for the College
electoral college is also part of compromises made at the 1787 Convention
to satisfy the small states. The United States Constitution was made by
and for the states, and the founders wanted each state to have a voice
in elections.
the system of the Electoral College each state had the same number of
electoral votes as they have senators and representatives in Congress,
thus no state could have less than three.
the Electoral College system was drafted by the states to empower the
states, so as to preserve regional identity and protect small
states from the domination of the larger ones.
states it even better than I ever could:
Founders understood that democracy was important, but they knew that
if it wasn’t tempered by a republican system, majority
rule could lead to tyranny
. Thomas Jefferson wisely admonished
future generations of voters that, “Measures are too often decided,
not according to the rights of the minor party, but by the superior
force of an overbearing majority.”

the Framers guaranteed a “Republican form of government”
to the states (Article
4, Section 4
), the rights of states are under attack. Their jurisdiction
in issues ranging from the death penalty to healthcare standards to
the regulation of firearms have become subject to federal mandates.
Presidents swear an oath to “preserve and protect the Constitution,”
and that must include a firewall to shield our republic from the deception
of “democratic” national elections.

founders of America’s Republic, the authors of our Constitution,
were men not only of letters, but of bravery and fortitude who gave us
a document like no other document ever given to any nation. We need the
electoral college, the inclusion of same in our Constitution was a brilliant
addition. God certainly must have given those men a vision of our future
for this measure to have been added to protect us.

men were undoubtedly led by God to preserve the freedoms and liberties
they fought to attain. May the Good Lord above help us to do the same,
and may our new president take time to study the American Constitution
he will soon take an oath to preserve, protect, and defend.


Published on Nov 1, 2016
Hillary Clinton cannot be President because she is committed a felony. She should be charged and stand trial. Her candidacy is now tainted. The Chicago Tribune called for her to step aside. There is substance behind the reasons she cannot serve as President.

Here is the smoking gun. FBI Director Comey wrote to Congress informing them that the FBI was again investigating Clinton because Clinton’s emails had been discovered on a laptop shared by Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin.

Here is why Hillary Clinton is guilty of a crime:

Espionage Act 18 US Code 793 and 1924. Clinton intentionally and knowingly exposed classified information to someone who does not have a security clearance. Just possessing classified information beyond your employment is a felony and we know from her personal server that this information was shared with Cheryl Mills and other attorneys. Additionally, Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner possessing her emails is also a crime as they were shared with them by Clinton.

Secrecy Agreements are signed by anyone who receives a security clearance.

OF109 – separation statement – Clinton did not sign this.
DS1904 – Department of State Form – Clinton did not sign this.
SF310 – Separation Statement – when signed Clinton admitted that if she continued to possess classified information she was guilty of a crime.

Jen Psaki previously stated in a press briefing that she had no knowledge if Hillary Clinton had signed the mandatory separation agreements.

This was all accidentally mailed and emailed to Dr. Larry Kawa. There was also a cover-up to stop these documents from being delivered. To see the document that was sent by the State Department to Dr. Kawa view this link:https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0DE…


“‘Sinners are Loved by a God who infallibly bends towards us, even while we perpetually bend away from Him.’ –TT.”
Tullian and Stacie (Photo Credit: Facebook)
Tullian and New Wife Stacie (Photo Credit: Facebook)
Tullian and Kim (Photo Credit: Facebook)
Tullian and Former Wife Kim (Photo Credit: Facebook)
SEE: http://christiannews.net/2016/11/26/year-after-affair-admission-divorce-tullian-tchividjian-emerges-with-new-wife-preaches-god-bends-toward-sinners/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — A year after the grandson of evangelist Billy Graham resigned from his role as pastor of a Florida megachurch following his admission to being involved in an inappropriate relationship, and subsequently being counseled to divorce his wife, Tullian Tchividjian has now remarried.
In social media post on Wednesday, Tchividjian repeated his remorse for his affairs in 2014 and 2015, stating, “I wish I could go back in time and do those things differently. I can’t. ”
“I am now, and have been, focused on my relationship with God, my new wife Stacie, my three kids and one daughter-in-law, and my grandson,” he said.
Tchividjian’s new wife also posted a wedding photo to social media on Nov. 8, and last week, shared an audio message that Tchividjian had delivered as a recent guest at Spring Hills Community Church in Santa Rosa, California. 
“What an honor it was to be invited to Spring Hills Community Church and sincerely welcomed by such a loving staff & congregation!” she wrote. “Our time in Santa Rosa was too short, but SO wonderful… Tullian Tchividjian (my amazing hubby!) delivered an authentic, powerful message…”
“Until we see how bad we are, we will never see how good God is,” Tchividjian declared in the sermon. “Grace will become nothing more than white noise to us until we see how desperately we need it.”
He said that the good news of the gospel is not that Jesus is our example, but that Jesus is our substitute.
“Jesus being my example is not good news to me, okay? And it shouldn’t be good news to you. He was perfect!” Tchividjian exclaimed. “Jesus being my example further reminds me of how far I have fallen short of God’s glory.”
“[But] this passage show us that sinners are loved by a God who infallibly bends toward us, even while we perpetually bend away from Him,” he said. “He loves bad and broken people because bad and broken people are all that there are. Make not mistake about it: God loves train wrecks because train wrecks are all that there are. He loves us because He loves us. Not because we are good, not because we are clean. He loves us because we are bad and dirty. All of us.”
As previously reported, Tchividjian, 43, the son of Virginia Graham, took over the pulpit of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in 2009 following the passing of founder D. James Kennedy. However, the selection divided the congregation, as some approved and others disapproved of his leadership. Several months after he accepted the job, Kennedy’s daughter and others began calling for his removal.
When a vote was taken over the matter and it was decided to keep Tchividjian as pastor, some left the church and started their own congregation.
As an author, Tchividjian wrote against what he saw as “spiritual performancism” and legalism in the Church, outlining his beliefs in the hyper-grace book “One Way Love: Inexhaustible Grace for an Exhausted World.”
“The Gospel of Jesus Christ announces that because Jesus won for you, you’re free to lose; because Jesus was strong for you, you’re free to be weak; because Jesus was extraordinary, you’re free to be ordinary; because Jesus succeeded for you, you’re free to fail,” he wrote.
Tchividjian announced in June last year that he had resigned as senior pastor of Coral Ridge after admitting to leadership that he had inappropriately become close to another woman after he discovered that his wife Kim had been having an affair.
“I resigned from my position at Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church today due to ongoing marital issues,” he wrote in a statement. “As many of you know, I returned from a trip a few months back and discovered that my wife was having an affair. Heartbroken and devastated, I informed our church leadership and requested a sabbatical to focus exclusively on my marriage and family.”
“As her affair continued, we separated. Sadly and embarrassingly, I subsequently sought comfort in a friend and developed an inappropriate relationship myself,” Tchividjian continued. “Last week I was approached by our church leaders and they asked me about my own affair. I admitted to it and it was decided that the best course of action would be for me to resign.”
The former megachurch leader was then stripped of his ministerial credentials, and soon filed for divorce from his wife. Paul Tripp, a pastor who counseled Tchividjian following his admission, wrote in a public statement that he had concluded that Tchividjian’s marriage was “irreparably broken,” suggesting that he had recommended the divorce.
“Sadly, there are times in this broken world where things that have been damaged by sin don’t get put together again,” he wrote in part. “It has been with sadness that I, along with others, have come slowly and cautiously to the conclusion that his marriage is irreparably broken.”
Less than two weeks after the filing, Willow Creek Presbyterian Church in Winter Springs announced that it had hired Tchividjian to serve as Director of Ministry Development. Some expressed concern over the timing of such a move.
But in March of this year, the church fired Tchividjian as he confessed to another affair, stating that he had actually been in yet another inappropriate relationship before his wife was unfaithful to him. Willow Creek Presbyterian expressed concern that he had only confessed to one inappropriate relationship and had not provided the whole truth.
“The feeling of the elders was that Tullian had a long period of time to share that with the church and for one reason or another he elected not to,” leader Kevin Labby told the Christian Post. “I can’t really comment on what motivated him to not come out with that, but one thing that led him to come out with the confession was the knowledge that there were rumors swirling in Florida where he was previously ministering.”
Tchividjian told reporters in September that he had contemplated suicide over the guilt he felt about the matters.
“The hurt I had caused felt too much to bear. The level of shame and guilt and regret was so deep, I literally did not want to live any longer,” he told the Religion News Service. “I had betrayed and disappointed and caused suffering to those who depended on me to provide the opposite. The thought of killing myself was relieving to me. I actually found momentary peace in the idea that I would soon be dead.”
On Wednesday, he publicly asked for forgiveness for his behavior.
“From the bottom of my heart, I am truly sorry for the pain I’ve caused and the hurt I’ve induced and I humbly ask you to please forgive me,” he wrote. “In conclusion, I wholeheartedly agree with Charles Spurgeon who, when looking back on dark seasons in his own life, said, ‘I bear witness that I owe more to the fire, and the hammer, and the file, than to anything else in my Lord’s workshop.’”
As previously reported, Israel Houghton, former worship leader at Joel Osteen’s Lakewood Church, recently remarried after obtaining a divorce and admitting that he had been unfaithful to his wife several years ago. He stated that he viewed a new marriage as another opportunity to “get it right.”
11008833_1549246602021050_1310423420_n (1)

Centering Prayer Taught By Mystic 

Phileena Heuertz at Catalyst Dallas

SEE: http://www.solasisters.com/2014/04/centering-prayer-taught-by-mystic.htmlrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
“Centering Prayer” exercise,
Catalyst Dallas

Posted by Christine Pack

Writer Jim Fletcher is reporting from the Catalyst Dallas conference that a Centering Prayer exercise was recently led by mystic and contemplative spiritualist Phileena Heuertz at Catalyst conference, which is a Christian conference that moves from city to city. The current Catalyst is being held April 30-May 2, 2014 in Dallas, TX.  Heuertz, who is the author of Pilgrimage of the Soul, was listed as a “lab speaker,” which means that her session was probably a breakout session in which not all of the conference attendees were participants. Some of the other Catalyst Dallas speakers includeTullian Tchividjian, Dave Ramsey, Louie Giglio, Mark Batterson, Jen Hatmaker, Craig Groeschel, and Francis Chan.

(HT: Jules LaPierre, Jim Fletcher)

Phileena Heuertz

Some background information on Phileena Heuertz: Heuertz and her husband teach contemplative mysticism at their websitegravity, as well as other mystical/pagan practices:

– Breath Prayer 

– Centering Prayer

– Labyrinth 

– Lectio Divina

– Yoga

On her Centering Prayer page, Heuertz talks about having been taught Centering Prayer by Roman Catholic mystic monk Thomas Keating himself, with whom the practice of mystical centering prayer originated. (Learn more about Thomas Keating here on a show by Chris Rosebrough of Fighting For The Faith.According to Heuertz’s bio on the Sojourners website, Heuertz is “a member of the New Friar movement,” teaches and writes on contemplative spirituality and facilitates contemplative retreats.





republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

WASHINGTON — During a recent speech in Washington for the national lawyer’s convention of the Federalist Society, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito opined that religious freedom might be “in greater danger” than the right to free speech.
“I am reminded of a song by the latest recipient of the Nobel Prize for Literature: It’s not dark yet, but it’s getting there,” he said.
Alito pointed to a case out of Washington State that was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, in which the owner of a pharmacy was required to stock the morning-after pill despite his religious convictions regarding abortifacients.
As previously reported, in 2006, Ralph’s Thriftway owner, Kevin Stormans, received a call inquiring whether the location sold the morning-after pill. After replying that the pharmacy did not carry it, he began to receive anonymous complaints via phone and email. Ralph’s Thriftway was soon also picketed and complaints were filed with the Washington Board of Pharmacy, which launched an investigation.
The following year, the state passed regulations requiring that pharmacies stock and dispense the morning-after pill, and the legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed suit on behalf of Stormans and two of his pharmacists, Rhonda Mesler and Margo Thelen, who objected to the requirement because of their Christian faith.
The pharmacy had asked for the right to provide referrals rather than provide Plan B and Ella themselves, but while the regulations allowed for referrals for a number of reasons, religious protections were not included.
“It violates their religious beliefs to sell these drugs,” Alito outlined. “Instead of selling them, the pharmacy referred customers to one of more than 30 other pharmacies located within a five-mile radius.”
2012, a federal court ruled in favor of Ralph’s Thriftway, stating that the new regulations “appear to intentionally place a significant burden on the free exercise of religion for those who believe life begins at conception.” But the case was appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which unanimously ruled that Ralph’s Thriftway must stock the drugs despite the pharmacy’s religious objections.
The battle consequently went to the U.S. Supreme Court, but the majority of justices declined to take the case, allowing the lower court ruling on the matter to stand. Only Justices, Alito, Thomas and Roberts desired to hear the matter.
“[N]ational and local pharmacist’s associations submitted an amicus brief telling us that this practice of referring customers to other pharmacies is standard, because no pharmacy can possibly stock every single drug that is approved by the Food and Drug Administration,” Alito noted in his speech to the Federalist Society this month.
“In this case, there is strong evidence that the law was enacted to rid the state of those troublesome pharmacists who objected to these drugs on religious grounds,” he told those gathered, “but the Ninth Circuit sustained the law, and the Supreme Court did not even think that case deserved review.”
Alito, a Roman Catholic, lamented that “Washington would rather have no pharmacy than one that doesn’t toe the line on abortifacient emergency contraceptives.”
“This case is an ominous sign. At issue are Washington State regulations that are likely to make a pharmacist unemployable if he or she objects on religious grounds to dispensing certain prescription medications,” Alito wrote in his dissent from the court in June. “[T]here is much evidence that the impetus for the adoption of the regulations was hostility to pharmacists whose religious beliefs regarding abortion and contraception are out of step with prevailing opinion in the state.”
“Yet the Ninth Circuit held that the regulations do not violate the First Amendment, and this Court does not deem the case worthy of our time,” he bemoaned. “If this is a sign of how religious liberty claims will be treated in the years ahead, those who value religious freedom have cause for great concern.”



SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/11/french-retailers-ordered-to-label-products-that-come-from-israeli-settlementsrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Boycott Jewish goods. We have seen this before in Europe.
“Diplomatic officials in Jerusalem said they were puzzled as to why France chose this present moment in time to publish the directive, since the EU guidelines have existed for over a year but so far have not been implemented.”
Probably to appease France’s growing Muslim population.
Israel reacted angrily on Thursday after France issued a directive to all importers and retail chains in the country that they must now label products originating in Judea, Samaria, eastern Jerusalem and the Golan Heights.
The directive is an application of the guidelines issued last year by the European Commission.
According to the new provision, “The Golan Heights, eastern Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria are occupied territories and are not considered part of Israel. Therefore, in order to avoid misleading consumers, please mark products from those places and make it clear where they came from – and refrain from indicating they were made in Israel.”
Local retail chains and importers are required to clearly indicate that these products were produced in “occupied areas” to avoid confusion with Palestinian Authority-based products.
Diplomatic officials in Jerusalem said they were puzzled as to why France chose this present moment in time to publish the directive, since the EU guidelines have existed for over a year but so far have not been implemented.
The Foreign Ministry issued a strong response to the decision, stating, “The Israeli government condemns the French government’s decision to implement the guidelines of the European Commission in relation to marking Israeli products originating beyond the ’67 borders.”
“We regret that France, at a time when there are anti-boycott laws, promotes such measures, which can be interpreted as a boost to radical elements and to the boycott movement against Israel. Moreover, it is puzzling and disturbing that France adopts a double standard in relation to Israel, while ignoring 200 territorial conflicts currently taking place around the world, including those taking place right on its doorstep,” added the Foreign Ministry’s statement….


SEE: http://pulpitandpen.org/2016/11/22/hillsong-beth-moore-unite-using-weak-women-to-capture-weak-women-others/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
“so these men also oppose the truth, men corrupted in mind and disqualified regarding the faith.”  2 Timothy 3:8
When the imprisoned, soon-to-be-martyred Paul wrote his final letter to Timothy, effectively passing the mantle of ministry to his young protégé, he warned the young disciple about the imminent persecution that would come “in the last days.” The impetus for the coming “times of difficulty” was the increasing depravity of the pagan world.
At the end of the list (2 Timothy 3:2-5) of evidenced evil that Timothy ought to watch for, Paul included the following group in conclusion.
“… those … having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people. For among them are those who creep into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and led astray by various passions, always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth. Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men corrupted in mind and disqualified regarding the faith.”   2 Timothy 3:5-8
Well, guess what?
Today we are further along in “the last days” than the young Timothy and, as the Biblically informed will surely recognize, the plethora of those who “have the appearance of godliness” but “are disqualified regarding the faith” is replete across the church world today. As God loosens His restraining mercy, gender-equality in heresy has become – for quite some time, actually – a self-lauding feature in the false teacher business.
The latest example?
The femme fatale of faith, Beth Moore, is aligning with the heresy known as Hillsong, confirming both herself and that “church” as among those “disqualified regarding the faith.”  (2 Timothy 3:8)   Moore is scheduled as a headline “Special Guest” at the Hillsong Conference 2017. Along with fellow heresy hurlers and allies of false teaching, Craig Groeschel, Jentzen Franklin, Lauren Daigle, and John Gray, Moore will be bringing whatever credence her Living Proof Ministries presence can provide.   (If more believers were actually doing what Jesus said in John 8:31, “Living Proof” would rapidly, rightfully, become “Dead Evidence” of false teaching.)
We shouldn’t be surprised at this alliance because Scripture warns us of such things.  As Paul wrote to Timothy, “evil people and imposters will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.” (2 Timothy 3:13)
Beth Moore is perhaps the prime contemporary example of Paul’s comment.   But it’s no surprise that she’s been exalted to the dais of deception at Hillsong.  Moore has long been a gal-pal of the prosperity gospel pastrix and Hillsong heroine of faux Christianity, Christine Caine (and Joyce Meyer, and Kari Jobe, among many more.)
Like a bad BOGO offer from the “church of deception,” Moore and Caine are tag team partners at the upcoming Passion 2017 Conference where the dais will also feature notables such as the increasingly discernment-free John Piper and Francis Chan.  The Moore and Caine duo have also been featured together at the “let’s fleece women who don’t know Scripture” events known as Propel Women, a heretic-rich environment.


Hillsong is a well-known purveyor of false teaching, most notably the damning prosperity gospel. Believers “abiding in my word” (John 8:31) know, as Paul exhorts, to “avoid them.” (Romans 16:17-19)  As though doubling down on the warnings Paul gave Timothy, given Hillsong’s propensity to parade women “preachers” across their stage, they seem all too eager in their efforts to use women to “sneak into households and capture weak women.”  (2 Timothy 3:6)
What is evident is that for all the defensive postures of the followers of this false teacher, if Beth Moore actually knew, and obeyed, what Scripture teaches, she would avoid this conference and the charlatans it promotes.  Hillsong is, simply, not Christian.
Though she claims to be otherwise, Beth Moore is, for the Berean-inclined believer, the glaring evidence of the words of the apostle John:
“They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.”  1 John 2:19
Beth Moore, long ago, left the ranks of being “of us” … those of us for whom Biblical fidelity is a fundamental feature of faith.  Her alliance with known false teachers, and, now, with her participation with the known works of heresy that is Hillsong, make Moore one those Paul included with his remark, “Avoid such people.”  (2 Timothy 3:5)
For more on Moore, see HERE.   For more on Hillsong, see HERE.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
While it was provocatively illustrative of the spiritual and Scriptural abuses of the Roman Catholic church, the melodious jingle attributed to indulgence hawker Johann Tetzel has found its place in church history as, perhaps, the first Reformation-era musical heresy. (Today, of course, this genre is headlined not by Dominican papists, but by the heresy-hurling likes of Hillsong and Bethel.)
“As soon as the coin in the coffer rings,
The soul from purgatory springs.”
The suggestion of selling salvation, even if nobly done for the deceased, infuriated Luther who was still coming to the full understanding of sola fide that would become, once the flames of reformation burned fully from his illuminated grasp of Paul’s letter to the Romans, the material cause of the Reformation.
But Tetzel’s jingle represented to the indulgence buying 16th-century commoner that salvation, that grace, from God could be bought. Salvation had a price and the Dominican Tetzel was its absolving, bartering agent, approved and sent forth under the authority of the Pope.
It’s unlikely that those 16th-century “coffers” resembled the modern Salvation Army’s iconic Christmas-time red kettles, but the association with God’s grace may be only slightly different. Though the modern day coin collectors of the Salvation Army aren’t offering indulgences to the generous donor – except perhaps in the form of the conscience-stroking “I gave” satisfaction that so many in the world, including Christians, think helps tip the “I’m a good person” scales of get-into-heaven justice with a few extra-points – the kettle may represent something many Christians will find not altogether unlike an inverse indulgence. In many cases, those bell-ringing kettle attendants, and those in hierarchical quasi-military authority over them, are working to keep their salvation.41fim3u827l-_sx258_bo1204203200_
Pause a moment and ask yourself, what is the Salvation Army? How much do you know about this organization that is almost ubiquitous during the holiday season? Are they merely a charity seeking to serve the underprivileged? Are they primarily a homeless mission for the down and out? Are they, given their military-like structure, some quasi-religious militia that focuses on alleviating human misery? Is it a simply a parachurch ministry with a unique focus on social justice issues?
Would you be surprised to know that, in fact, The Salvation Army is a church?
The Salvation Army is not only a church, it is a denomination. It has its own creed, its own faith requirements for membership and its own doctrine. The Salvation Army Handbook of Doctrine, a nearly 400 page document, elucidates the 11 core doctrines of the denomination. Originating in the mid- nineteenth century London under its founder William Booth, what became formally named the Salvation Army in 1867 began from Booth’s ordained ministry in the Wesley New Connexion Methodist holiness movement. (Yes, they are continuationists with regards to apostolic gifts.)
“The corps is the Salvation Army’s local congregation. It is a visible expression of the Church. It has its own ways of worshipping, training and serving, based on the teaching of the Bible, the guidance of the Holy Spirit and the nature of its mission.” (Handbook, pg. 247)
“The Salvation Army became a church with a mission.” (Handbook, pg 265)
“Today it would be difficult to deny that The Salvation Army is a fully authentic and adequate fellowship within the spectrum of Christian denominations.” (Handbook, pg 266)
While the eleven doctrines of the organization read with an intended Wesleyan Arminian overtone, which in itself represents a substantially flawed understanding of orthodox Biblical truth, there is much in the Army’s Handbook elucidating these doctrines that many Christians will, and ought, to find concerning.
SCRIPTURE … It’s important, But Not Alone; It’s Inspired, But Not Completely
The opening doctrine states: “We believe that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments were given by inspiration of God; and that they constitute the Divine rule of Christian faith and practice.”
Intentionally, and noticeably, lacking a fundamental claim to the inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture, the Handbook still frequently points to the Bible as its source of faith and action. However, there is no sola Scriptura in salvationist lingo. The Army views three “pillars” as paramount: “the teaching of Scripture, the direct illumination of the Holy Spirit, and the consensus of the Christian community.” The obvious dangers of taking either of these extra two additions to their logical extremes may be seen throughout church history.
“Direct illumination of the Holy Spirit” has yielded the continuationist abuses strewn across the landscape of the modern church in such things as the Biblically-illicit charismatic movement and the outright heretical New Apostolic Reformation. An unbalanced emphasis on “direct illumination” has created most of the toxic teachings thrown at even non-charismatic pew sitters today, such as contemplative prayer and spiritual formation disciplines. Focusing on the mystical, experiential, spiritual desires can easily, in our fallen humanity, draw us away from the primacy of Scripture.
Take “the consensus of the Christian community” to its outplayed end and you arrive either back at a papist notion in which church tradition equals Scripture, or to a broader, more liberal and relativistic view of God’s revelation and ecclesiology (think of the current ecumenical unity movement; consensus without adherence to Scripture and sound doctrine, a la Titus 2:1, for example, yields boundless errors which breed yet more errors.) While historic orthodox Christianity has served to confirm the teachings drawn from a pre-eminent view of Scripture, for the Army “the consensus” is drawn not from the broader historic “Christian community” but from the Army’s own historic “Christian community.”  The introduction of an earlier Army Handbook indicates the supremacy of Army doctrine for their organization.
This volume contains an exposition of the principal Doctrines of The Salvation Army as set forth in its Deed Poll of 1878 and confirmed in The Salvation Army Act 1980. It is for the use of all Salvationists. These Doctrines are to be taught in connection with all Salvation Army officers’ training operations, both preparatory and institutional. It is required of officers of all ranks that their teaching, in public and private, shall conform to these eleven Articles of Faith.”
Either augmentation to Scripture is inherently erroneous, spiritually dangerous, and bound to result in false teaching. Thus, by the gracious hand of God, the reformation reawakened to us a singular focus, sola Scriptura.  But through the lens of Army interpretation, their less-than-sufficient view of Scripture results in practical denials of Biblical truths that Christian orthodoxy has held as authoritative, and final, for nearly two millennia.
For example, within Army theology, God is the creator, but Genesis is not an accurate, nor literal, record of that creation. The Army is willing to accept any view of Genesis, and apparently teaches none.
“Our study of Genesis 1 will point up some differences between Christians in approaches, interpretations, and conclusions. … These matters have been debated for many centuries, and still the differences persist. So we must accept as a starting premise that the issues surrounding Genesis 1 are sufficiently cloudy that no one view can be considered the Christian view.” (Emphasis original, Handbook, pg. 41)
While that might seem a gracious view, one complying fully with the spirit of post-modern tolerance prevalent in the world today, the Army intentionally does not teach what inspired Scripture clearly proclaims. While the truths of Scripture are evident within the historic, orthodox church, the Army is confused on this fundamental, foundational Biblical reality and, in so many words, they leave the matter untaught and to the preferential discretion of Army adherents who still must not exhibit their own dogmatism on the matter. “The Bible says it, that settles it” may be privately permitted in the Army, but it is to be avoided publicly when such dogmatic utterances may meet with a “consensus” that isn’t so inclined.
“Those who are comfortable with the straightforward record of Scripture as satisfying all we need to know of God’s creative work will guard against closing their minds to observable facts about creations’ history and mechanisms.” (Handbook, pg. 42)
If you flip with a Salvationist from Genesis all the way back to Revelation, you’ll find them, once again, befuddled at – and denying – the literalness of Scripture. While Genesis may imply theistic evolution to the Army, Revelation implies merely eschatological confusion with symbolism that may, or may not, be accurate.
“…this is not to assume that the symbolic pictures of the end times in the Book of Revelation and elsewhere in Scripture are to be interpreted as literal descriptions of actual events and places.” (Handbook, pg. 239)
So, for the Army, God may have given something generally inspired in Scripture – perhaps only its moral teachings, and certainly its apparent calls for social justice that drive the Army – but not something that is fully, literally inspired. The Army gives no credence to verbal plenary inspiration, an understanding that serves as the crux of Christian orthodoxy wherein inspiration is total, and total inspiration means total inerrancy.
But … The Army Isn’t Really A Church, At Least Not In An Orthodox, New Testament Sense
screen-shot-2016-11-23-at-12-47-43-pmThe Salvation Army is intentionally structured according to a quasi-militaristic ecclesiology. Its officers include a General who is its worldwide leader, Commissioners that oversee geographic territories, Colonels, Majors, Captains, and Lieutenants. Non-commissioned officers include Envoys and Sergeants; Cadets are in training for officership. Candidates are those undergoing assessment for either officership or envoyship.
Each officer in the Army – any Army affiliate may be known as a Salvationist or a “salvo”  – is also an ordained minister of the denomination.  Disregarding apostolic instructions in the New Testament, the Army ordains women as well as men to serve as the equivalent of “pastors” (officers) within the denomination.  (A curious restriction on Army officers is that an officer may only marry another officer.  For the Army, the notion of “unequally yoked” – a term used wrongly by most Christians with regards to marriage – means marrying outside the Army, even if the spouse-to-be is a professing believer.  Sound cult-like to you?) Officers have received specific training to serve and lead in the army. They are trained in one of seven officer training centers located in Australia, Canada, the United States, or the United Kingdom. The structure, then, of this “church” is unlike, in both nomenclature and organization, the ecclesiology established in the New Testament.
“And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ ” Ephesians 4:11
While the New Testament outlines the offices and qualifications for overseers in the church (1 Timothy 3:1-13Titus 1:5-9), history has seen these offices organized primarily among three styles of church structure: presbyterian, episcopalian, and congregational. Though Paul frequently uses military-type language and metaphors in his writings, Protestant church history – up until the mid 1800’s with the Salvation Army – has not seen a militaristic structure of ecclesiology, nor can it be vigorously defended from Scripture. The Army’s structure is decidedly more papist in flavor than it is New Testament. Where Rome has a pope, the Army has a general.
Aside from the unscriptural ecclesiastical structure of the Army, that alone is not what eliminates it from being rightfully considered as a “church.” A quick look at a bit of Reformation history is helpful for a Biblically-informed, orthodox definition of what constitutes a church.

Melanchton’s Augsburg Confession
In 1530, Philip Melanchthon, protege of Martin Luther, drew up the Augsburg Confession. In that early Protestant confession, Article 7 states that the Church “is the congregation of the saints in which the gospel is rightly taught and the sacraments are rightly administered.”
Move across the continent from Germany to England and, in 1553, the Church of England would find Thomas Cranmer producing the Forty-Two Articles, that church’s confessional guide. Cranmer would reiterate what Melanchthon had noted about the true church. “The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men in which the pure word of God is preached and the sacraments be duly administered.”
One further continental move of the map, this time to Geneva, finds John Calvin in his Institutes of The Christian Religion defining the church proper, sharing common ground with the two reformers Melanchthon and Cranmer. Calvin wrote, “Wherever we see the Word of God purely preached and heard, and the sacraments administered according to Christ’s institution, there, it is not to be doubted, a church of God exists.”
The church of the red kettle only meets – maybe – one of these two critical, orthodox thresholds for claiming the moniker of authentic, New Testament church. Why?  Because the Salvation Army does not baptize and it does not administer the Lord’s Supper. (To the extent that the Army teaches Scripture, albeit from a severely diminished, insufficient perspective, the first characteristic of a true church – preaching the Word of God – may, or may not, disqualify them as well. They preach a theology with a less than fully sovereign God and a Gospel with a less than fully-atoning Christ.)
In clear disobedience to Christ’s commands to baptize (Matthew 28:19-20) and His instructions to institute the Lord’s Supper, “this do in remembrance of me” – (Luke 22:19), the Salvation Army’s less than fully inspired, selectively interpreted view of Scripture prompts them to exclude these ordinances from their midst. They provide this comment regarding these two fundamental sacraments without which there is no true church.
“Early in our history, The Salvation Army was led of God not to observe specific sacraments, that is baptism and the Lord’s Supper, or Holy Communion, as prescribed rituals.” (Handbook, pg. 271)
So what Christ Himself dictated to be done by the church in the first century, and as clearly recorded in Scripture, the Salvation Army, “early in our history,” claims to have received a divine, and unique, exemption. Apparently by way of “direct illumination of the Holy Spirit,” God changed these requirements for the Army. In order to respond to the attacks it has taken for this marked disobedience to Scripture, the Army offers a rationalized, spiritualized response as a palliative to salve the wounds of criticism.
“We observe the sacraments, not by limiting them to two or three or seven, but by inviting Christ to suppers, love feasts, birth celebrations, parties, dedications, sick beds, weddings, anniversaries, commissioning, ordinations, retirements and other significant events and, where he is truly received, watching him give a grace beyond our understanding. We can see, smell, hear, touch, and taste it. We joyfully affirm that in our presence is the one, true, original Sacrament – Jesus Christ.” (Handbook, pg. 271)
1Specifically responding in “A Statement on Baptism,” the Army Handbook clarifies their replacement of the Biblically-instructed ordinance with one of their own making. “The swearing-in of a soldier of The Salvation Army beneath the trinitarian sign of the Army’s flag acknowledges this truth,” that “truth” being the public profession of faith. A military-like ceremony, in which the adherent commits not to Scripture, but to the Army doctrines, replaces baptism.
The “swearing-in” ceremony involves a would-be soldier swearing an oath known as “The Soldier’s Covenant“, or the “Articles a00130Of War,” in which allegiance to Army doctrine is proclaimed.  The oath includes such affirmations as “I will be faithful to the purposes for which God raised up The Salvation Army,” “I will be actively involved … in giving as large a proportion of my income as possible to support … the worldwide work of the Army,” “I will be true to the principles and practices of The Salvation Army, loyal to its leaders, and I will show the spirit of salvationism whether in times of popularity or persecution,” and, the closing affirmation that  I “will be a true soldier of The Salvation Army.”
In particular response to the Lord’s Supper, the Handbook states, “No particular outward observance is necessary to inward grace … Christ is the one true Sacrament, and sacramental living … is at the heart of Christian holiness and discipleship.” (Handbook pg. 300) While that certainly sounds quite spiritual and Christ-centered, it yet denies the fact that Christ Himself said, “this do in remembrance of me.” (Luke 22:19)
A Few More Dangerous Doctrinal Distinctions of The Army
“The compassion of the Army’s social action depends upon an understanding that God is Father of all without discrimination or partiality.” (Handbook, pg. 49)
While the Army is intentionally, vociferously Arminian in soteriology – it goes to lengths at various places in the Handbook to emphasize synergistic salvation – it does not promote universalism. But the Biblically faulty quote cited above feeds the popular, though false, understanding of salvation the Army purports to promote. No where does Scripture teach that God is the “Father of all.” While Scripture clearly teaches that God is the Creator of all humankind, the Bible is plain in teaching that not all men are His children. (John 1:12-13John 11:52Romans 8:162 Timothy 2:191 John 5:19)
“Salvation requires the personal involvement of the individual in the process of repentance and faith. It involves a free and deliberate choice to re-orientate our life towards God.” (Handbook, pg. 160)
“The Salvation Army has a responsibility to model, preach and teach salvation in ways that make it credible and understandable but cannot make it happen. That is the work of the Spirit in human life, and is dependent upon the response of the individual who chooses to repent and believe.” (Handbook, pg. 160) (Emphasis added)
The Salvation Army’s Handbook features a point by point rebuttal of the five points of Calvinism, affirming its position against all but the first point, that of Total Depravity.
In responding to Unconditional Election, the Army states “election is conditional upon faith in Christ.” The issue of predestination is taught by the Army to be a “corporate rather than an individual issue,” that is, God has predestined a group of people, but not specific individuals that comprise that group. (How this works is unexplained.) “Those who choose salvation are the elect of God.”
Limited Atonement is denied in article 6 of the Army’s doctrines. “We believe that the Lord Jesus Christ has by his suffering and death made an atonement for the whole world so that whosoever will may be saved.” While this differs from the sovereignty of God evident throughout Scripture, it also directly refutes the clear teaching of Christ who made clear that before any “whosoever” actually “will,” it is God first who actually “wills.” (John 6:37John 6:44John 6:65)
For the Salvationist, the less than sovereign God who is unable, by the attribute of His own omnipotent will, to save apart from the sinner “dead in trespasses and sins” participating, the notion of irresistible grace is denied. “For The Salvation Army, the phrases “whosoever will may be saved’ and ‘repentance toward God, faith in our Lord Jesus Christ’ … are necessary to salvation’ (Doctrines 6 and 7), clearly indicate the importance of human decision making and agency in the process of salvation.” (Emphasis Added) (Handbook, pg. 187)
The suggestion about the red kettle serving as a sort of inverse indulgence relates directly to what the Army believes and teaches in their rebuttal to the concluding point of Calvinism. There is no perseverance. There is no “once saved, always saved.” According to Army theology, “continuance in a state of salvation depends upon continued obedient faith in Christ”. That “continued obedient faith” is played out most evidently, and is aggressively emphasized, in the social justice mission of the Army.
While saints are to persevere in the faith (Hebrews 10:23), this ability is graciously administered through the Spirit-guided gifting of faith by God, and in His own persevering faithfulness to the believer, that reality of God’s faithfulness, evident in such places in Scripture as the ordo salutis ofRomans 8:28-30, is not taught within Salvationist theology.   Since there is, for the Salvationist, no assurance of salvation affirmed by the faithfulness of a sovereign God, perseverance becomes a man-only endeavor.  Unlike the Roman Catholic position in which faith AND works contribute to salvation, for the Salvationist, the works that don’t save initially are the works that do, in fact, save continually.  According to the Army, where salvation is initially, necessarily, synergistic, the continuation of salvation is distinctly monergistic.  God doesn’t keep you saved.  To remain saved, one must do good works. Bell ringing alongside a red kettle, then, qualifies.
“Holiness stresses the ethical and social consequences of salvation.” (Handbook, pg. 200)
The Army’s pursuit of holiness is dangerously close to that of the prosperity gospel. “The Gospels reveal that Jesus cared about every dimension of human life and how sin has distorted it, and that his ministry demonstrated a healing response to human suffering and disease in all its forms. Again and again, the New Testament as a whole records the healing work of the Holy Spirit. … This means that there is no holiness without wholeness.” (Handbook, pg. 197)
Though the Army is linguistically cautious in the Handbook to issue a caveat that prosperity and health do not necessarily indicate holiness, nor that maladies represent sinfulness, it nevertheless says, “we claim the promise of wholeness in all of life.”
It is out of this ambition for wholeness that the works of social justice seem to be borne within the Army. “As God’s holy people we [The Army] are concerned not only about our own wholeness and health but also that of others. Thereby we who know healing for ourselves become a healing community engaged in a healing mission in anticipation of the final healing to be experienced in the New Jerusalem.” Handbook, pg. 198) “The holy life is expressed through a healing, life-giving and loving ministry.”
For the Army adherent pursuing holiness, its apprehension may be in any number of ways. Among ways which holiness may be experienced is “entire sanctification,” “full salvation,” “infilling of the Holy Spirit,” “Baptism of the Holy Spirit,” the “second blessing,” the “Blessing of a clean heart,” and, finally, by “perfect love.” Each of these experiential interpretations of holiness, explained in the Handbook (pp. 202-205), are common to the vernacular of the Army. Of note, some of them are also common to the vernacular of the known and vital error that is the modern charismatic movement.
The Army does, by the way, teach a continuationist theology, though it is careful to stress internal caution with the use of spiritual “gifts” that may be, depending on the circumstances, disruptive. After providing a list of gifts, including “preaching, teaching, and prophecy … gifts of service, healing, generosity, and hospitality …leadership … prayer, faith and speaking in tongues,” the Handbook gives a blanket statement, “ The Army recognizes all spiritual gifts.”
The Handbook states that “the Army emphasizes those gifts that encourage the clear proclamation of the gospel.” (Pg. 269) Given their theology, this begs the question, what exactly is the “salvation” that the Army teaches and the “gospel” through which it proclaims it?
As has been cited, the Gospel of the Army is the commonly heard “God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life” message. It offers cheap grace, a less-than-sovereign God, an elevated view of man and his “God-given free will,” and a crucified, atoning Savior whose substitutionary death, showing “God’s love towards all people,” is yet woefully insufficient to insure eternal, permanent salvation.
The Gospel touted – when it is – by Salvationists features the fundamentals of the one given in Scripture, but Army theology, so aggressively and completely Arminian, diminishes God’s influence and authority in salvation and emphasizes man’s free-will to choose and trigger God’s required, saving response. But even if one is “once saved,” the atonement of Christ and the faithfulness of God to the believer are incomplete, tenuous, and man-dependent. Salvation can be lost. Only works will insure remaining in a continued state of salvation. Salvation is imminently a man-chosen, man-maintained endeavor in which God is merely a responsive partner.
“The love of God is such that, with profound sorrow, he allows us to reject him. (Mark 10:17-27) (Handbook, pg. 132)
(It is curious they cite the story of the rich young ruler as a validating Scripture for the synergistic gospel they proclaim. It is from this narrative that Jesus is asked, “Then who can be saved?” His response, “With man it is impossible, but not with God.” The notes from the MacArthur Study Bible forMark 10:27 – the source of Christ’s response – says, “It is impossible for anyone to be saved by his own efforts, since salvation is entirely a gracious, sovereign work of God.”)
Though it lauds itself as a church, and though it points to Scripture, the Salvation Army is not a legitimate church, as it refuses to obey clear Scriptural, Christ-given instructions to administer the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Though it defines itself with the descriptor “Salvation,” the Army teaches a theology in which Scripture is less than fully inspired, and thus less than fully sufficient, with an intentionally man-centered, synergistic gospel. God in the Army isn’t the fully sovereign God of Scripture, nor of historic Christian orthodoxy.
One curious question, though, to consider. When have you actually encountered a Gospel-proclaiming Salvationist? Do you see them handing out Gospel tracts to each coin-dropping donor to their red kettles? Do you see kettle attendants actively engaged in witnessing, even to their own flawed gospel? Has a Salvationist – who has sworn allegiance to Army doctrine which states “The Salvation Army’s responsibility to communicate the message and meaning of the atoning work of Jesus clearly and in a way that is culturally relevant” (Handbook, pg. 142) – ever knocked on your door to share their gospel?

General Andre Cox & Commissioner Silvia Cox, December 2014

      Though their main website, SalvationArmy.org, is replete with resources regarding fund-raising, their international humanitarian programs, and features a prominent “Donate Here” banner, one thing lacking is an expected “how to be saved” button. You will find links to “Our Vision” and “Our Faith,” and even an indication of the Army’s eagerness towards ecumenism with a link to the recent “Stations of The Cross” London exhibit, but you’ll find very little of a prominent, saving, gospel message.
(The “Stations of the Cross” are, according to Catholic.org, “ a 14-step [Roman] Catholic devotion that commemorates Jesus Christ’s last day on Earth as a man. At each station, the individual recalls and meditates on a specific event from Christ’s last day. Specific prayers are recited, then the individual moves to the next station until all 14 are complete.” Though pietistic in tone, there is no such devotional observation given in Scripture, but the Army has linked arms with Rome to promote this one.)
But with regards to evangelism, the Army seems far more concerned about fund-raising than soul-saving. With some interesting comments, a thread from SermonIndex.net discusses an entry entitled “Salvation Army Soup Kitchen Says, ‘No Tracts Here”. The first commenter states, “You can’t just feed people’s bodies and not their souls.”
It is to the mammoth money-making machine that is the Salvation Army, and the social justice ambitions it pursues, that we next turn our attention in Part Two.
And poor Tetzel would today be drooling at the financial effectiveness that red-kettle inverse indulgences represent. In 16th-century bucks, it’s likely the entire continent of Europe could be bought out of purgatory with the annual haul of the Army’s revenue in America alone. Can you say “billions?”
In the likely event that you encounter a red kettle attendant this holiday season, the most helpful thing a Gospel-According-To-Scripture believer could do is not dropping coins in the coffer.  It’s sharing the true Gospel, the power of God for salvation (Romans 1:16), to the bell-ringing kettle attendant.  It’s very likely that they’ve never heard it, because the Salvation Army certainly doesn’t proclaim it.



The battle over who will direct the hearts and minds of children is intensifying. Within the dangerous labyrinth of Common Core standards, testing, and data-mining is the even more concerning ramp-up of Social Emotional Learning (SEL). Parents and teachers who believe in genuine education rather than pseudo-psychological evaluation are facing off against bipartisan big government and its affiliated corporations and foundations.
This summer, the Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL) announced it had chosen eight states to collaborate on creating K-12 SEL standards. All K-12 students would be measured on five “non-cognitive” factors: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making, which includes ethical decision-making. As we’ve written, the result is that overworked, untrained teachers essentially become psychotherapists to their classrooms of patients. Other problems we’ve warned about include the subjectivity of the standards and assessments, indoctrination, danger to freedom of conscience, data-mining, and inadequate security of this sensitive data that resides for eternity in longitudinal databases.
Less than two months later, two CASEL states (Tennessee and Georgia) have already withdrawn from the initiative. Parents have begun to realize the dangers of SEL and to challenge their schools’ robotic march toward psychological manipulation of children. Interestingly, CASEL has removed the list of other states involved (California, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Washington) from its altered website about the project. Either it’s embarrassed at losing 25% of its cohort or is trying to hide from further parental opposition, or both.
Undeterred, CASEL presses forward. The group joined the liberal Aspen Institute’s new National Commission on Social, Emotional, and Academic Development, led by CASELboard member Linda Darling-Hammond (the radical education professor whom terrorist Bill Ayers recommended to be Obama’s Secretary of Education). This commission is funded by the same gallery of rogues — including the ubiquitous Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation — that have funded the pro-Common Core, pro-progressive education schemes of recent history.
The American Institutes for Research (AIR), publisher of many state Common Core tests and key SEL proponent, is also represented on the commission. AIR is also heavily involved in promoting the controversial LGBT agenda.
Parents should know about the agendas of CASEL and some of these important partnerships involved in the SEL effort.
CASEL has a definite ideological tilt. It’s funded partly by the federal government’s Institute for Education Sciences — the same agency that wants to assess mindsets in the National Assessment of Educational Progress and to have social emotional research become a federal mandate — and partly by a range of liberal foundations. These foundations bemoan the effect of climate change on “health and equity” (Robert Wood Johnson); push Buddhist “mindfulness” techniques (1440); and seek to use SEL to promote social-justice theories and transgenderism (NoVo).
How might CASEL use SEL to advance its partners’ agendas in areas such as healthcare, climate regulation, and sexual politics? This Cleveland eighth-grade standard referenced on the CASEL website creates gender confusion by asking students to “[i]dentify what you like about yourself, including things that might be considered atypical for your gender.” Sample lessons offered by a CASEL partner called Morningside Center for Teaching Social Responsibility teach students the perils of climate change and fracking and encourage students to “take action toward transgender equity.” Thus does CASEL’s SEL accomplish its partners’ desires to change the world.
SEL is the embodiment of what government schools should not be doing to children.
The criteria for SEL are so subjective that ideologues can twist them into almost anything. Suppose SEL curricula and guidelines adopted the argument of some psychiatrists that “extreme racism” and “extreme homophobia” should be classified as mental disorders. Could students then be “diagnosed” for those disorders, and perhaps treated with dangerous antipsychotics, as California prisoners have been? Already children have been screened without consent and forcibly treated with these drugs as a result of school-related mental-health programs. How far will this go?
Common core political cartoon

At the very least, parents might object if SEL is used to turn their children into worker bees for the global economy. Former Michigan Governor John Engler, now chairman of the Business Roundtable (BRT), co-chairs the National SEL Commission. BRT has long promoted Common Core, SEL skills development, and treating children as widgets in the labor-supply chain. In fact, BRT’s education and workforce committee chairman was Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson, who called American students “defective products” if not taught by Common Core, and whose corporation is a major funder of the data-mining, including SEL data, of the Data Quality Campaign. (We’ve provided an abundance of evidence of the coordinated effort by these business, government, and foundation entities to assess,record, and analyze personal characteristics of children.) When Hillary Clinton and Marc Tucker’s Goals 2000 and School-to-Work first made SEL part of the federal education lexicon for workforce-development, BRT was cheering them on.  
SEL is the embodiment of what government schools should not be doing to children. Parents and other citizens must stand against this tyranny of the mind by vigorously opposing these programs, refusing to elect leaders that support them, and demanding that legislators defund them.

Don’t Miss:


SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/11/israel-13-muslims-arrested-for-arson-jihad-as-fires-still-ragerepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
“Fires have forced tens of thousands of Israelis from their homes in the past four days, with officials saying many began almost simultaneously and were probably due to arson. Israeli police chief Roni Alsheich on Thursday said that, where arson was the cause, it was likely “nationalist,” a phrase authorities use to describe attacks by Arabs. Police said they have arrested 13 people for suspected arson or incitement to commit arson….Fires that spread through the northern port city of Haifa are apparently ‘acts of terrorism,’ and the government will compensate residents for loss of property, Finance Minister Moshe Kahlon said.”
“‘Unleash Hell’: New Al Qaeda magazine describes in detail how to start huge forest fires across the U.S..with instructions on how to make ’ember bombs’” — Daily Mail, May 3, 2012
“Israel Accepts Egypt, Jordan Firefighting Help as Suspects Held,” by Alisa Odenheimer, Bloomberg, November 25, 2016:
Israel accepted offers of firefighting help from Egypt and Jordan as blazes continued around the country.
Fires have forced tens of thousands of Israelis from their homes in the past four days, with officials saying many began almost simultaneously and were probably due to arson. Israeli police chief Roni Alsheich on Thursday said that, where arson was the cause, it was likely “nationalist,” a phrase authorities use to describe attacks by Arabs. Police said they have arrested 13 people for suspected arson or incitement to commit arson….
“I’ve accepted the offer of help in putting out the fires from Egypt and Jordan,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Twitter. “Egypt will send two firefighting helicopters and Jordan will send fire trucks.”
They will join vehicles sent by the Palestinian Authority and aircraft from Russia, Cyprus, Turkey, Croatia and Greece already battling the flames. A massive Supertanker firefighting plane from the U.S. is scheduled to arrive later on Friday.
Fires that spread through the northern port city of Haifa are apparently “acts of terrorism,” and the government will compensate residents for loss of property, Finance Minister Moshe Kahlon said.


SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/11/trump-invites-hungarian-pm-orban-to-visit-him-in-washingtonrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
“Trump Invites Hungarian PM Orbán to Washington D.C.,” by Chris Tomlinson, Breitbart, November 25, 2016:
U.S. President-Elect Donald Trump has invited Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán to visit him in Washington D.C.
The Prime Minister said that Mr. Trump then praised the Hungarian government and called the people of Hungary “brave freedom fighters” during a telephone conversation on Thursday night, Hungarian paper Magyar Hirlap reports.
Mr. Orbán also noted that Trump congratulated Hungary for its economic success in recent years saying that he has called the nation’s achievements over the past six years “outstanding”.
After being invited to Washington D.C., Orbán said: “I told him that I hadn’t been there for a long time as I had been treated as a ‘black sheep’, to which he replied, laughing, ‘Me too’.”
On Mr. Trump’s open attitudes toward Hungary, the prime minister said: “He is much more interested in success, efficiency and results than in political theories,” adding: “This is good for us, as the facts are with us. The economic cooperation has always been good, only the ideologies presented obstacles.”
One of the first European politicians to come out in support of Trump, the maverick Hungarian leader has been a fierce opponent of the migrant policies of German Chancellor Angela Merkel and the European Union’s plans to redistribute migrants across the political bloc.
In an exclusive interview with Breitbart Londonshortly after the Hungarian migrant referendum, spokesman for the Hungarian government Zoltán Kovács said the Obama administration had left the country feeling abandoned. “My first-hand experience, the experience of the government, [is that] the U.S. has lost interest, and probably with it, knowledge about the region. Europe in general, but most certainly about Central Europe,” he said.
While Mr. Orbán had come out in support of Mr. Trump, Kovács was more cautious than to offer an official governmental endorsement, but did at the time note that the migrant policies of Trump and the Hungarian government aligned.
“If it’s about migration, which seems to be the most acute challenge we face, it’s definitely true that Mr. Trump and the conservative philosophy on migration is a lot closer to us,” he noted.
Hungary, along with neighbours Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Poland, constitute the Visegrad 4 group, who have been a major bloc in opposition of mass migration within the European Union. The V4 now look to the presidential elections in Austria for another potential ally in the anti-mass migration Freedom Party (FPÖ) candidate Norbert Hofer….


Nigel Farage speech in The United States 
about Brexit and Trump


SEE: http://newswithviews.com/Edwards/shirley128.htmrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
By Shirley Edwards

November 26, 2016
[These are my views as a woman living in England, on how the culture and spirit of my country has changed over 50 years. Why the country does not feel protected or strong any more, how it has lost, and is losing it values and decency, and how we are daily losing our free speech.]
The announcement of Donald Trump as the new president of the United States has creating quite a lot of mixed reactions in the United Kingdom. There are of course those who really appreciate him and have celebrated with America; but for others it has incited a type of bewildered amusement, and also created some fear.
Based on the portrayal of a brash, confident, and very outspoken tycoon, with an extremely glamorous family: as though it were a crime to be successful, some of the British have completely missed some points. In the same vein that Ronald Reagan was ostracized for being an actor making it to the white house, there is a snobbery associated by some of the British that a character like Trump could have ever even made it.
They are confused why a man who has absolutely everything, and would be taking a step down, would want to be the president? Either he has egotistical plans for world domination, or he genuinely loves America and wants to restore it to the country it once was.
It has been somewhat embarrassingly painful to see just how much disrespect can be shown by our mainstream media and also by some of our politicians in comparison to the respect and adoration that has been attributed to his more scandalous counterparts, who have much more darker skeletons in their cupboards, and who we know have been working under an agenda to displace America, rather than make her whole.
Yet, if you have been watching closely, you cannot fail to see certain similarities taking place which are identical to the reactions which were expressed by a minority of people who voted to remain in the EU, now being replicated across the United States.
A certain confidence amidst what you would consider to be ordinary people, who voted to remain in the EU, reflected quite extreme behavior when their ‘absolute certainty’ was squashed. It didn’t quite get to rioting, or the burning of the flag, but the catchphrase of the well known grumpy British TV character, Victor Meldrew who continually cries “I Don’t Believe It” reverberated across the nation for many months after the Brexit results.
Any celebration that Brexit supporters may have wanted to participate in was most certainly deemed insensitive. There was instead an overall but very quiet joy whilst all of the attention was immediately reverberated back onto the very loud demonstrators, the tears, the tantrums, and the petitions to overthrow and overrule the majority of people who had voted to leave the EU after so many years.
Whilst psychologists likened this response to the four stages of grief experienced when some people loose a loved one, free counselling sessions were also being offered in South East London and Kent to NHS workers by Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust.
It is reported at the time that UKIP MEP Jane Collins said “the decision to offer counselling was ‘an insult to democracy and an insult to people who expect their NHS to be helping sick people”.
Despicable Me
Other similarities besides the acute shock which had been experienced by some of the Remain voters were the derogatory name-calling aimed towards those who wanted to leave the EU.
Older people, now over the age of fifty, those who were considered middle class and those on a low income were targeted as illiterate, unqualified and un-educated to know what they were doing, not only by very notable celebrities that some of the younger generation look up to, but also by the government.
It was threatened that Brexit supporters were also ruining the future for the younger generation; and also that they were considerably racist in bringing up the problems that are factually being experienced through mass immigration across Europe.
However, it was possibly the irony of watching the destruction of the younger generation over a period of years, and the pressure from living under a politically correct regime of being silenced upon every viable complaint or concern that was raised, that had actually tipped the ‘aged’ over the edge to vote.
The Despicable had become the Deplorable in a ruse to become the Dispatchable.
Flying Free
The UK counterpart of Donald Trump has of course been UKIP MEP Nigel Farage in terms of exposing the ploys of a global elite who have been busy building a one world order. He too has been a character that people have either liked or loathed. Farage is not as charismatic, but he is certainly on the same page.
It was on the eve of the 2010 election that Nigel Farage was almost physically dispatched to eternity when the small light aircraft he was flying in crashed to the ground and the UK almost lost one of it most colourful and outspoken politicians.
It was hailed as a miracle that he even survived the crash. I am very glad he did. Part of the course of ‘pain’, or near death experience, is that it sometimes gives you a renewed sense of life and a desire for the truth about mankind’s existence.
His relentless exposure of corrupt bureaucrats in the EU Parliament carried on and his understanding on the nature of freedom and mans need to govern himself, has been like a very vocal voice crying out from the wilderness to many. He confirmed what people were experiencing and witnessing from within college and workplace, and yet who were being confused, bullied and silenced into mass submission. He has carried this out without the usual fake sentiment or fake humility, but used factual points with his very own unique sense of humour and determination at times.
However, this most certainly does not sit him upon the throne of sainthood or mean he does not display some of the egotistical traits that all of mankind possesses. I understand his personal beliefs certainly might not line up with the Christian principles which are at the forefront in society today. Yet, he would most certainly stand up for the right to every voice being heard, and is vehemently against the silencing of speech, which has resulted in an extreme form of dictatorship to the detriment of many people in the UK today.
He writes: “It is a sad reflection of what remains of our culture that a sort of aesthetic ‘genetic fallacy’ makes certain subjects taboo even for discussion – so I am permitted to discuss the undoubted virtues of tobacco or the liberties of smokers because I am one myself, and only immigrants are permitted to have views on immigration. -Busman’s Holiday, Flying Free, Page 233
Indeed, it was his anti-immigration poster earlier this year that had him reported to the police for inciting racial hatred and breaking UK laws.
And of course, one of the main criticisms we have also heard towards Trump has been his pledge to provide security to Americans against illegal immigrants crossing over boarders which has also misleadingly been labelled racist.
Any objection to building a wall for security sake seems strange when on an individual basis we would never remove our own garden fences, come out of gated communities, take the locks off our doors, switch off the security system and never question a single soul who steps over our own front door.
Outside of genuine refugees and people who sincerely need our help, our countries are becoming populated with people who do not care about their host countries. The ideal view of us all being one is unrealistic in a world in which good and evil does exist.
Knowing who is who in a world that is upside down and back to back front means that it is not always easy to determine the pure motive or character of anyone. Looking through a psychological lens today does not always reveal the truth about what is at the core of someone’s intention.
What is interesting however is that it is this year, 2016, when people across Europe and America have heard the truth expressed much more vocally than at any other time, instigated by the most unlikely of characters, and this has injected some light and enthusiasm back into the world. There had been a starvation of seeing genuine truth and power expressed.
Power Struggles
When reflecting on the EU referendum and the Presidential election I realized that if the outcome was not good for either country, the need to remain focused on God, and upon that which was right still had to come first and is paramount in keeping sane in a world that has unleashed a great amount of evil.
When you don’t have that belief your house crumbles and panic sets in. You can become very despondent. It is very obvious that the only secure foundation we have is a home/body built on solid foundations.
Most people know that you have to return to spiritual principles to keep a country stable.
We do not know if the new president will return America to godly principles, but he most certainly made a very wise indication that he may be returning the bust of Winston Churchill to the White House, and that would be a most wonderful gesture.
has also suggested that Nigel Farage would make a good British Ambassador
to the United States. All of the people who voted to leave the EU
would surely agree.
typical fashion the disdain and ‘irrelevance’
displayed towards Donald Trump and Nigel Farage now being expressed
by some British politicians in response to that particular suggestion
is the same ‘irrelevance’ that was shown to the
majority of people in the UK.
people think Donald Trump is arrogant?
Victor Meldrew would say, “I Don’t Believe it”…….
war goes on. The people are now aware of its nature. It is not a war
between left win and right not between nationalist and internationalists.
It is far more fundamental that that. It is the struggle between a
formerly sovereign people and a coterie of professional politicians
who have claimed sovereignty for themselves and wrested it from them
by deceit and bribery”
Cheats and Frauds, Flying Free, Page 227


ALEX JONES: “Castro’s vile ways are now worshiped by the traitor media, his sins are being swept under the rug as they burnish his legacy to hide the vile results of totalitarian communism.”
Fidel Castro - MATS Terminal Washington 1959.jpg
Statement by the President on the Passing of Fidel Castro
SEE: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/11/26/statement-president-passing-fidel-castrorepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
“At this time of Fidel Castro’s passing, we extend a hand of friendship to the Cuban people. We know that this moment fills Cubans – in Cuba and in the United States – with powerful emotions, recalling the countless ways in which Fidel Castro altered the course of individual lives, families, and of the Cuban nation. History will record and judge the enormous impact of this singular figure on the people and world around him. 
For nearly six decades, the relationship between the United States and Cuba was marked by discord and profound political disagreements. During my presidency, we have worked hard to put the past behind us, pursuing a future in which the relationship between our two countries is defined not by our differences but by the many things that we share as neighbors and friends – bonds of family, culture, commerce, and common humanity. This engagement includes the contributions of Cuban Americans, who have done so much for our country and who care deeply about their loved ones in Cuba.
Today, we offer condolences to Fidel Castro’s family, and our thoughts and prayers are with the Cuban people. In the days ahead, they will recall the past and also look to the future. As they do, the Cuban people must know that they have a friend and partner in the United States of America.”

Donald Trump Issues Perfect Statement On Death Of Fidel Castro

SEE: http://www.redstate.com/prevaila/2016/11/26/donald-trump-issues-perfect-statement-death-fidel-castro/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Donald Trump’s statement, on the other hand, hit the nail on the head and reminded the world that Fidel Castro, outside of his friends and family, is no one the world should miss:
“Today, the world marks the passing of a brutal dictator who oppressed his own people for nearly six decades,” Trump said in a statement issued a couple of hours after his tweet.
“Fidel Castro’s legacy is one of firing squads, theft, unimaginable suffering, poverty and the denial of fundamental human rights. While Cuba remains a totalitarian island, it is my hope that today marks a move away from the horrors endured for too long, and toward a future in which the wonderful Cuban people finally live in the freedom they so richly deserve.”
The President-elect added, “Though the tragedies, deaths and pain caused by Fidel Castro cannot be erased, our administration will do all it can to ensure the Cuban people can finally begin their journey toward prosperity and liberty. I join the many Cuban Americans who supported me so greatly in the presidential campaign, including the Brigade 2506 Veterans Association that endorsed me, with the hope of one day soon seeing a free Cuba.”


Pope Francis Sends: 

Telegram for the death of 

Fidel Castro

SEE: http://www.news.va/en/news/telegram-for-the-death-of-fidel-castrorepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
“In a telegram sent to the current president, Raul Castro, the Holy Father also offered his prayers for the former leader, and entrusted the Cuban people to the intercession of Our Lady of Charity of Cobre, the patroness of Cuba. 
Here is the full text of the telegram from Pope Francis: 
On receiving the sad news of the death of your dear brother, His Excellency Mister Fidel Alejandro Castro Ruz, former president of the State Council and of the Government of the Republic of Cuba, I express my sentiments of sorrow to Your Excellency and other family members of the deceased dignitary, as well as to the people of this beloved nation. At the same time, I offer prayers to the Lord for his rest and I entrust the whole Cuban people to the maternal intercession of our Lady of the Charity of El Cobre, patroness of that country.”
Trump: Castro Was A Brutal Oppressive Dictator; Pope: Castro Was A Saint
Published on Nov 26, 2016: Castro’s vile ways are now worshiped by the traitor media, his sins are being swept under the rug as they burnish his legacy to hide the vile results of totalitarian communism.  
Secrets Of Fidel Castro’s Death and Life Revealed
Trump Releases Official Statement On Fidel Castro’s Death and It’s Viral
But Not on Mainstream Media
“Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau hailed Castro as a “legendary revolutionary.” Jimmy Carter sounded a personal note, noting that he and Rosalynn “remember fondly our visits with him in Cuba and his love of his country.” Pope Francis called Castro’s death “sad news” and addressed the Cuban people: “I express to you my sentiments of grief.”
One Cuban émigré declared: “Him dying represents the end of something awful that happened to us. It’s actually him — not anybody else — who caused this. It’s because of him that we lost our opportunity to have a life in our country.” Another added: “He died, but his brother is still there, the government is still there, it’s still the oppressive government.”
Trump and those who are celebrating in Miami know what Fidel Castro really was, and what he actually did and represented. The Leftist intelligentsia, by contrast, is once again tone-deaf and unseemly in its regard for authoritarians, totalitarians, oppressors, and dictatorial butchers.
It doesn’t matter how many times Jimmy Carter and Jesse Jackson and the like tell us that Fidel Castro was a towering figure of history: we agree already that he will be remembered, but he will be remembered for the bloodthirsty tyrant he was.”

Anti-Trump Media/Leaders Worship Fidel Castro

Fidel Castro: Death of a Murderous, 

Communist Dictator

SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/north-america/item/24716-fidel-castro-death-of-a-murderous-communist-dictatorrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Fidel Castro is dead, but the communist tyranny he imposed on the Cuban people lives on. Unfortunately, much of the American media are trying to bury the truth about his murderous regime — and those in America who helped Castro come to power — with him.
In its coverage of Castro’s passing on Friday, the increasingly discredited mainstream media is downplaying or ignoring Castro’s crimes against humanity — and generally refers to him as the “former Cuban leader,” as opposed to a dictator, which he was. He was also a mass murderer, and his brutal oppression of the Cuban people caused many of his fellow citizens to risk their lives to flee their island homeland in rafts and whatever else might float.
Castro was 90 years old at his death, having turned over power to Raul nearly a decade ago, due to Fidel’s declining health. News of the death of the tyrant touched off celebrations in Miami’s Little Havana in south Florida.
Despite the glossing over of inconvenient facts about the Castro brothers by most of the American media, the Cuban community of exiles in Miami know the truth. That is why they or their ancestors fled their Cuban homeland at some point since Castro’s seizure of power in 1959.
Castro was born August 13, 1926, the son of a Spanish immigrant who was a sugar plantation owner. In contrast to those who mistakenly believe communism is a product of the “exploited” working class, Castro was not drawn to the ideology of Marx and Lenin by toiling in the cane fields. He was introduced to the ideas of communism while a student at the University of Havana, where he received a social science degree.
In 1953, the Castro brothers joined with others in an attack on a military barracks in Santiago. The attack failed, and the brothers wound up in prison, only to be eventually pardoned. Fleeing to Mexico, they brought together rebels who returned in 1956, organizing a guerilla band in the mountains of the eastern Sierra Maestra.
By January of 1959, Castro led his victorious rebels into the streets of Havana, where he established a new government. Fulgencio Batista, who had ruled Cuba for several years, had shortly before fled the country. The United States was among the first nations to establish diplomatic relations with his government.
How had Castro done it?
Castro’s improbable taking of absolute power is largely the result of media reports by the New York Times and machinations by the U.S. State Department under President Dwight Eisenhower.
Writing in None Dare Call It Treason, John Stormer explained: “Castro was supported by but a few dozen bandits and a handful of Communists in May 1957, when a career diplomat with a questionable record was named to head the Caribbean Desk in the U.S. State Department. His name was William Arthur Wieland.”
According to a report prepared by the U.S. Senate’s Internal Security Subcommittee, Wieland was vice consul in Bogota, Columbia in 1948, when a young Cuban revolutionary, Fidel Castro, was a leader of Communist-inspired riots. During the riots, Castro took over a radio station and announced, “This is Fidel Castro. This is a Communist revolution.”
Wieland knew about Castro’s communist-supporting activities in Columbia, yet he was the instigator of an arms embargo against the anti-Communist Batista regime in the late 1950s. Wieland removed all anti-Castro diplomats from their positions, including the American ambassador to Cuba, Arthur Gardner. Gardner had sent several reports to the State Department, warning his superiors that Castro was a communist. When Earl Smith replaced Gardner, Wieland sent Smith to Herbert Matthews, a New York Times reporter, for background on Castro.
Smith later testified to the U.S. Senate, after Castro’s take-over. “Three front page articles in the New York Times early in 1957, written by editor Herbert Matthews, served to inflate Castro to world stature and world recognition. Until that time, Castro had been just another bandit in the Oriente mountains of Cuba, with a handful of followers.”
In his articles, Matthews compared Castro to Abraham Lincoln and to Jose Marti, hero of Cuba’s wars of independence from the Spanish Empire. This was not the first time that Matthews had lionized communists, having written articles in 1936 in support of the communist side in the Spanish Civil War.
Matthews assured his New York Times readers that Castro was not a Communist, but was rather a champion of liberty and democracy. Castro, was, according to Matthews, a man who “has strong ideas of liberty, democracy, social justice, the need to restore the Constitution, to hold elections.” Batista, on the other hand, was pictured as just another right-wing dictator.
He was not alone among the American media in backing Castro during his rise to power. Edward R. Murrow of CBS television produced a very positive documentary on Castro. Ed Sullivan, the host of what was then one of TV’s most-watched variety shows, even traveled to Cuba and filmed an interview with the young revolutionary. Thirty million viewers watched as Sullivan asked Castro, “You are not a Communist are you, Fidel? You are a devout Catholic, aren’t you?”
Sullivan ended the documentary with an over-the-top endorsement of Castro. “The people of the United States have great admiration for you and your men because you are in the real American spirit of George Washington.”
A year and a half later, Sullivan publicly apologized for his support of Castro, when it became apparent that Castro was no George Washington.
William Atwood of Look magazine wrote in March 1959, “We can thank our lucky stars that Castro was no Communist.” Dickey Chapelle of Reader’s Digest even said in April of 1959, “The Cuba of Fidel Castro today is free from terror. Civil liberties have been restored, and corruption seems to be drying up.” And Newsweek even wrote in the same month, “Castro’s vision has a capitalist base. He wants a country in which every farmer owns his land.”
In 1960, Secretary of State Christian Herter, however, said, “I don’t think anyone could say affirmatively that Cuba is Communist at the present time.” Of course, that was not true, as many Americans, including Ambassador Smith, candy maker Robert Welch (who founded The John Birch Society, the parent organization of The New American) and many others repeatedly warned that Castro indeed was a Communist. Even Vice-President Richard Nixon privately told President Dwight Eisenhower that Castro was a Communist!
Despite all this, President Eisenhower said in 1963, “It would have taken a genius of prophecy to know that Castro was a Communist when he took control of Cuba.”
John Birch Society (JBS) founder Robert Welch and the others who had it figured out must have been geniuses then. In December 1958, at the founding meeting of the JBS, Mr. Welch warned about Castro, declaring, “If you have the slightest doubt that Castro is a Communist, don’t. If he is successful, time will clearly reveal that he is an agent of the Kremlin.” Three months earlier, Welch had warned in American Opinion (the predecessor of The New American), “Now the evidence from Castro’s whole past, that he is a Communist agent carrying out Communist orders and plans, is overwhelming.” Later, he added, “Castro is a Communist. Period. He is not just pulled and tugged by Communist influences and steered by Communist advisers. Fidel Castro himself has been a conscious and dedicated agent of the Kremlin ever since his student days. His whole ‘revolution’ followed the Communist pattern, used Communist techniques, and was supported and managed by Moscow.”
The truth is that the Eisenhower administration had been instrumental in bringing Castro to power. In March 1958, U.S. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles severely damaged the Batista government by refusing to ship 1,950 Garand rifles legally purchased by the Cubans.
Speaking before the U.S. Senate in 1960, Ambassador Smith said, “Without the United States, Castro would not be in power today.”
Later, Smith wrote a letter published in 1979 in the New York Times, in which he still held to that belief. “The final coup in favor of Castro came on December 17, 1958. On that date, in accordance with my instructions from the State Department, I personally conveyed to President Batista that the Department of State would view with skepticism any plan on his part, or any intention on his part, to remain in Cuba indefinitely. I had dealt him a mortal blow.”
Fourteen days later, the Cuban government fell, and was soon replaced by the Communist dictatorship of the Castro brothers. This pattern has unfortunately been repeated many times, notably with President Jimmy Carter’s undermining of the Shah of Iran and the anti-Communist Anastasio Somoza in Nicaragua.
The help the U.S. government gave to Fidel Castro was bipartisan, however. While Eisenhower was a Republican, the Democrat John Kennedy administration inherited a plan from Eisenhower, concocted by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), for an invasion of Cuba by exiled Cuban freedom fighters. Kennedy approved the plan, with some modifications, promising to provide an “air umbrella” to keep Castro’s air force out of the action. But that did not happen, and the 1,400 Cuban exiles landed at the Bay of Pigs in April 1961, not knowing that they would not have that air cover.
CIA radio broadcasts were also promised to alert over 100 underground operations, but they were never transmitted. By the time it was apparent that the Bay of Pigs was the invasion site, it was too late for these internal anti-Castro forces to provide any help to the brave freedom fighters.
The Brigade fought bravely for three days, inflicting over 2,000 casualties on Castro’s overwhelmingly numerically superior forces. The small band of doctors, lawyers, common laborers, and university students were either killed or taken captive.
The next year, the United States and the Soviet Union faced off in the Cuban Missile Crisis, when Soviet dictator (not just a “leader”) Nikita Kruschev planted nuclear missiles in Cuba. In the next several years, Castro gave assistance to the world communist effort by sending Cuban troops to places such as Angola.
Inside Cuba, the people there felt the full weight of life under a brutal communist dictatorship. Soon after coming to power, Castro announced the need for gun registration, ostensibly to fight gangsterism on the island. Nine months later, he simply rounded up the guns, asserting that there was no longer any need for individual citizens owning guns.
Armando Lago, a Harvard-trained economist, has estimated that almost 78,000 may have died trying to flee Cuba since Castro imposed his Communist dictatorship on the island Lago, writing in The Black Book of Communism, was able to document nearly 100,000 killed by Castro, either by firing squads, assassinations, or deaths in prisons, or by attempting to flee the island through the treacherous waters between Cuba and Florida, 90 miles away.
Miguel Faria, writing in his book Cuba in Revolution, said, “Since Fidel Castro took over the island in 1959, the best figures that we can glean is that between 30,000 and 40,000 people have either been executed [by firing squad or at the hands of their jailers].”
Of course, the exact numbers of Castro’s killings cannot be known with certainty. Then, of course, there is the reduction in the standard of living imposed on the country under the command economy of communism. Before Castro, the Cuban economy was ranked the second-highest in Latin America.
In 2008, Castro’s failing health, reportedly from an intestinal disease, led him to surrender day-to-day power to his communist brother Raul. But, as Fidel Castro had said in five-hour TV speech on December 2, 1961, “I am a Marxist-Leninist and will be until the day I die.” That was certainly true, but in his path to power, he had hidden this belief from some of his followers who actually believed he was for liberty. He explained his lie was necessary, “because otherwise we might have alienated the bourgeoisie and other forces which we knew would eventually have to fight.”
Suspicions remain that Castro, acting in retaliation or defense because of the assassination attempts on his life at the direction of President Kennedy, was somehow involved in the murder of an American president, John F. Kennedy.
All in all, Fidel Castro brought much pain and misery to the world during his 90 years on earth, and it is quite understandable how the Cuban community in Miami is relieved to hear of his passing. Unfortunately, many Americans will remain mystified at the intensity of animosity toward Castro by the south Florida Cuban community, considering the sugar-coated version of his life they have been presented by the mainstream media in the United States.
But they are simply continuing a cover-up of the Castro record, dating back to the 1950s.
Certainly a better perspective was provided by Rolando Perez, founder of Bear Witness Central, an anti-communist group composed to a large extent (though not exclusively) of those who witnessed communism firsthand:
The Cuban people were betrayed by Fidel Castro when fifty-seven years ago, he came to power in a bloody revolution that installed a Communist totalitarian dictatorship. The people of Cuba have suffered an inhuman repression, hundred of thousands unjustly imprisoned, millions of broken and destroyed families, oppression of free speech and the murder of tens of thousands of people during his reign in power.
Perez, who himself lived under communism in Cuba before fleeing from his native land to his adopted homeland, the United States, concluded:
The Cuban people have suffered enough, Bear Witness Central is asking President-elect Donald Trump, the incoming Trump Administration and the U.S. Congress that it is unequivocally clear that the Cuban-American population and the Cuban people want a free Cuba and demand political reforms; and that it does not matter who is in power in Cuba,  codified sanctions shall only be lifted upon the release of all political prisoners; the recognition and respect of fundamental human, civil and political rights as prescribed by international covenants; and the legalization of opposition parties, free elections and an independent media.
Enough is enough!  Cuba must be FREE!
God Bless America!
 Related articles:
Birch Society’s Robert Welch Was Correct on Castro

(Friday Church News Notes, December 2, 2016, www.wayoflife.org [email protected], 866-295-4143) – 
The death of Cuba’s dictator Fidel Castro last week brought an outpouring of sympathetic lies from the leftist propagandizing “mainstream media.” A report in Reuters was typical, and these are the type of reports that appear on popular Internet news sites and in newspapers throughout the world to brainwash the average ill-informed person. I read it in The Himalayan Times in a coffee shop in Kathmandu, Nepal. The spirit of the piece is that Fidel was a hero who thumbed his nose at the oppressive United States and created a congenial communist state that allegedly improved the lives of the people. “He swept away capitalism and won support for bringing schools and hospitals to the poor” (“Former Cuban Leader Dies at 90,” Reuters, Nov. 26, 2016). 
The truth is that he didn’t win support; he forced support through terrorism and brutal oppression. While the report admits that Fidel had “legions of enemies and critics” who “saw him as a ruthless tyrant,” these critics were not given a voice to express their concerns. An ill-informed reader is left to think that perhaps their criticism of good-ole Fidel was unjust. This Reuters report does not inform its readers of Fidel’s brutality, the destruction of free speech, free religion, free press, and democratic elections, the destruction of the economy through Marxist principles, the tiny, dark, nightmarish prison cells filled with 500,000 “critics,” the “highest political incarceration rate per capita on earth,” the unspeakable torture and beatings, the 15,000 executions by firing squad, the forced labor. Reuters does not explain why hundreds of thousands of Cubans risked their lives to escape Fidel’s communist paradise to flee to oppressive America (tens of thousands drowning or being eaten by sharks in the attempt), while practically no one tried to immigrate to Cuba. Those people can tell you the truth about Cuba, but they were not given a voice by Reuters, et al. (They are given a voice in volumes such as The Black Book of Communism by Pascal Fontaine, Fidel: Hollywood’s Favorite Tyrant by Humberto Fontova, and Against All Hope by Armando Valladares, who describes the frightful 22 years of torture and imprisonment he personally endured for “merely raising the issue of freedom.”) 
Though Cuba’s socialistic health care system has been touted as one of the best in the world, the reality is there are two health care systems in Cuba, a very poor quality one for ordinary Cubans and a superior one for the Communist Party elite and medical tourists. “Testimony and documentation on the subject are vast. Hospitals and clinics are crumbling. Conditions are so unsanitary, patients may be better off at home, whatever home is. If they do have to go to the hospital, they must bring their own bed sheets, soap, towels, food, light bulbs–even toilet paper. And basic medications are scarce … finding an aspirin can be a chore. And an antibiotic will fetch a fortune on the black market. The equipment that doctors have to work with is either antiquated or nonexistent. Doctors have been known to reuse latex gloves–there is no choice. When they travel to the island, on errands of mercy, American doctors make sure to take as much equipment and as many supplies as they can carry. One told the Associated Press, ‘The [Cuban] doctors are pretty well trained, but they have nothing to work with. It’s like operating with knives and spoons’” (“Does Cuba Have the Best Healthcare System?” May 22, 2016, quora.com). 
This Reuters report also failed to tell its readers that Cubans continue to stream out of Fidel’s communist paradise for America’s oppressive shores (“Surge in Cuban Immigration to U.S. continues,” Aug. 5, 2016, Pewresearch.org). We wonder why the leftist reporters don’t immigrate to one of the communist paradises instead of staying in oppressive America. For more truth about Fidel’s shocking reign of terror see this web report.




Triumph of God’s Kingdom in a Broken World

In this new That The World May Know video Bible study, author and Bible teacher, Ray Vander Laan takes you on a journey in Israel to explore what it means to be a kingdom of priests in a prodigal world by discovering the mission that God gave his people many centuries ago and how that impacts us today.

In each lesson, Vander Laan illuminates the historical, geographical, and cultural context of the sacred Scriptures. Filmed on location in Israel, the That the World May Know DVD series will transform your understanding of God and challenge you to be a true follower of Jesus.

The Mission of Jesus Small Group Bible Study 
by Ray Vander Laan – Trailer

The Mission of Jesus Small Group Bible Study by Ray Vander Laan 



SEE: http://apprising.org/2008/04/11/rob-bell-and-his-echoes-of-ray-vanderlaan/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
“My people have become lost sheep; Their shepherds have led them astray, They have made them turn aside on the mountains; They have gone along from mountain to hill, And have forgotten their resting place.” (Jeremiah 50:6, NASB)
Heading Into Jewish Kabbalistic Mystic Spiritual Bondage
Many are new to the mystical Messianic musings of Rob Bell, rock star icon within the sinfully ecumenical neo-liberal cult of the Emergent Church aka the Emerging Church with its quasi-universalism in a new version of postmodern Progressive Christian theology under their spiritual circus “big tent” of empty Emergence Christianity.
What they don’t know is how he rose to prominence through his own leaning heavily on the teachings of Ray Vander Laan. Here’s the link to some more research at Relational Concepts, Inc., which is a group of Michigan pastors have done extensive research into Ray Vander Laan and also reviewed Velvet Elvis, which is the first book by Rob Bell.
And then in this letter to Apprising Ministries a reader describes the adverse effects on a Christian school in their community which has also come under Vander Laan’s questionable influence:
I live in a fairly large community and our local Christian school has been taken over by Ray Vander Laan followers. The Bible dept. was handed over to a long time protégé of RVL. The school president and several board members became enamored with Ray Vander Laan after taking a trip with him to Israel.
Being doctrinally conservative and a serious student of the Word for over 20 years, I started seeing red flags all over the place. The children were reciting the Jewish Shema 3 times a day in Hebrew. The high schoolers got a heavy dose of Rob Bell too. Mezusah boxes started showing up on the classroom doorways. The students were introduced to a ritual Mikvah cleansing at retreats and chapels.
A group of parents formed behind the scenes to advise the board and president about our doctrinal concerns. We were placated and ask to trust them. After a long and ugly battle, we gave up our school and left with about 30 other families.
Rob Bell calls Ray Vander Laan his Rabbi. Interesting.
By the way Rob Bell produced RVL’s most recent video “Dust of the Rabbi”.
Would be interested to hear your comments on my research into RVL. Thanks.
Because of Him,
Just Say No To “Rabbi” Ray

 See also:

“This paper is a summary of the dangers of using extra-biblical ancient Jewish culture to determine the
meaning of the Bible. As in my previous critique, “How Jewish Do You Have to be to Understand the
Bible?”, I will specifically focus on the hermeneutics of Ray Vander Laan. As I’ve said before, I have
nothing against Mr. Vander Laan personally; I’ve never met the man. But Vander Laan is the teacher in
my area (West Michigan) who is the lead proponent of this method of interpretation. Since I am most
acquainted with his teachings, they will be the subject of my critique. As a supplement to my earlier
critique, I will now summarize and reinforce the point that using culture to determine meaning is a poor
method of interpretation which the body of Christ should not espouse. 
Specifically, I will show that
culturally based methods of interpretation, such as Vander Laan’s, lead to the following:
1) The explicit denial of the sufficiency of Scripture
2) The implicit denial of the inerrancy of the Bible
3) The potential denial of Christianity’s central doctrines
4) The conclusion that context is irrelevant to determining meaning
5) The Gnostic approach to spiritual understanding and growth
6) The affirmation that biblical texts have many meanings, but the assumption that only the
culturally based interpretation is correct
7) The average Christian will not study their Bible.  
Commentary: Notice that Vander Laan states that a Westerner can’t get to the proper meaning of the
text unless he understands it through VanderLaan’s extra-biblical/Eastern interpretation. Here again
Vander Laan reinforces the fact that the Bible is not sufficient. Also, because the extra knowledge you
need to understand is only known by a few, Vander Laan’s methods reduce to Gnosticism, in that, unless
you have special/secret knowledge, you will not get the proper meaning, even after a thousand readings
of the text.
  In an analysis of a speech given by Vander Laan, Wayne Grudem writes: “Vander Laan’s
approach is deeply troubling because he would take away the ability of ordinary readers to read, understand, believe, and hold firm to the words of the Bible for themselves. And he would take
away the ability of ordinary believers to quote a verse from the Bible to prove that a particular
teaching was right or wrong. His approach takes away the Bible from the people.”


Pardoning The Criminal Turkey: An American Precedent
Published on Nov 24, 2016
As we sit back and enjoy the company of family this 2016 Thanksgiving Day is it too much to ask to remember those that have sacrificed to protect your basic rights? Where would we be after this monstrosity of a Presidential election? And as the spy state grows with the coming implementation of Rule 41, where would we be right now without Bradley Manning, Julian Assange, and Edward Snowden? Its always the heroes that die or are imprisoned fighting for the undeniable truth. While it never fails that it is the turkeys in Washington D.C. that always get pardoned. Jon Bowne reporting.


Obama makes final Thanksgiving turkey pardon




1 2 3 9