Turkey’s new prime minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, pessimistic regarding his country normalizing ties with Israel.
Turkey’s new prime minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, pessimistic regarding his country normalizing ties with Israel.
As a talk-show host, I have no choice but to keep up with what’s happening in America and the world. I am therefore submerged in depressing and often angering fare.
It is hard to read about and discuss the progressives who dominate American media and academia who morally equate Israel and Hamas; who describe America – the most tolerant multi-ethnic country in the world – as racist; and who characterize American universities as a “rape culture.”
But there was a barely reported story that came out of a small city in Vermont last week that, for reasons to be explained, really got to me. The story isn’t comparable to the beheading of innocent people or as dramatic as the rioting in Ferguson, Missouri. But if it typifies what is happening in America, it is difficult not to be pessimistic about America’s future.
The facts of the story are not in dispute.
As reported in the Burlington Free Press, a restaurant in the town of Winooski, Vermont, population 7,000, “removed a sign reading ‘Yield for Sneakers Bacon’ from a garden at the Winooski Rotary.”
Why did the Sneakers Bistro and Cafe remove the sign?
Because “a woman who described herself as ‘a vegan and a member of a Muslim household’ called the sign offensive in a post” on a local Internet forum.
“Given the large number of Muslim families in Winooski, as well as many others who do not eat pork for a variety of reasons,” the woman wrote, “it seems unnecessary for this insensitive business sign to be at the city’s main crosswalk.”
The Free Press reported that “Sneakers owner Marc Dysinger replied that the sign was meant to be fun and to show that the restaurant cares about Winooski. … He apologized for the controversy.”
After “a swarm of Internet comments followed the decision,” Dysinger wrote on Facebook:
“We are here to serve people BREAKFAST, not politics. We removed the sign that was located on public property as a gesture of respect for our diverse community. … Removing it was not a difficult decision. We still love bacon. We still love eggs. Please have the political conversation elsewhere.”
Everything about this story is depressing.
First, the complaint.
The woman who wrote this totalitarian drivel is the worst combination of fake victimhood, political correctness (which itself is a PC euphemism for “that which offends the left”) and Muslims who seek to impose Shariah law on non-Muslims. It is also highly likely this woman graduated college, probably with a major in the liberal arts. Our universities teach non-white, non-Christian, and female students to find offense everywhere. American students get degrees in Finding Offense.
As a Jew who refrains from eating bacon or any pork product, it would never occur to me or to Jews far more observant than I to tell a non-Jewish restaurant to take down a sign advertising bacon. Nor would it occur to any Jew to find such an ad “offensive.”
The woman possesses yet another vile trait – one of the ugliest in the human pantheon: ingratitude. There is a Somali refugee community in Winooski. These people were saved from the murderous horrors of Somalia; yet this woman, whether or not she is a member of that specific community, has the gall to tell the city that saved this Muslim community’s life that it dare not advertise a food she doesn’t eat. Such ingratitude doesn’t come naturally. It has to be learned.
Second, the restaurant owner’s reaction.
This woman should have been ignored or told in the same social media in which her complaint appeared to seek psychotherapy and/or be reminded that she’s free to move to a society that bans bacon, and that this society is free and wishes to remain so.
Instead the restaurant owner immediately gave in to this woman.
This man typifies the moral weakening of America taking place over the last generation. Throughout our history we prided ourselves in being the “Home of the Brave.” The restaurant owner’s reaction exemplifies the opposite of bravery. He actually “apologized for the controversy.” In a morally ordered universe, one apologizes for a wrong done. Yet he did nothing wrong. She did.
Why did he apologize even though he was the wronged party? Because he has imbibed the left’s poisonous doctrine of “diversity,” one of the left’s fig leaves behind which it dismantles American values and unifying identity.
Third, the city manager.
A feature of Political Correctness is lying on its behalf. This was exemplified by Winooski’s city manager, Katherine Decarreau, who wrote, “As I read her post, her request came as a vegan, not as a Muslim.”
This comment is breathtaking in its mendacity. The complaining woman described herself as “a member of a Muslim household” and wrote that the sign is offensive to Muslims. Yet the city manager publicly denies that the complaint emanated from the woman’s being a Muslim.
No one has called her out on this lie, let alone called for her resignation. Because in the Brave New World in which we live, truth doesn’t have an objective existence. Everything, even truth, is relative.
When leftism (aka political correctness) corrupts as small and Middle American a town as Winooski, Vermont, it is time to be very concerned.
And to fight back.
This means, among other things, getting Muslim organizations to disassociate themselves from the original message. I could not find one that has, including the Winooski Islamic Community Center.
And it means explaining to the restaurant owner why his apology was morally wrong, undermined American values and was not “a gesture of respect for our diverse community.” It was gesture of disrespect to the vast majority of the citizens of Winooski who enjoy bacon and to the vast majority of Americans outside of Winnoski, whether or not we eat bacon.
Former Cuban leader claims U.S. Senator McCain collaborated with the Mossad to create the Islamic State terrorist group.
Al-Nusra Front presents three demands for the release of 43 Fijian peacekeepers kidnapped last week.
Pentagon says U.S. military forces conducted an operation against the Al-Shabaab terrorist network. No further information provided.
Ireland’s Defense Minister says his country may not replace its forces in the Golan Heights given recent tensions.
About how America became involved in certain wars, many conspiracy theories have been advanced – and some have been proved correct.
When James K. Polk got his declaration of war as Mexico had “shed American blood upon the American soil,” Rep. Abraham Lincoln demanded to know the exact spot where it had happened.
And did the Spanish really blow up the battleship Maine in Havana Harbor, the casus belli for the Spanish-American War?
The Gulf of Tonkin Incident, involving U.S. destroyers Maddox and C. Turner Joy, remains in dispute. But charges that North Vietnamese patrol boats had attacked U.S. warships on the high seas led to the 1964 resolution authorizing the war in Vietnam.
In 2003, Americans were stampeded into backing an invasion of Iraq because Saddam Hussein had allegedly been complicit in 9/11, had weapons of mass destruction and was able to douse our East Coast with anthrax.
“(He) lied us into war because he did not have the political courage to lead us into it,” said Rep. Clare Luce of Franklin D. Roosevelt, who, according to many historians, made efforts to provoke German subs into attacking U.S. warships and bring us into the European war through the “back door” of a war with Japan.
This week marks the 75th anniversary of World War II, as last month marked the 100th anniversary of World War I.
Thus, it is a good time for Eugene Windchy’s “Twelve American Wars: Nine of Them Avoidable.” A compelling chapter in this new book, by the author of “Tonkin Gulf,” deals with how Winston Churchill, First Lord of the Admiralty, schemed to drag America into Britain’s war in 1915.
In 1907, Britain launched the Lusitania, “the greyhound of the sea,” the fastest passenger ship afloat. In 1913, Churchill called in the head of Cunard and said Lusitania would have to be refitted for a war he predicted would break out in September 1914.
The Lusitania, writes Windchy, was “refitted as a cargo ship with hidden compartments to hold shells and other munitions. By all accounts there were installed revolving gun mounts.”
On Aug. 4, 1914, after war was declared, Lusitania went back into dry dock. More space was provided for cargo, and the vessel was now carried on Cunard’s books as “an auxiliary cruiser.”
Churchill visited the ship in dry dock and referred to Lusitania as “just another 45,000 tons of live bait.”
When war began, German submarine captains, to save torpedoes, would surface and permit the crews of cargo ships to scramble into lifeboats, and then they would plant bombs or use gunfire to sink the vessels.
Churchill’s response was to outfit merchant ships with hidden guns, order them to ram submarines, and put out “Q-ships,” disguised as merchant ships, which would not expose their guns until submarines surfaced.
German naval commanders began to order submarines to sink merchant ships on sight. First Sea Lord Sir John (“Jackie”) Fisher said he would have done the same.
Churchill, seeing an opportunity to bring America into Britain’s war, wrote the Board of Trade: “It is most important to attract neutral shipping to our shores, in the hope especially of embroiling the United States with Germany. … We want the traffic – the more the better – and if some of it gets into trouble, the better still.”
Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan wanted to warn Americans not to travel aboard British ships. But President Woodrow Wilson, writes Windchy, “said that American citizens had a right to travel on belligerent ships with impunity, even within a war zone,” a defiance of common sense and an absurd interpretation of international law.
On May 1, 1915, Lusitania set sail from New York. As Windchy writes, the ship “secretly carried munitions and Canadian troops in civilian clothes, which legally made it fair game for (German) U-boats.
“After the war, Churchill … admitted that the Lusitania carried a ‘small consignment of rifle ammunition and shrapnel shells weighing 173 tons.’ New York Customs Collector Dudley Malone told President Wilson that ‘practically all her cargo was contraband of various kinds.’”
Future Secretary of State Robert Lansing knew that British passenger ships carried war materiel. German diplomats in New York warned American passengers they were in danger on the Lusitania. And instead of sailing north of Ireland to Liverpool, the Lusitania sailed to the south, into waters known to be the hunting ground of German submarines.
Lusitania blew up and sank in 18 minutes. Munitions may have caused the secondary explosion when the torpedo hit. Some 1,200 people perished, including 128 Americans. America was on fire, ready for war when the next incidents occurred, as they would in 1917 with the sinking of U.S. merchant ships in similar waters.
Had Wilson publicly warned U.S. citizens not to sail on the ships of belligerent nations and forbidden U.S.-flagged merchant ships to carry contraband to nations at war, America might have stayed out of the war, which might have ended in a truce, not a German defeat.
There might have been no Adolf Hitler and no World War II.
Egypt says Israel’s plans to declare land in Gush Etzion as state land contradict international law.
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif voices optimism that a dispute over Tehran’s nuclear program can be resolved by November 24.
Cast your vote now. All answers are stored anonymously.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post’s poll.
UN Secretary General fears Israel’s decision to declare 988 acres of land in Judea as state land will lead to “settlement activity”.
The latest Gallup poll indicates that 14 percent of the people “moderately disapprove” of Barack Obama’s performance as president and 39 percent “strongly disapprove.”
Since Obama won two presidential elections, chances are that some of those who now “strongly disapprove” of what he has done voted to put him in office. We all make mistakes, but the real question is whether we learn from them.
With many people now acting as if it is time for “a woman” to become president, apparently they have learned absolutely nothing from the disastrous results of the irresponsible self-indulgence of choosing a president of the United States on the basis of demographic characteristics, instead of individual qualifications.
It would not matter to me if the next five presidents in a row were all women, if these happened to be the best individuals available at the time. But to say that we should now elect “a woman” president in 2016 is to say that we are willfully blind to the dangers of putting life and death decisions in the hands of someone chosen for symbolic reasons.
If we were to choose just “a woman” as our next president, would that mean that any criticism of that president would be considered to be a sign of being against women?
No public official should be considered to be above criticism – and the higher up that official is, the more important it is to hold his or her feet to the fire when it comes to carrying out duties involving the life and death of individuals and the fate of the nation.
We have not yet had a Jewish president. If and when we do, does that mean that any criticism of that individual should be stigmatized and dismissed as anti-Semitism? What of our first Italian-American president, our first Asian-American president?
Human beings of every background are imperfect creatures. When they are in a position high enough for their imperfections to bring disasters to more than 300 million Americans, the last thing we need is to stifle criticism of what they do.
It is by no means guaranteed that this country will survive the long-run consequences of the disastrous decisions already made by Barack Obama, especially his pretense of stopping Iran’s becoming a nuclear power.
Obama may no longer be in office when those chickens come home to roost.
If we wake up some morning and find some American city in radioactive ruins, will we connect the dots and see this as a consequence of voting to elect an unknown and untried man, for the sake of racial symbolism?
Among those who look around for someone to blame, how many will look in the mirror?
Presidents already have too much insulation from criticism – and from reality.
When President Calvin Coolidge caught everyone by surprise in 1928, by announcing that he would not run for re-election, despite a prosperous economy and his own personal popularity, he simply said, “I do not choose to run.” Coolidge was a man of very few words, despite his knowledge of multiple languages. Someone once said that Coolidge could be silent in five different languages.
But, when he later wrote a small autobiography, Coolidge explained the inherent dangers in the office of president of the United States, especially when one person remains in the White House too long.
“It is difficult for men in high office to avoid the malady of self-delusion. They are always surrounded by worshipers. They are constantly, and for the most part sincerely, assured of their greatness.
“They live in an artificial atmosphere of adulation and exaltation which sooner or later impairs their judgment. They are in grave danger of becoming careless and arrogant.”
Of presidents who served eight years in office, he said, “in almost every instance” the last years of their terms show little “constructive accomplishments” and those years are often “clouded with grave disappointments.”
Another president chosen for demographic representation (whether by race, sex or whatever), and further insulated from criticism and from reality, is the last thing we need.
Conservative women want real men to be a part of their lives, not someone reduced to a “useless yes man” by the domination of a federal government that wants to control men and “save” women with programs such as a “Fluked-up, fifteen-dollar freebie in birth control.”
That blunt assessment is from the authors of “What Women Really Want,” a new book by Dr. Gina Loudon, actress Morgan Brittany and PolitiChicks Editor-in-Chief Ann-Marie Murrell.
“Real women do not need or even want that sort of assistance,” said Murrell told WND.
Loudon believes that real women are for a number of characteristics in men, including:
Such men desire want independence, not government hand-holding, she said.
In the government’s eyes, “We have been reduced to walking uteruses,” she said.
Real men know that true economic prosperity comes from hard work and not a reliance on government handouts, she said.
According to a Forbes survey, most women have the dream of being able to quit the work force to stay home with their children. Of 1,000 women surveyed, 84 percent of working women said that staying home “is a financial luxury they aspire to.” But a struggling economy and lack of opportunity, as well as oppressive tax laws and flawed public policy, make the dream harder and harder to realize for many women.
She says a real man will stand up for freedom and liberty, no matter the pressure from government.
That actually just reflects what many Americans want. A Gallup poll found that 53 percent of Americans want less government meddling in the nation’s problems. Only 13 percent want more government involvement.
“Women want government out of their bedrooms, their exam rooms, and their boardrooms! They want to be able to conduct their lives as they see fit, and to reach their full potential by trial and error,” Loudon said.
Real men and women have to think for themselves because the government is incapable of adequately caring for everyone, nor does it have your best interests at heart, the book argues.
Conservatives understand. According to a Gallup poll, “Democrats also are more trusting of the men and women who hold or seek political office, at 59 percent, compared with 42 percent of Republicans and 39 percent of independents.”
The ever-enlarging federal government and increasing cost of living now often forces women to work outside the home, to the dismay of Loudon.
“Women I talk to today often say that their first love, like mine, is being a wife and mother. That is by God’s own design. But today, so many women must forgo that dream to enter the workplace,” she said.
While in the work force, women want the freedom to choose a job that will work for them. Yet according to Gallup, 44 percent of women still would rather stay at home and take care of their children.
Real men care for the women in their lives, and they will value their opinions, beliefs, and their liberties, the book explains.
A discouraging poll done by USA Today found that one third of married women who own pets said their pets listen better than their husbands.
Conversely, there are things that women, the authors say, do not want:
The federal government pushed women into having children outside of marriage with welfare and other benefits, but these women were not free, the authors suggest. They were dependent on that government, and were warned that they were unable to leave that cocoon.
And the federal government’s support for abortion is not in step with what women actually believe. Only 28 percent of women support abortion under any circumstances while 71 percent believe it should be illegal or legal only in certain situations.
The authors suggest independent women don’t want a nanny state, where a government sees them just as a number.
According to Gallup, 68 percent of women do not trust the government’s ability to fix problems. For example, 63 percent of women saying federal regulations on food have negative or no effect. In addition, women are twice as likely to oppose regulations on salt, sugar, and fat consumption.
The book notes women tire of being labeled as old, young, rich, poor, black, white, fat, and thin. They also don’t want to fight against men in a trumped up gender war.
Almost two-thirds of Americans (63 percent) think that women serving in elected office would benefit the country, according to Gallup. America knows that women care about more than just “gender issues,” and that they can and should be able to engage all political issues.
As Loudon observes, “Politics shouldn’t be about division. Real politics is about standing together for the values we share as Americans, and finding common ground through adult dialogue, civil discourse.”
Any type of government intrusion, whether it be by the NSA, TSA, IRS or Obamacare, irks women and will not be tolerated, the book explains.
According to a CNN poll from 2013, 57 percent of women oppose Obamacare while only 39 percent of women are in favor of it.
“Women in America want men who will take charge of their destiny and will stand up to the federal government,” said Brittany, a film, television, and stage actress since the age of 6, best known for playing Katherine Wentworth in “Dallas.”
Brittany said, “Real men stand up and fight intrusions, and always seek to remain free. Together men and women together can achieve the liberty that Americans have cherished for 238 years.”
Controversy surrounding the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi attacks is poised to return with a “vengeance” this month, threatening political headaches for President Obama and Hillary Clinton, warns MSNBC.
The news network specifically fingered a new book by radio host and WND reporter Aaron Klein, entitled, “The REAL Benghazi Story: What the White House and Hillary Don’t Want You to Know,” as being in part responsible for the renewed Benghazi publicity.
Also blamed is the upcoming anniversary of the attacks as well as the jumpstart of the special House committee investigating Benghazi when Congress returns from its August recess.
MSNBC reports Klein’s book promises “to blow the lid off” of the issue and provide “shocking,” “devastating” and “mind-blowing” new details of the Benghazi attack.
Continues the news network: “Klein’s audience is undoubtedly the already converted, but three of his previous books have made it to the New York Times bestseller list, and his latest is easy fodder for the conservative echo chamber.”
MSNBC reports Klein is launching a book tour in New York and Washington, and quotes the author’s publicist, Maria Sliwa, as stating Klein “has interview commitments with top-tier cable, radio and print outlets.”
It reports the renewed interest in Benghazi is expected to cause “a headache for the teams surrounding Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.”
Klein’s extensively sourced book breaks news on significant issues related to the Benghazi attack.
A sampling of what the publisher says is contained in the book:
The book is slated for release Sept. 9, two days before the second anniversary of the Benghazi attack.
See a trailer:
“All the ways of a man are clean in his own eyes; but the Lord weigheth the spirits.”
– Proverbs 16:2
The Bible talks about times in the past and in the future when every man does what is right in his own eyes.
I think that’s exactly where America is today – without a clear focus on what is right and wrong.
A perfect example of this is the moral confusion and violent rage over the police shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri.
None of those looting and trashing the city really know what happened when a white police officer shot the black teenager. They’re just assuming they know – that somehow because the policeman was white and the teenager black race was an issue.
That’s crazy. I don’t know how else to say it. It’s mindless hysteria.
It may even be worse than that. When the event is purposely politicized by Attorney General Eric Holder, the media, elected officials and others across the country – all very short on facts – it’s obvious justice is no longer color blind.
I think it was Holder who said: “Our society is not yet colorblind nor should it be. We must be color brave.”
Translation: “Martin Luther King Jr. was wrong. Let’s keep race-consciousness alive for our political purposes.”
Along with a willingness to make an example out of a police officer who may have behaved appropriately in a moment of provocation and stress, there is an imbecilic, cult-like inclination by some to turn Michael Brown into a martyr.
Take the Rev. Sarah Kinney Gaventa, associate rector at St. Paul’s Church in Ivy, Virginia, who compared the teenager to Jesus – the teen who only moments before he was shot was videotaped beating a convenience store clerk half his size so he could steal some cheap cigars.
“In our Gospel today, standing in a center of Roman power, a town named after Caesar, Jesus asks his disciples who people say he is,” she said in a sermon last week. “Peter gets the answer right – the Messiah, the Son of the Living God. The God we love came to disrupt the power structures of the world that tell us what we are worth. He is a living God, who loved us so much and was so grieved by our inability to love him and one another, that he was willing to become human. He became Michael Brown. He became the victim of our sin, so we wouldn’t have to sacrifice each other anymore. His sacrifice should have been the last. His sacrifice was enough for us.”
Hear Gaventa’s remarks:
Jesus did not become Michael Brown. Jesus came to be a perfect sacrifice to atone for the sins of all of us, including Michael Brown, who are willing to call upon His holy name in repentance for salvation.
Then there is this unidentified fellow in Ferguson who wears a T-shirts that says: “I rather get stopped by ISIS terrorist than Ferguson P.D.”
Oh, really? Not only are too many Americans unable to distinguish between right and wrong, some, like this gentleman, live in a world of unreality, mendacity and outrageous hyperbole.
Get a grip.
Police shootings happen frequently in America. They don’t happen often in Ferguson, Missouri. They happen far more often in Washington, D.C., under Eric Holder’s watch. Some get more attention than they warrant, as in the case of Michael Brown, while others, like the death of Miriam Carey, a young, black unarmed mother and dental hygienist who was cut down in a hail of gunfire by Capitol Police last year for making a wrong turn, are successfully covered up and forgotten by the same officials and media on the verge of hysteria over what happened in Ferguson.
Because we live in a fallen world too often governed by corrupt, self-righteous politicians quick to condemn others but slow, as Jesus said, to remove the mote from their own eye.
Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
As the character Cecily said to Miss Fairfax in a play written by Oscar Wilde entitled “The Importance of being Earnest”: “When I see a spade I call it a spade.”
In October 2008, Obama told a gathering of his acolytes:
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the Untied States of America. In five days you can turn the page on policies that put greed and irresponsibility on Wall Street before the hard work and sacrifice of the folks on Main Street. In five days you can choose policies that invest in our middle class and create more jobs and grow this economy so that everyone has a chance to succeed. Folks who can’t afford to pay their medical bills or send their kids to college or you not being able to afford college, or thinking about that $30 or $40 or $50,000 worth of debt that you might have to carry. People who can’t save for retirement. You know ordinary Americans can’t take a backseat to CEOs and Wall Street banks for four more years, but remember we’ve faced difficult times before; the American story has never been about things coming easy, it’s been about rising to the moment when times are tough.
“Some of you may be cynical and fed up with politics, and you have every right to be. But despite all of that I ask of you what’s been asked of Americans throughout history. If you’ll stand with me and fight by my side and cast your ballot for me, I promise you this: We will not just win Missouri, we will win this general election, and together we will change this country, and we will change the world.”
Those of us who were paying attention understood the operative words spoken were “We are five days away from fundamentally changing the United States of America. … we will change this country, and we will change the world.” In the final analysis, when you remove all of the other verbiage, the only thing that remains is that from the beginning Obama’s objective has been to “fundamentally change America” and to “change this country and the world.”
And the utilities he has used to do so are right out of Saul “the Red” Alinsky’s Communist handbook. Those of us who were paying close attention understood that America didn’t need changing and that Obama’s idea of change was to create a socialist state. We understood and warned people pursuant to exactly what Obama stood for, and we warned he was a neo-Leninist with a proclivity for radical Islam who would use skin color and class warfare to divide America.
Now, except for those who are in a terminal state of denial based on an Erebusic ideology and color of skin, there is no longer any doubt that Obama is a neo-Leninist Muslim sympathizer who is committed to transmogrifying America into something that will be unidentifiable to the America our Founding Fathers provided for vis-a-vis our Constitution.
Even those in the media have dropped the charade of pretending Obama is something other than a Leninist. It has taken since 2004, but as Sherlock Holmes famously said, “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” Blacks have used the color of Obama’s skin to herald him as “the great emancipator,” but every salient statistic categorically shows blacks are worse off under Obama than any president heretofore. I don’t make up the statistics. I only report them. Blacks can call me names and label whites who disagree with Obama’s assault on our Constitution racists, but that doesn’t change the fact that even Democrats are finally condemning him for his disregard for the Constitution.
As America comes to the end of Obama’s tyrannical reign, he is pulling the curtains back for all to see. He no longer even pretends to govern within the constraints of the Constitution. He has sanctioned Eric Holder to administer justice based on color-coded enforcement.
He was elected the president of the United States, i.e., of all Americans, but he makes it clear time and time again that while he praises Planned Parenthood for the systematic extermination of unborn black children, he openly despises whites. And he exhibits his contempt for whites at every opportunity.
Some may still try to say he isn’t openly racist, but it is time to call this spade a spade. If he weren’t a race-mongering infidel, he wouldn’t have said Trayvon Martin looked like the son he didn’t have; at the very least, he would have acknowledged that Christopher Lane, the white baseball player who was murdered in Oklahoma by three blacks, could have looked like him if he had a son as well.
If Obama didn’t value the use of blacks more than he valued all citizens, regardless of their skin color, he wouldn’t have sent an “armada” of representatives to the funeral of a black hoodlum while ignoring the funerals of white law-enforcement officers murdered by blacks.
If Obama cared about the United States, he would not have put his golf game above the beheading of American journalist James Foley, even as the Syrian coalition announced to the world that “Foley died because Obama ignored his own red lines.”
As I stated, it is time to call a spade a spade and this one is named Obama.
Media wishing to interview Mychal Massie, please contact email@example.com.
One of the long-standing traditions of the United States Military Academy at West Point took place on Thanksgiving Day afternoons with the Goats versus the Engineers.
The Goat team was selected from those cadets with the lowest academic standards. The Engineers came from those cadets with the best academic records.
This was a rousing, exceptionally colorful and stimulating tradition that came just before the annual Army-Navy football classic – one of the longest standing rivalries in U.S. college football. In 1927, just prior to Thanksgiving, the West Point varsity held a top-secret practice on one of the parade grounds. High above this parade ground towered the great gothic chapel. And on the top of that chapel sat the cadet chaplain, then a civilian Protestant.
This chaplain, who was also a West Point assistant football coach, had played on the first University of Virginia team that ever beat Yale. He had been persuaded to coach the heavily unfavored cadet Engineer team.
He knew full well that his Engineer team’s practices would be scouted – that is, spied upon – by Goat coach operatives. So he arranged by academy bus to move those practices to different locations every day.
This cadet chaplain coach also went up to the top of the chapel, where he used the field glasses he had brought back from his combat ambulance service in World War I.
Through these field glasses, he obtained a close-up of Army’s varsity conducting practice inside of a field that had been cordoned off, fenced up and heavily guarded by a score of military police officers.
From the top of the chapel, this chaplain had a perfect field-glass view – in which he could take note of all those top-secret plays.
He knew that no Navy scout or alumnus would ever bother to attend anything like West Point’s Thanksgiving Day Goat-Engineer rivalry.
So, he wrote down all those secret plays, which the Engineers delightedly ran over time and again at all those secret locations.
On Thanksgiving, the Engineers used none of those top-secret plays in the first half, but they played so confidently against the Goats that at half time, it was a scoreless tie.
During the half time, there was the ceremony in which West Point’s head football coach, the legendary Biff Jones, made like the president and processed across the field to sit on the Engineer bench.
When the second half began, the chaplain-coach ordered the use of those secret plays.
In the corner of his eye on that bench, the chaplain glimpsed at Head Coach Jones – whom he saw staring in horror as those secret plays enabled the Engineers to overwhelm the Goats by a score of 39-0.
Head Coach Jones endured this torment without saying a word of protest. He hoped and presumed (quite desperately) that Navy had sent no scouts to cover the Goats-Engineers contest.
And Jones was right. The Naval Academy had no scouts present to cover this classic. And Army’s varsity, using those top-secret plays, defeated arch-rival Navy by a score of 14-9.
Decades later, when Mr. and Mrs. Biff Jones were vacationing in Arizona, this former cadet chaplain, who had been elected Arizona’s Episcopal bishop, invited the Joneses to have dinner.
And during that dinner, he decided to confess his top-of-the-chapel purloining of those top-secret plays.
Biff Jones howled with laughter and shouted:
“For 35 years, I’ve been wondering how in hell you ever got those plays!”
And that former West Point chaplain – who was my father – grinned greatly and replied:
“I did NOT get them in hell! They came in an inspiration that was heavenly!”
Media wishing to interview Les Kinsolving, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
While the world’s attention was distracted by his incursions into eastern Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin quietly made another provocative move that could lead to a direct confrontation with the United States. The Russian Navy sent a ship to remote Wrangel Island, planted a Russian naval flag on Aug. 20, and announced plans to build a naval base there for Russia’s Pacific Fleet.
Wrangel Island is a frozen, nearly uninhabited island in the Arctic Ocean, about 90 miles north of Siberia and 300 miles northwest of Point Hope, Alaska. It’s about the size of our two smallest states, Delaware and Rhode Island, combined.
Wrangel Island has little economic value in itself, but it is hugely important because it is the closest land to a vast swath of the Arctic Ocean, which is estimated to hold 25 percent of the world’s recoverable oil and gas. According to a European reporter, Putin has said he wants to expand Russia’s presence in the Arctic, both militarily and economically.
It’s not the first time Russia has planted a flag to claim territory in the Arctic, hoping to extend its control over that resource-rich region. In August 2007, a Russian submarine planted a Russian flag on the ocean floor at the North Pole.
When the Canadian foreign minister expostulated that Russia could not expect to claim territory under rules of “the 15th century,” the Russian foreign minister cited a more recent precedent: “Whenever explorers reach some sort of point that no one else has explored, they plant a flag,” he said. “That’s how it was on the moon, by the way.”
Yes, the United States did plant a flag on the moon on July 21, 1969. Planting the American flag was Neil Armstrong’s first task after taking that “one small step” which was a “giant leap for mankind.” The sight of that flag, beamed back to earth, was rendered sweeter because many so-called experts had predicted that the Russians would get there first.
Americans beat the Russians to the North Pole, too. On April 6, 1909, Adm. Robert Peary, after an arduous expedition with dogs and sleds over hundreds of miles of ice, triumphantly wrote: “I have this day hoisted the national ensign of the United States of America at this place, which my observations indicate to be the North Polar axis of the earth, and have formally taken possession of the entire region, and adjacent, for and in the name of the President of the United States of America.” Peary’s claim was reaffirmed when our first nuclear submarine, the USS Nautilus, reached the Pole on Aug. 3, 1958.
Russia claims that its recent flag-planting on Wrangel Island was 90 years to the day from when Russians had planted a Soviet flag there on Aug. 20, 1924, claiming the island for the U.S.S.R. But there again, American explorers had already claimed the island for the United States some 43 years earlier.
Wrangel had not yet been officially discovered when the United States purchased Alaska from Russia in 1867. The $7.2 million purchase price agreed to by U.S. Secretary of State Seward was considered so large that Alaska was ridiculed as “Seward’s Folly” until gold and oil were discovered years later.
The brave American explorers who reached Wrangel Island on Aug. 12, 1881, were aboard the United States Revenue Cutter, the Thomas Corwin, which regularly cruised the Bering Sea and Arctic Ocean off the coast of Alaska. The party included the famous environmentalist John Muir, founder of the Sierra Club, whose account of the 1881 expedition to Wrangel Island was published after he returned to the mainland.
The Corwin’s captain dispatched a landing party led by William Edward Reynolds to plant the American flag on the island, claiming it for the United States. Reynolds later became commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard and retired as a rear admiral.
Although Russia’s claim to Wrangel Island dates only to 1924 while America’s claim dates to 1881, the U. S. government shamefully failed to assert and defend our prior claim against Russia’s more recent one. Indeed, our State Department on several occasions purported to surrender America’s claim to this important outpost.
In the 1970s, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger tried to negotiate a boundary agreement giving away Wrangel Island to the Soviet Union, but the deal fell through because the Soviets kept demanding greater access to fishing near Alaska. Again in 1990, Secretary of State James Baker tried to make a deal with Gorbachev to give the island to the collapsing Soviet Union, but that was not completed before the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, and anyway has never been ratified by the Russian Duma.
In light of Russia’s chronic misbehavior on the world stage, let’s correct a historical blunder by reviving America’s historic claim to Wrangel Island, thereby extending our jurisdiction over the riches of the Arctic.
Full disclosure: During World War II, I spent two years test-firing .30 and .50 caliber ammunition at the world’s largest ammunition factory while my future husband served in the U.S. Navy helping to protect Alaska against a possible Japanese invasion.
National Geographic channel removed in Megiddo prison, out of fear terrorists would use its contents to plan escapes.
National Geographic channel removed in Megiddo prison, out of fear terrorists would use its contents to plan escapes.
Blake Rayne, Ashley Judd and Ray Liotta in “The Identical”
In 1967, Israel was miraculously saved from warring Arab nations on all sides, and this weekend in Hollywood’s only widely released debut movie, well-known actor Ray Liotta will proclaim that Israel’s fate has “everything” to do with Christians in America.
Liotta, perhaps best known for the films “Goodfellas” and “Field of Dreams” and an Emmy Award-winning performance on TV’s “ER,” plays in “The Identical” the part of Reece Wade, a Depression-era preacher given one of two, infant, twin sons to raise as his own when the boys’ poor parents couldn’t afford both their babies. The film follows the Wade family from the 1930s through the ’70s, as both boys – unknown to one another – grow up allured by the sounds of rock ‘n’ roll.
In a video provided to WND, Yochanan Marcellino, executive producer of “The Identical,” which opens in thousands of theaters nationwide Sept. 5, explains why his mainstream movie is bringing up 1967′s Six-Day War in Israel and gives WND readers an exclusive preview of Liotta’s pivotal scene.
“‘The Identical’ is a story about miracles, it’s about your destiny, that everyone is born for a reason and has a divine purpose to fulfill,” Marcellino explains.
“When ‘The Identical’ was in production in 2012, we had no idea how serious the current conflict in Israel would be,” he continues. “With unspeakable atrocities being committed, while Jewish babies are being blown up and Christians are being beheaded all over the Internet … it is our responsibility now, as it was then, for Zion’s sake, not to be silent.”
In the scene from “The Identical” below, Liotta’s character tells his 1967 congregation why the war a world away is so important: “What does that have to do with the Christian church in the state of Tennessee? Everything! It has to do with everything! We are commanded by the Word of God to give Him no rest from our prayers. For who? Today for Israel. If we love God we must love what God loves, and God loves his chosen people!”
Watch the exclusive WND video and sneak peak from the makers of “The Identical” below:
“The Identical” also stars recognizable faces like Ashley Judd, Seth Green and Joe Pantoliano and marks the movie debut of singer/actor Blake Rayne, whose Elvis-like baritone bops and ballads through 23 original songs from the three-generation Marcellino family, a name in the music industry long associated with Motown legends such as Michael Jackson, Diana Ross and Lionel Richie.
“I’m a music guy at heart, and we basically wrote and produced the music out of our own experience living out those eras, ’50s, ’60s, ’70s,” Marcellino told WND. “It’s a wonderful film with great entertainment, but great spiritual insight, and I believe it’s going to touch
Watch the trailer for “The Identical” below:
In a preview screener of the film, WND noticed “The Identical” is infused with faith themes, not just because Liotta’s character is a preacher, but also because his son is on a winding journey of trying to discern God’s call on his life, whether to follow in his father’s footsteps, or those of, ironically, his twin brother.
“You’re going to see a Judeo-Christian thread running throughout the whole film,” Marcellino confirmed. “We feel that it’s right in our wheelhouse: faith friendly, family friendly, great story, great acting – but that doesn’t make it a ‘religious’ movie.
“We didn’t set out to do a faith-based film,” he continued. “There’s a place for that, but we set out to do a film where people were really living their everyday lives, in family relationships, in encouraging your children to go down the road you think is best for them but at some point backing away and saying it’s got to be their ownership. Everyday life is not just about going to church or synagogue, but it does include our faith. It’s a normal thing, our faith, and it should be a normal part of our life.
“It’s a mainstream film,” he concluded. “It has a faith-friendly message and family-friendly message weaving through it, but that doesn’t make it religious.”
Including the scene about the Six-Day War, Marcellino explained, was simply a natural fit for the movie, its characters and the company making it.
“This is a period piece, beginning in the Great Depression and moving all the way into the 1970s,” Marcellino said. “Ray Liotta plays a pastor during those times, and in 1967 a man of God would have been very alert to when that was going down. It was the biggest news in the world at that moment, so it was important for us in that period piece to capture the Six-Day War.
“We are [also] pro-Israel as a company, City of Peace Films,” Marcellino told WND. “This is a movie about miracles, and the Six-Day War is a modern-day miracle. In ’67 Israel was surrounded by enemies wanting to eradicate them from the face of the earth, completely outnumbered, a lopsided situation. Many in Israel were preparing to die. And all of a sudden God shows up, like He did so many times throughout biblical history and He showed Himself strong for His people.
“God intervened for His people Israel, and that went very well with the theme of this movie,” Marcellino said, “being that it’s a movie about miracles and destiny and about understanding God’s call in your life.”
In fact, WND noticed, “The Identical” experienced a bit of a miracle itself, somehow poised to be the only major Hollywood film widely released on Sept. 5, a privileged position few “faith” films have ever enjoyed.
“I gotta tell you, we thank the Lord for every opportunity we have,” Marcellino told WND. “It feels like God’s divine providence has been moving in this project from the beginning.
“If you were to go back and look over last few years of weekly [Hollywood] releases, to find just one wide release on a given day is an anomaly. It doesn’t happen. And it wasn’t always that way. There were a couple of wide releases with us on that date, and they dropped off, one by one,” he continued. “Something else happened unusual, too. The box office performed very poorly over the Labor Day weekend and the weekend before. All of a sudden there’s nothing going on, no new inventory, and people have nothing new to see except ‘The Identical.’ I don’t believe it was by accident. I really believe we’re there because God wants us there, and it worked and He wants to do something special in the lives of people with this film.
“As of today,” Marcellino said, “we’re opening in over 1,500 screens, that could escalate to 2,000 by Sept. 5, and here we are, with basically an open field in front of us to touch lives, families, and encourage the hearts of people in the hour in which we live and bring a wholesome, great, family film that you can take your children, parents, grandchildren and grandparents to, a film where they can come away saying, ‘My life has been touched here in an unusual way.’”
DISCLAIMER: While it is the goal of all JPR staff to bring you only unbiased facts, it is our belief that no one can truly be 100% objective. Therefore, all opinions expressed by this host/instructor do not necessarily reflect those of fellow hosts, instructors or the JPR senior staff. However, we believe what sets us apart is our cohesive willingness and need to correct ourselves if it is discovered that any of our reports have been anything but 100% accurate.