USA Online local classifieds

Community - politics classifieds in cleveland

<![CDATA[It is truly marvelous that someone who puts themselves in the same classification as Conan Doyle, William Faulkner, Hemmingway and even Steven King should deign to lower themselves to the level of Craigslist posting "drivelers". If you think Cleveland is bad try Washington D. C. It should come then as no surprise that the internet was created by and for drivelers. {Look at Myspace, Facebook et al-a trillion $ business}. We have just come through a historic election where emotions were high and posting reached new levels of the good, the bad and the ugly. But that's America. So how does Religion get into politics (and thusly Craigslist Politics postings)? Did we forget about George W. Bush. (We can't wait to). I am not sure that many appreciate JUST HOW CLOSE we all came to having a theocracy in the United States c. 2003. The peak was at the TERRY SCIAVO affair, which scared even (other) religious people. Then along came Nancy Pelosi and the indictment of Tom DeLay and Rebublicans OUT OF THE CLOSET (or in the public restrooms),so to speak. And why would THEOCRACY be bad? Well, let's see, it all started 430 A.D. with good ole Constantine the Great and his direct successors MANDATING what is the "right" religion. Civilization thereafter did not recover (coincidance?-I think not?)until 1500 sometime when the Italians re- discoved the ancient Greek civilization. That's why History calles it: the Renaissance. But something else destroys great civilizations: complacency ie complacent people. ]]>

<![CDATA[Misbehave appropriately.]]>

<![CDATA[Not to be outdone by the foolishness of their upstart neighbor to the south, Cleveland is holding a gun "buyback." <a href="http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Cleveland-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2008m11d19-String-theory" rel="nofollow">http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Cleveland-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2008m11d19-String-theory</a>]]>

<![CDATA[A few tips on how to get all those nasty people what you don't like* to agree with your sound and obviously correct assessments of the human condition. *People you don't like may include, but is not limited to: racists, bashers, haters, Jews, atheists, theists, Catholics, transgendered persons, gays, queers, feminists, Christians, liberals, conservatives, Darwinsists, hippies, anarchists, terrorists, libertarians, gun-nuts, druggies, pigs, socialists, capitalists, communists, communalists, Muslims, hipsters, queers, sinners, war-mongers and apparently Hellenophiles. Tip #1. Do not post drivel on the internet. Tip #2. Move your fingers away from the keyboard. Seriously. Go outside for a jog. Make some cookies. Read a book. Play with your children. Make a macaroni card for your aged mother (She’ll honestly still think it’s cute no matter what age you are. Also… call her. She misses you.). Fly a kite. Make passionate mind-blowing love to somebody that it is acceptable within your personal moral code of choice to make love to (I personally like my heterosexual female wife for this sort of thing, before anyone gets grumpy). Have a hot cup of cocoa. Draw a picture. Work on that paper for class/project for work/novel you've always wanted to write. DO ANYTHING EXCEPT POSTING MORE DRIVEL ON THE INTERNET. Tip #3. Live out your ideals in an obvious and inspiring manner. Ex: If you are a believer, say, in a certain messianic Jewish carpenter who was executed and miraculously resurrected sometime in the 30s A.D. era, please exemplify the deep spiritual wholeness He fills you with in your day to day life and leave NO DOUBT to any observer that this is the RIGHT way to do things. Turn the other cheek. Witness in a gentle lamb-like fashion that focuses on non-hostile parable and good deeds. Eat out with tax collectors, poor people and whores. Occasionally, when the time is ripe and you can really get away with looking righteous, turn over a merchant's table or two, just to stir things up. Don't stir things up, however in ways that end with you frothing maddeningly at the mouth, shrieking with theistic rage as you slam your copy of the compiled Letters According to Paul into my face. You'd be surprised at how many people will think your religion is neato when you're not making illegible attacks at them in public forums. Ex: If you are say, a believer in, say, a lack of any higher supernatural power and rather put your faith in secular principles of human morality, please exemplify your ability to act as a morally capable rational human being without the aid of a codified religion such as that there can be NO DOUBT to any observer that this is a RIGHT way to do things. Be polite and reasonable with people. Show people how the natural world is beautiful, even without the divine. Exemplify virtues which you consider important. Don't froth maddeningly at the mouth, shrieking with anti-theistic rage as you slam your copy of whatever it is that Dawkins has recently written into my face. You'd be surprised at how many people will think your viewpoint is a-okay when you're not making illegible attacks at them in public forums. Tip #4. Don't respond to this post telling me how I'm A) an egotistical morally superior jerkoff B) going to hell C) automatically discredited becuase I made a typo in this sentence D) stupid E) wasting my time by writing this long diatribe about wasting time on the Internet F) a hypocrite G) wrong I will ignore you. I will ignore you and laugh and eat the delicious cookies I have made while I cavort naked with my hot wife and work on the novel that will make me a billionaire. ]]>

<![CDATA[Is calling someone derogatory names, such as 'childish', a sin of bearing false witness? Blessings in advance to you.]]>

<![CDATA[I don't recall saying that Paul did not understand Greek culture, only that he despised it, while Cretans were not exactly Greeks, Titus 1:12 could sum up his general attitude for Western Culture. On the contrary though, it was Paul who persuaded James and the others to accept repentent Greeks into the fold of their beliefs, (with of course the proviso of abolishing the rigidities of the Mosaic Code so that they could be assimilated easier). Despite Dr. Luke's statement that Peter was the apostle to the Gentiles, (Acts 15:7,14) that is more likely to be recollection after-the-fact of James sending Peter to Rome to put a brake on Paul's heresies. No explantions are offered as to how or why he got there. He simply is there: 1 Peter 5:13? Everything we know about Peter indicates his differences with Paul on the importance of Jewishness being foremost. This is why James has Paul sent to the Temple! Paul is the historical bridge between eastern and western culture, it was his idea and not Peter's. This clash is apparent in Acts 17 on Paul's trip to Athens. He sees the many gods about and loses it. It's not clear whether this is "another" official arrest or merely a request to address the Areogagus. It was against Greek and Roman law to deny the existance of the gods=the charge of Atheism for which later many Christians suffered. Athens was not like Ephesus, Corinth or Thessalonica of the kind of rough and tumble town he was used to and the Areopagus had long boasted of its wisdom by settling disputes even among the gods! When they had copies of the Septuagint distributed to the assembly, Paul should have guessed he was going to be in for it. Despite Dr. Luke's hyperbole about ONE member (out of three to six hundred)asking to hear more, it is a rather dismal account. Paul himself, founds no church there and is in a hurray to move on. In fact, it was the very last place in the western world to become "Christianized". So now the last we hear of Paul-back in Rome-he had just caused an incredible sensation at the Temple by starting ANOTHER riot, yet strangely we read at Acts 28:21-"..."We have received no letters from Judea about you, and none of the brethren coming here has reported or spoken any evil about you". ... The next thing we hear from History is that a RIOT has broken out in Rome and that Paul has been beheaded in 64 A.D. and MAYBE Peter as well. Assuming Dr. Luke published his writings after Paul's death but nothing is mentioned of it-another mystery. ]]>

<![CDATA["The Lady of the Gun" is my Rights Watch column for the December 2008 issue of GUNS Magazine. <a href="http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2008/11/lady-of-gun.html" rel="nofollow">http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2008/11/lady-of-gun.html</a>]]>

<![CDATA[Forget results. A compliant media presenting them as "successful" is all that's needed. As long as the general perception is that "Crimestoppers" stops crime, the incentive is to be a part of it all. What's that JFK quote? "Victory has a thousand fathers..." <a href="http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Cleveland-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2008m11d18-A-thousand-fathers" rel="nofollow">http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Cleveland-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2008m11d18-A-thousand-fathers</a>]]>

<![CDATA[It's great to see that racism is still alive and well. It's also great to see that ignorant people still identify themselves quite clearly by using run-on sentences, poor spelling and grammar, and LOTS OF CAPS. Thanks for making it easy to see who didn't finish high school so we can take that into account when reading your posts. First, the word Hussein. I'm sure most of you Fox news viewers will scratch your heads and wonder if this could possibly be true, but that's what the internet is for.. you can look it up. First and foremost, Hussein is an exceptionally common name worldwide and has been for decades. This stems in a large part from King Hussein of Jordan, one of America's strongest allies in the 20th century. Did you read that? I just said Hussein = ally. Furthermore, it's well-known amongst those who think before they speak that both "Barack" and "Hussein" are Semitic names and, indeed, the first name was used several times in the Bible as it means "to bless." That's the Christian Bible, just in case you rednecks think that other religions call their holy book "the Bible" too. Second, he is biracial. His father is black. His mother is white and from Kansas. He was born in Hawaii, where he still has family. He was raised American and lived in this country all but six years of that time. To those who wonder if he is "naturalized" or not.. the answer is no, he didn't need to be naturalized, he was born in the United States and is a U.S. citizen. He wasn't born in an Arab country, he wasn't raised as a follower of Islam. You've criticized him for his Christian pastor's extreme statements, but continue to call him Muslim. As moronic as you and your current president are, you can't consider him both Muslim and Christian with a bad pastor. You can't have it both ways, it just doesn't work. Third, who would care if he was Muslim? Not me, this is America. There is no "Under God" in my America. That was added fifty-odd years ago as propaganda against Communism. It wasn't a founding principle of our country and, as a matter of fact, is anti-founding principles of our country, because America was developed as a means to leave a church, not become one. We were built on the principles of freedom, including freedom of religion, and the sham of "Under God" is just that.. a sham. The basic tenets of all religions are don't kill, steal, or lie. In that vein, I don't care what religion our president practices, as long as he doesn't force it down my throat, because I live in a free country and I don't have to follow that same religion. Fourth and closely related, who cares about his race? We've had forty-three white guys in a row that have had mixed success, but if there had been women or black guys or Asians in there, it wouldn't have been much different in the long run, because your skin or genitals don't make decisions, your brain does. Contrary to popular belief in the backwoods of Ohio, the "Negro brain" and the "white man brain" are equal, so get off it already. It's a total non-issue. OK, onto the "terrorist contacts" that everyone without a functioning brain loves to talk about. The "terrorist" in question is a well-respected college professor in Chicago with a very public past that has been widely known about for decades. So why isn't he in jail if he's a terrorist? Because.. uh, he's not. He was part of an anti-war group that got a little carried away when Obama was eight years old. Yeah, sounds really risky to trust an old man that did bad things as a war protestor in his younger days. Really risky to trust anyone anti-war, really, because war is so.. American to you and your type. Conservatives just seem to love war so much that they're afraid of having a president whose poor judgment could see an end to the war. Oh, yes.. the "socialist" myth. I, myself, am a socialist, and let me tell you now.. while I love Obama for not being George W. Bush, not pushing toward war, not giving speeches suited for fifth graders, not wanting to reward huge corporations for ripping off the middle class, etc., Obama is no socialist. He's not even close. We had a Socialist Party candidate running this year and he got around five thousand votes. We're not ready for that in America, and the voters did not vote for a socialist. His policies are in favor of the middle class, unlike the lobbyist-friendly Republicans who favor anyone who's already rich, but he does not plan to take over business and truly "redistribute the wealth." He simply intends to tax more fairly in order to allow those struggling in the working class to keep more of what they earn and to force those at the top to give a little extra "thanks" to the country that made their success possible. That sounds American to me. Finally, to the poster who said that Obama is wrong from wanting to "unite the world," I must ask: Are you on meds? Uniting the world is a very positive, peaceful goal that I think every American president should have been aspiring towards. I can't even comprehend how you could see "uniting people" as a bad thing.]]>

<![CDATA[/SNIP Alexander’s successors were Greeks who became intent on spreading Greek culture. Pride of place in society was to go to “Greeks”, at first Greek settlers but within a few generations, mixed races and the wealthier conquered people. Alexander had encouraged his men to marry women of the Persian aristocracy. Initially, Greek ideals were preserved in the Greek foundations, with citizenship and membership of the gymnasium the privileges of the Greek settlers. Orientals might live in the Greek cities but they were not citizens. The Jews learned Greek and changed their Canaanite names for distinctively Greek names. A man named Joshua called himself Jason, by allusion to the famous Argonaut, and Matthew became Menelaus, in honor of the celebrated husband of Helen. The names of cities were likewise changed. Amorah became Ariopolis, and Akko became Ptolemais. In the temple at Jerusalem, the signs regulating admission to the sanctuary were written in Greek. The Jews continued to enjoy, under Alexander and the Diadochi who succeeded him, the privileges they had been given by the Persians. The Jewish Encyclopaedia admits (sub voce ‘Hellenism’): Alexander… and the first Ptolemies and Seleucids… treated their Jewish subjects with much benevolence. Greek After Alexander, the language of trade and administration was Greek. Greek became a lingua franca in many parts of the Hellenistic East, as Aramaic had been under the Assyrian, neo-Babylonian and Achaemenid empires. The Ptolemaic and Seleucid kings appointed local officers, who had Greek secretaries. Such favoured natives gave their children a Greek education, and early in the Greek period, educated Orientals spoke Greek, read the classics, dressed as Greeks and were called Greeks. Manetho in Egypt and Berosus in Babylon were writing treatises in Greek in the early part of the 3rd century, and its direct influence on the Jews can be deduced from a variety of sources. Palestine was an important crossroads in the trade between north and south and between Egypt and Arabia. In the Tobiad romance, Joseph and later his son Hyrcanus (second half of the 3rd century) dealt with the Ptolemaic court on an equal footing (Josephus, Ant 12:4:2-11). They apparently did not need an interpreter, nor were they considered inferior. Long distance merchants will have used Greek for dealing with officialdom and to be understood in different countries, but local trade would be negotiated in Aramaic rather than Greek. An ostracon in Aramaic from about the middle of the 3rd century BC already contains two Greek words. Another ostracon from Khirbet el-Kom in the Idumean area, dated about 275 BC, is a bilingual in both Greek and Aramaic. Yet, only one formal bilingual inscription is known in the whole of Syria—that from Tel Dan about 200 BC. The widespread use of Greek cannot be doubted but to the time of the Maccabees it was confined to the educated upper-class. The number of Jews outside the Greek cities fluent in Greek was probably small, though a greater number must have had a smattering of Greek. A few hundred years later, at the time of Jesus, Greek would have been more common, but the Hasmonaean influence would have polarized society so that some were thoroughly anti-Greek and others favoured it as more modern and progressive. The Jewish scriptures, originally written in Hebrew and Aramaic, had to be translated into Greek, including books and parts of books that are omitted in most Christian bibles, for the benefit of Jews who could no longer read Aramaic. The Greek translation was the Septuagint, which takes its name from a letter concocted in the name of Aristeas, which claimed that seventy-two learned rabbis independently translated the Jewish scriptures into Greek copies. Yehouah saw to it that the seventy-two independent translations were identical, even to the smallest jot or tittle. Judaism and Hellenism were not mutually exclusive at first. The Jews of Palestine did not stay aloof from Greek culture. From the middle of the third century BC Judaism was “Hellenistic Judaism”. Under the Assyrians, the Persians and then the Greeks, the Jews had shown themselves loyal supporters of the colonial rulers. Though some Jews came to rebel against the Seleucid Greeks, they had previously shown no strong resistance to Hellenistic culture, and after a few generations of Greek occupation, it is a moot point whether many could clearly distinguish between what was Greek and what was Jewish. /END SNIP <a href="http://www.askwhy.co.uk/christianity/0100Hellenization.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.askwhy.co.uk/christianity/0100Hellenization.php</a> To say that Paul had "...no appreciation nor understanding of Greek culture," would place him in a desert cave in Australia his entire life. I'm willing to bet that Paul, educated enough to collect taxes, had quite a bit of knowledge of Greek culture, tho despised.]]>

<![CDATA[Acts of Apostles 17:28-"IN HIM WE LIVE AND MOVE AND HAVE OUR BEING....FOR WE ARE ALSO HIS OFFSPRING". In this great "inspired" passage wherein Paul quotes the Greek poet Cleananthes' poem: "Hymn To Zeus". Paul no doubt thinks he is being clever quoting Greek poety {as he does on other occassions). But he has no appreciation nor understanding of Greek culture. In fact he despises it. (ie 1 Corinthians 1:23) while he TELLS OTHERS to offer no offense to the Greeks, (1 Corinthians 10:32) not surprisingly he ignores his own advice and causes offense at Ephesus. (Acts 19:26) (This makes one of {I count} approximately 12 occasions Paul is arrested or otherwise must leave one town or another because he caused a riot. It is not not difficult to understand why we do not have a lot of empathy for Greek culture. That's becuase what we have comes through and from the Romans. The true Roman also thought Greek culture was effeminate to begin with. But later when they had luxury, leisure and wealth, they grew to love them. They loved their literature, poetry and while not entirely identical eventually merged the Etruscan gods with the Greek. We in America (better in England) just refuse to accept our debt to them. Books by Walter F. Otto describes in more detail the pious Greeks belief in their gods and the moral lessions which could be learned from their frailities and weaknesses. For example in an earlier post about the liason between the beautiful Aphrodite and lame (as the god of War) dolt-Aries, Aphrodite was ridiculed and shamed by the Olympiads. I would note too, that even the (late) apostle of Evolution Dr. Carl Sagan, did not understand the Greeks, they never would send rocket ships into outer space simply out of curiosity, they were a practical and pragmatic people. They were not want to waste their time on wild-goose chases simply for the fun of it.]]>

<![CDATA[<h2>11.22.08: End The Fed Nationwide Protest</h2> This is a HEADS UP to everyone who cares about their future -- in 5 days patriots will meet in 38 cities across the country to End the Federal Reserve and we need YOU there! Are you ready to step away from the computer and join us? WHY // The Federal Reserve is an unconstitutional private institution (see U.S. Constitution, Section 8, Clause 5) that drains the wealth of the American people through the inflationary process. Despite silence on the topic, every day it becomes more and more apparent that the number one issue in our country is the economy and the falling dollar. Who is to blame for this? Who is printing all the money that drives down the value of our dollar? Who controls the interest rates upon which the fate of our banks, credit cards, loans, mortgages, and lives depend? These are very important questions to ask yourself. One needn't be an economist to understand: the Federal Reserve is neither federal, nor do they have any reserves. Our dollars are no longer backed by gold or silver. It is a "fiat" currency, and every economy that has used fiat currency in the past has ultimately collapsed. It's time we demand that Congress END THE FED. On November 22, 1910 the Federal Reserve Act was conceived at a private meeting of elite bankers. Ninety-eight years after its conception, we will gather to signal the end of its reign! Patriots from across the country will join together to protest the Federal Reserve system. Activists will demand an END to private banker control over the nation's money supply and the return to a hard, commodity backed monetary system. WHERE // All 38 Federal Reserve locations WHEN // This Saturday, November 22nd @ 12pm DON'T FORGET // Signs, banners, bullhorns, drums, whatever you need to make a statement. WEBSITE // <a href="http://www.abolishthefederalreserve.com/?p=55" rel="nofollow">http://www.abolishthefederalreserve.com/?p=55</a> FIND YOUR LOCAL FED // <a href="http://www.abolishthefederalreserve.com/?p=55#findYourFed" rel="nofollow">http://www.abolishthefederalreserve.com/?p=55#findYourFed</a> DOWNLOAD FLYERS // <a href="http://www.abolishthefederalreserve.com/?p=174" rel="nofollow">http://www.abolishthefederalreserve.com/?p=174</a> <h2>YES WE CAN abolish the Federal Reserve!</h2>]]>

<![CDATA[Religion, and politics, is a phenomenon of the cultural mind dependent on mental abstracts such as the magical manner in which the mind can relate totally arbitrary signs to territorial concepts and through convention acquires significance. The cultural mind, by reason that it is colonial, that is, it consists of individual minds, has always and will always carry religious and political baggage from the past to any new cultural form that may arise. A cultural mind, such as Jesusism, does not grow from a closeted jellyfish. (Jellyfish are colonies of individual animals : ) I dare conjecture that the argument, the resolution of that not found in the bible, between Peter and Paul, arose from a cultural disjunction wherein Paul insisted on carrying the anti-Roman temple-table-turning terrorist Joshua message to the Greeks by reformatting it in terms that the Greeks would understand: Ritual. By renaming Joshua to Jesus, the transference of the anti-Roman Hebrew cultural mind blended into the Greek cultural mind via a set of symbolic rituals. There was no other way to do it. Do you think the Greek culture would champion a Hebrew whose lands they themselves conquered? (Spit) The Roman occupied Greeks retained their cultural pride and were able to point to an hearsay example of Roman atrocity. The Greek cultural mind, call it ritual baggage, was retained in the new cult of Jesusism, probably to the dismay of Peter who was more concerned with the anti-Roman political struggle. The Roman Empire is long gone. We still have the Greek pagan Jesusism. I will readily grant that Jesusists believe they are engaging in some sort of new cultural mind, I wait for ALL of them to admit they are ritualist pagans wholecloth. As far as Jesusism idol worship, saint exaltation, the perversion of Jesus' birthday, and Mary worship goes… Idol worship goes back further than the Golden Calf, saint exaltation has its foundation in Jesus exaltation, Jesus’ birthday does not exist if he is god, let alone if he is a Pauline creation, and Mary/Mari/Maia/Earth Mother worship is far far older than even Zoroastrianism! These are all excellent examples of cultural mind carried forward. With that said, I too admit that I have no use for the stories of the Greek gods, including Jesus as Dionysus. The story is mostly a fabrication for anti-Roman political purposes. Paul’s Jesus used the Greek picture of ritual cannibalism as an injecttion into the Hebrew cultural mind to instigate a fellowship of anti-Romanism. The “truth in us and our life through his death,” is a cultural mind rip-off of Dionysian death and rebirth rituals. Jesusism is an extension of pagan mythology. The Greek Jesusists are the ones who borrowed a hearsay story of a man in Judea whose name was Joshua. So temporally Constantine was in actuality ‘surrendering’ to the pagan Greek cultural mind of Jesusists influenced by the Joshua story that developed from the pagan Greek ritual of cannibalism that Joshua borrowed from the Dionysians. For Constantine it was politic since he needed bodies for war. It was an obvious solution given to him in a psychotic dream about a sword that turned into a cross or was it vice-a-verse. No matter. (Thank 'god' for those psychotic interpretations of symbols in dreams, eh?) Oy, notice I cannot even bear to use the word Chri***** (It's a misnomer for a mental state of being beyond the material plane. The material plane that Jesusists seem to be so overly politic about.) ]]>

<![CDATA[I see your point in regard to why you thought that raising the issue of homosexuality was out of context. On the contrary, it is Paul himself who tells us about how the "Mosaic Law" was to be viewed: He says that (at least during his time-which goes back to the other argument): 'Jesus' teachings were 'spiritual' not written down in codes. [Which is the whole point presumably]. (2 Corinthians 3:6) Despite the fact that Jesus "reportedly" said to keep the law: Matthew 19:16-17; Luke 16:17. But Paul tells us that the Law is now "abolished": Galatians 2:21; 3:5,13,25; 5:1,18; Colossians 2:14-16; and Ephesians 2:15 (KJV). In addition he goes on to say that the OT was "under a veil": 2 Corinthians 3:14-16 and Galations 4:24. So you see why I assumed that "homosexuality" would simply be another code which fell under the same perview, not unlike circumcision or the sabbath, there is no difference. Jesus himnself never mentions it and the only other mention in the NT is in Jude (who may or may not have been a physical brother) moreover, who again is not making universal law. One can't pick and choose which "laws" would follow through from the OT to the NT. According to Paul and a "New Testament Church" concept, none of them did. That's all.]]>

<![CDATA[i will readily grant that catholics believe they are engaging in cannibalism, and also that they have blended themselves with paganism. constantine making "christianity" the new roman religion is one of the most tragic events in christianity's history: it brought us idol worship, saint exaltation, the perversion of Jesus' birthday, mary worship, the crusades, the miserable papacy and a weird catholic political system, forced abstinence for church officials, and a list of unfortunate items that can go forever. with that said; i have to admit that i have no use for the stories of the greek gods because though they do fit in too well with catholic christianity, they really don't have anything to do with biblical christianity or judaism. if it wasn't for biblically illiterate professors teaching "bible classes" we wouldn't even have this insanity to talk about in the first place. i don't want to sound harsh, but two of the worst enemies of sound biblical knowledge are catholicism, and teaching the bible out of context. i said this earlier but don't mind repeating; jews have always taken their food and who they eat it with, very seriously. even for people who have nothing to do with God, we all know that some of our greatest times of fellowship are when we're eating together. Jesus used food as a picture of christians having perfect fellowship through his truth in us and our life through his death. the fact that constantine blended this meal and fellowship with the old paganism of his country, shows that it's the romans who borrowed part of their theology from the jews and christians, not the other way around. some christians today can't even bring themselves to say the words "catholic church" and instead refer to catholics as the "romanists" for reasons such as this and those listed at the top of this post.]]>

<![CDATA[thanks for your kind words. i'm afraid we'll probably have all of this flagged before too long, so if you'd like to reply, perhaps you should do so in an email response as well as a post. for the first point. i'm not sure why you singled out sexual sins in the last post. i don't believe at all that paul was making new laws himself in any of those situations, including any sexual ones. sexual sins, just like the rest; were codified in the law given to moses. as we can see clearly in the verses you brought up; paul was both giving examples of sinful depravity,(and not just the sexual depravity) and giving instructions to the church regarding the life of a believer. for example if there was someone in my church who was a thief and i said to him,"stop stealing"; i wouldn't be making a law for him myself, i would be commanding him according to the law already in place. in fact i wouldn't dare make new laws for people myself, and i don't think the apostles would either. for the second point: if you read that verse again, you won't see a difference in the teaching of the apostles, you see only that some people followed one or another. i have a great example of this in my old church; there was a pastor and a youth pastor, and many people started going to the youth pastor's part of the church. they weren't teaching different theologies whatsoever, but we all liked the youth pastor better as a teacher and even as a person. so this became an awkward issue in the church, and the youth pastor ended up voluntarily leaving. so we really had two churches in a single church, and it was not good for fellowship. and if paul would have written to our church, he would have said,"make sure you are not followers of the youth pastor or of the pastor, just be followers of Jesus." for the issue with festus, and paul not knowing what the other christians knew: i really don't think that paul was at all different in the knowledge of the issues from the other christians. even when he was one of the pharisees, he knew the christians and about Jesus; remember he was there holding coats at the stoning of stephen. and right after the Lord knocked him off his horse, he went straight to the christians and wasn't separated from them,(except for maybe in prison) again until he was executed. what you're seeing in the letter from festus is the difference between the christians and the nonbelieving jews, but since paul was the one in custody, it's just his name mentioned against the jews. and the specific argument there was that the jews said Jesus was dead, while paul,(and the christians) said he was alive. thanks again]]>

<![CDATA[/SNIP In order to write The Wampum Keeper, I've had to research both ritual cannibalism and the origins of Christianity. I've learned that Sir James Frazer was very likely correct when he made his famous analogy between Jesus and the dying gods of the ancient Greeks. Today, many scholars -- chief among them members of the Anthropology Department of Cambridge University where Frazer taught for many years -- believe that the Eucharist, the Christian ritual of death and redemption, the sacrifice of holy mass, IS a survival of pagan mystery religion. The American scholar Camille Paglia refers to herself as a 'disciple of the Cambridge School of Anthropology'. She writes succinctly about pagan mystery religion and Christianity. "Paganism," she states, "recognized, honored and feared nature's daemonism [i.e. its amalgam of both good and evil] and it limited sexual expression by ritual formulae. Christianity was a development of Dionysian mystery religion which paradoxically tried to suppress nature in favor of a transcendental other world." 13 Of the Greek god Dionysus, she writes: "Heir to the Great Mother of chthonian nature, he is, with Osiris, the greatest of the dying gods of mystery religion. Out of his worship came two rituals of enormous impact on western culture, tragic drama and Christian liturgy." 14 Paglia insists "that Christianity could not tolerate the pagan integration of sex, cruelty, and divinity." 15 In the passage below she explains how the worshippers of Dionysus integrated these three elements: "The violent principle of Dionysian cult is sparagmos, which in Greek means "a rending, tearing, mangling" and secondly "a convulsion, spasm". The body of the god, or a human or animal substitute, is torn to pieces, which are eaten or scattered like seed. Omophagy, ritual eating of raw flesh, is the assimilation and internalization of godhead. Ancient mystery religion was posited on the worshipper's imitation of the god. Cannibalism was impersonation, a primitive theater. You are what you eat. The body parts of dismembered Osiris, scattered across the earth, were collected by Isis, who founded a shrine at each site. Before his arrest, Jesus tears the Passover bread for his disciples: "Take, eat: this is my body" (Mt.26:26). At every Christian service, wafers and wine are changed into Christ's body and blood, consumed by the worshipper. In Catholicism, this is not symbolic but literal. Transubstantiation is cannibalism. Dionysian sparagmos was an ecstasy of sexual excitation and superhuman strength...The scattering of sparagmos inseminated the earth. Hence swallowing the god's parts was an act of love. 16 Paglia buttresses her arguments with quotations from the Greek biographer and moralist Plutarch who lived near the time of Jesus: "Plutarch says dismemberment is a metaphor for Dionysus' metamorphoses "into winds and water, earth and stars, and into the generations of plants and animals". Dionysus, like Proteus, shifts through all forms of beings, high to low. Human, animal, plant, mineral: none has special status. All are equalized and sacralized in the continuum of natural energy...Plutarch says "riddles and fabulous tales" about Dionysus "construct destructions and disappearances, followed by returns to life and regenerations". Mystery religions offered initiates eternal life. Promise of resurrection was and is a major reason for Christianity's spread." 17 /END SNIP <a href="http://wampumkeeper.com/wkauthorintro.html" rel="nofollow">http://wampumkeeper.com/wkauthorintro.html</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[I really enjoyed your reply/commentary. Granted, who knows, you could be right. There are two points to consider however: 1)"The Bible...initially (were) letters to individual groups or people". I have been saying that for years about Paul. But you may not agree in this context: Paul's "moral" writings were in regard to "specific" situations that he dealt with in "his" churches, of which the meaning would have been understood in the church he was speaking to. Specific people and events that he knew of and when his letters were read alound, everyone know what he meant-even if we do not. For example, his comments on homosexuality found at Romans 1:26-27,32; 1 Corinthians 6:9; and 1 Timothy 1:10-were not written to make "universal" law in the name of Jesus, for he could not do that. His shed blood cannot save anyone. He was exerting control only in a localized situation and not laws for everyone. 2) "Most of the Gospel that they knew probably came from him". That is perhaps a problematic statement. He does mention the fact that differences are to be found in the teachings of "apostolic" teachers. (1 Corinthians 1:11-15) But what you suggest might be a significant difference which would be noticeable. Furthermore, most evangelical/fundamentalist "apologists" must put a least one or more of the synoptic Gospels in circulation c. 40 A.D. I believe you are correct timewise, only that you have a pretty good fight on your hands from this sector. It is fairly apparent, that Paul has no knowledge of any this material (and often contradicts it). In any case, if that were true, obviously the Roman Governor Festus tells Paul that he has never heard any of this. (Acs 25:19-20) Surely somebody would have told him about the miracles, His Resurrection and (depending on how you read the passage) the resurrection of the ancient Biblical fathers running around over Jerusalem? (Matthew 27:52) Thank you for an interesting and civil reply. "May de swartzs be vitch you".]]>

<![CDATA[concerning communion and paul initiating it: it's easy for us to see the bible as a whole and forget that parts of it were initially letters to individual groups or people. paul was writing to the corinthians which was one of the churches that he had a large influence on. most of the gospel that they knew probably came first from him, so he passed that which he got from God onto them. much like if i started a church somewhere, i would pass the same things to that group of people. i hope that helps, God bless.]]>

<![CDATA[In talking about the religious observance of Communion, we have this from Paul: 1 Corinthians 11:23-"FOR I RECEEIVED FROM THE LORD, WHAT I PASSED ON TO YOU: the Lord Jesus on the night he was betrayed, took bread, (ect) (NIV) 1) Paul did not consider the other apostles to be his superior: 1 Corinthians 4:15; 2 Corinthians 11:5; Galatians 1:12,17; 2:6,9 2)The Last Supper is clearly annunciated in the Synoptic Gospels, it appears to be an "ordinary" supper in the Gospel of John. 3)Paul did not claim to know Jesus "in the flesh". 4)It would be supposed that this was a tradition carried down by the early church by the twelve apostles to its followers. If so, then why indeed does Paul make this claim that HE has imposed it upon the church from one of his numerous personal revelations by God to him?]]>

<![CDATA[Very well said, Thank You ]]>

<![CDATA[two things are sad to me about your post; your biblical misinformation, and your hostility toward Jesus. i'm guessing you got your biblical scholarship solely at a university from a biblically illiterate professor; from what i read so far in your posting you sound identical to the tri c religion classes. even if you did think the bible is completely off the mark(and i'm sure you do), you undermine yourself by lashing out about it like a pouting 4th grader instead of having candor and good will toward the people you disagree with. you think paul orchestrated the whole "ad campaign" of the new testament, though he was converted toward the middle of all the action; you think Jesus fooled a party of people at cana to drink green algae water and also fooled them to think it was the best wine around as you think they didn't know the difference back then between algae and wine like we do now; you think paul's master plan was to simply erase progress and science; you think jesus picked up a piece of bread and convinced everyone in the room that it was his flesh; and you're trying to fool anyone reading this now into believing that you're a balanced observer of the facts. i hope that even if you disagree with me and the bible, you can appreciate that i make a conscious effort to not push my beliefs on you or anyone else beyond having good conversations. you might be stuck on believing that Jesus was part of a jewish messianic conspiracy cult that borrowed heavily from the greeks, zoroastrians, and of course egyptians; but i have studied my butt off on these things and i'll tell you the symbolic meaning of Jesus with the bread and wine, and it's very simple: the jews took and still take their meals and who they eat with very seriously, and jesus was making a point to his disciples that they were all eating of the same bread and that he is the bread of life within them; and the wine symbolized the life they had through his blood. i promise you it's as simple as that and you are suffering from hyperliteralism. only the catholics could mess that up, like they messed up idol worship, the christmas date, vain repetitions in prayers, etc, etc. even if you don't believe in God, i hope he blesses you. so if you reply to me again, please don't be all cocky with your antagonistic rhetoric and just enjoy discussing deep things with someone you disagree with. and an abolition of marriage might put the money hungry priests out of a lot of money, but good pastors like mine do those for free out of a pure heart and a love for God's institutions. ]]>

<![CDATA[It is evident that you do not understand the sacred magical rituals that Jesus was RE-performing from the ORIGINAL Greek Dionysian rituals he had learned. BTW the name Jesus is Greek and roughly translates as Son of Zeus. The guy’s Hebrew name was Yahshua. The whole new part of the bible is an advertising campaign, orchestrated by Paul, who never met Yahshua, targeted at the Greek community to give up the Apollonian/Aristotelian/verging-on-science based culture toward a retro-stone age culture (written at a third grade level like our newspapers) based on belief of magic and trickery. I can go to the same spring wells in Judea today and dip out some of the water with the blue-green algae and pour it from one jar to another and reproduce the LOOK of wine the same way Yahshua did. But now we know better. As far at the ‘hard pieces’ of Jesus, you are missing the MAGICAL point. He said “This IS…,” not “This symbolizes….,” or ”This represents…” Any degradation, which you seem to opine, of Yahshua’s magical act AS WRITTEN IN THE WORD is no longer “Christianity.” It is moving toward science and why not go all the way instead of half stone aged. My point was antagonistic rhetoric. My opinion is to ABOLISH MARRIAGE and any legal privileges given to it. But that might be politically incorrect because it would take away a lot of business from priests. ; ) ]]>

<![CDATA[in your message below here, you said that taking communion is cannibalism. crackers and grape juice magically becoming the real body of Christ is one of many misguided catholic beliefs and i have no part in them. remember, the first communion was initiated by Jesus himself, and instead of pinching a piece of himself off for everyone to bite, he used bread as a symbol that he is now in his believers, and we are in him as well. we are in his body, the church; and we have life in him through his blood. so to take communion is to symbolically show that all we who believe in him are one together and in him. to take communion is to eat crackers and juice, not eat hardened Jesus pieces. as far as marriage turning two people into a beautiful hermaphrodite; first of all, a gay couple cannot turn into a hermaphrodite; and second, marriage has nothing to do with forming a unified hermaphrodite. the bible is clear that we are not our bodies, in fact our body is nothing more than a tent for our soul; so though i'm in a man body, my soul is not man, white, american, or anything that describes my body. but as we're confined to these bodies, we're confined to the laws and circumstances that God made for our bodies. i lived a long time making my own rules as i went along; when i became a christian, i submitted to the laws of God and i have found perfect rest that comes from giving myself to a Lord who's ways are perfect far above my own ways. i want anyone who's gay or whatever lifestyle they may be to have the freedom to choose their own path as long as they don't hurt others, and i have no interest in making nonchristians act as if they were. i don't in any way want to live in a christian utopia,(which never work because Jesus never meant such a thing) so i will not use the bible as a reason for gays to marry eachother. i personally support civil unions between whoever wants the benefits of a partner to lean on through life; between gays, siblings, fishing buddies, whoever wants a partner to have full legal access to aid eachother through life,(naturally i would personally discourage sex or immoral behaviour and think incest/polygamy should remain illegal). so i think a gay couple should be allowed all the privileges of a married couple, but should not be allowed the title of marriage. and the government should remain neutral toward homosexuality(as it already is), and should continue to promote monogomous/heterosexual marriage as the foundation of our society,(which has provided a steady and solid foundation for all societies up to now). that's my humble opinion.]]>

<![CDATA[Nuns. Should this be legal?]]>

<![CDATA[Decide to preserve a piece of AMERICA for your grand kids? Visit a small merchant this season. Nobody is bailing them out. Here is a list of shops that are eager to serve you. Small grocers Independent auto repair Independent gas stations if you can still find some Ice Cream shops Hair Dressers Ma and Pa shops Vitamin shops Sandwich shops Farmers markets etc. Again it is important to save them before their complete elimination and it may be the only way we can get our country back. Fight back against big destroing businesses by patronizing the small guy.]]>

<![CDATA[The FACT that the Body and Blood of Jesus LOOKS like bread and wine after consecration is irrelevant and accidental. Ingestion is FACTUAL CANNIBALISM. LOOKS being irrelevant and accidental after a sacred consecration transformation, MARRIAGE is a sacred consecration transformation wherein two are made one. The FACT that male/female or male/male or female/female in the profane makes no difference in the sacred consecration transformation to ONE SACRED HERMAPHRODITE. The outward LOOK is irrelevant and accidental. Do you condone cannibalism and not the joining of two into one through sacred consecration derived of love?]]>

<![CDATA[we have been taught by people on the left and atheists, that as we leave delusions of a mythical God behind, we'll become more advanced in our thinking and in touch with what we truly are. this hasn't been the case with our once again pregnant man named tom beatie. tom beatie is a woman who has had a mastectomy and takes medication, not at all separating her from any lady who's survived breast cancer because of a mastectomy and medications. if taking your breasts off, and taking medications make you a man, would you call some breast cancer survivors men? you show me a man who has a vagina, a baby growing in his womb, female dna, scars from the removal of his breasts, who takes medication and hormones to grow facial hair; and i'll show you a woman who is sad, confused, and hates her body. she deserves our sympathy, but her choices don't deserve our acceptance.]]>

<![CDATA[WHY DOES THAT FAMILY WHO INSISTED ON HAVING THEIR OWN GENES IN THEIR KIDS instead of adopting Think they are so special? They are selfish and typical of the gimme sense of entitlement in humans. This behavior and this thought process is what we humans should overcome if we want the planet to survive human intrusions. WE are the terriorists by nature of being human. Humans are knocking off the planet because we are spreading like weeds into all habititats. In the meantime while this couple and granny had to spread their own genes, millions of parentless children world wide suffer from a loss of love from parents....and no one out there to adopt them. That wife probably was too vain too spoil her face and figure by having kids. Her expensive face lift was in danger from the wear and tear of child birth.]]>

<![CDATA[Psalm 58:3-"The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies". Psalm 58:8-"As a snail which melteth, let every one of them pass away: like the untimely birth of a woman, that they may not see the sun". Job 3:11-"Why died I not from the womb? Why did I not give up the ghost when I came out of the belly"? Ezekial 16:5-"None eye pitied thee, to do any of these unto thee, to have compassion upon thee; but thou was cast out in the open field, to the loathing of thy person, in the day that thou wast born". Hosea 9:11-"As for Ephraim, their glory shall fly like a bird, from the birth, and from the womb,and from the conception". Hosea 13:16-"Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up".]]>

<![CDATA[This is really pathetic, people making MORE excuses for DIVIATE lifestyles, and no matter what you tell them they will CONTINUE to PUSH their AGENDA using whatever tactic they can. Yet, I still have to say this. In its simplest form, sex is the ability to exchange genetic material between two individuals for the PURPOSES of PROCREATION. When procreation is the goal, one partner tends to contribute a greater amount of nongenetic material to the procreation effort and we call that partner female - by default the one that's left is the male. For MOST not all forms of life, fertilization, that actual exchange of genetic material, takes place outside the physical body. This means that quantity of the nongenetic contribution, and therefore the distinction between male and female, can be very blurry. In most cases it doesn't really matter. Sometimes, a better way to distinguish male from female is to examine the reproductive strategy. The female invests a relatively greater amount of energy and effort into a fewer number of potential offspring (she values quality over quantity). The male invests as little as possible in each individual potential offspring, but tries to produce as many potential offspring as possible (he values quantity over quality). Still, there are some creatures that hedge their bets, and play both strategies - these are the hermaphrodites. The true hermaphrodite is a CREATURE with a complete, and functional, set of both the male and female SEXUAL organs.(Humans NOT in this catagory) This is different from a creature that is self-fertilizing, such as a plant, since that represents a re-mixing of genes but not an exchange. There are several examples of TRUE hermaphrodites in NATURE, such as the earthworm. With all true hermaphrodites, two individuals must still exchange genetic material. So, what are we dealing with when we discuss human hermaphrodites? Actually they are more properly called pseudohermaphrodites (which is the term used by biologists) or "Intersexuals" (which is the term that seems to be preferred in the POLITICALLY CORRECT circles). If we examine the course of human embryological development we can see that we are all originally equipped with the potential to form both the male and female genitalia (which are actually outgrowths of early types of kidneys), but we have only ONE set of GONADS. During NORMAL male development, the gonads form into testis, the male based genitalia enlarge and the female based genitalia regress. In female development, the opposite happens, gonads become ovaries male genitalia regress and female genitalia enlarge. Sexually ambiguous individuals develop in a way that both sets of genitalia enlarge. NOTICE, that these individuals still ONLY have ONE SET of gonads. These gonads will either be testis or ovaries and that will TRULY IDENTIFY the SEX of the individual. In some cases, the gonad will itself be ambiguous and share histological characteristics of both testis and ovaries, but in this case it will be able to function as neither. So the individual that develops is NOT a true hermaphrodite since they lack any functional reproductive organ. But that does NOT say whether they are M or F they still have more of either chromosomes to tell what the sex is! These types of "sexual" confusions are more confusing to us as humans than they are in the natural world. Cases of clitoral hypertrophy (a penis-like organ on the female) is quite common in nature and is actually the "normal" condition in many types of animal (such as the hyena and the spider monkey). Similarly, undescended testis are common in elephants. It becomes confusing in humans because much of our role in society is determined by sex. If we don't know whether someone is male or female (due to some type of cross-dressing) our culture does not instruct NOR SHOULD IT how we should interact with that person. It should NOT be accepted. PERIOD! Each person NORMALLY has one pair of sex chromosomes in each cell. The Y chromosome is present in males, who have one X and one Y chromosome, while females have two X chromosomes. Any deviate from that would mean they are whatever (M or F) they have MORE of (X or Y) and EXCUSES for them living another way is WRONG and causes THEM to be MORE confused! I will state clearly, that a true hermaphrodite CAN'T happen in humans. The person you are looking at is either male or female by the GENETIC chromosomes REGARDLESS of the abnormal, too many or lack of sex organs! Jer 1:5 say...Before I FORMED thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations. Although, you can't blame God for children being born with abnormalities or anything else tragic happening in this world, BECAUSE WE ALL live in a FALLEN world and MOST are NOT living right and are NOT saved therefore YOU put yourself out of God's hands. Put the blame on yourself, society, ways you live (smoke,drink,drugs etc..)! Why else do you think God tells us through his Bible how to live so we COULD AVOID or get HELP from such tragedies! Instead we make EXCUSES for IMMORAL lifestyles and ways and than CRY when we need help and blame God!]]>

<![CDATA[Akron is having a gun "buyback," at least that's what they're calling it. But how you can buy back something you never owned in the first place is the least of things that don't make sense. <a href="http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Cleveland-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2008m11d14-Buying-back-illusions" rel="nofollow">http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Cleveland-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2008m11d14-Buying-back-illusions</a>]]>

<![CDATA[Have just been 'googling': "Hermaphroditism", "Transgender" or "Intersex" as some prefer to be called. It is a very complex subject obviously and I will grant that my knowledge borders on the ignorant. As a male however it is very uneasy to contemplate this subject (and apparently for females too). It is in connection to the recent news event of denial by California for "gay" couples to marry. (It's more than possible-it is said-that the pleblesite may be overturned as apparently the framers of the amendment failed to follow legal proceedure as it required a 2/3rds majority for passage). Apparently, "true" Hermaphroditism occurs (can't be sure which from reading), 1 or 2% of live births. "Intersex" births are figured from 1-1000. I was just wondering what Moses would do with a Hermaphroditic child? Under the "harsh" laws of YHVH (some say Jehova-which is incorrect usage), would he have pitched "it" into the river? Now let's look at what the "heathen" Greeks did: At the announcement of this "miracle", a festival would take place. Someone broke out a flute and sang to the glory of the uniting of the gods Hermes and Aphrodite. (Let's hear again who had the better culture or better "family values"). Now these same people who rave about ancient Hebrew culture so much, want to deny people who have been given an ambiguous sexual identity-the right to marry? If it were all that easy to determine what is "male" or "female"-I might be on your side. But it isn't in this case. Yea, the "guy" that's having his second baby is kinda hard to get use to, but I am not going to take his legal rights away, particulary if it is a situation that was out of "his" control in the first place. The state does not tell religion what its practices are. (Well, within reason: the snakes had to go and the mushrooms too, oh while Polygamy is out-it's legal in most Moslim countries)! Religion has NO business telling the state what its laws should be. ((Oh and yea, you pay money to the insurance companies-you should pay for fire and police levies too. Just saying, how many churches get robbed or catch fire))? ]]>

<![CDATA[You raise a good question. What does a Bible passage really mean? That's the whole point. After all, (I like to call "700" Denominations), actually I suppose it is only about 300-400 but I like to exagerate like those Hebrew priests did. You are learned and correct when you mention the Babylonians. Actually, the Psalms is a compilation of authors. But why was it that that passage came out so hateful? After all, Jeremiah at 29:7-"And seek the peace of the city whither Ihave cause you to be carried away captives, and pray unto the Lord for it: for in the peace thereof ye shall have peace". But as we saw, hate overcame peace. I have another favorite passage at Exodus 18:15-16, where Moses finnds it so difficult to solve a simple property dispute he calls on God in prayer for guidance. But when we go to Numbers 31:17: "Now kill every male among the little ones and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him". There is no need for prayer here, he doesn't need to ask. Why do you ask me to "stop typing"? You know you must give an answer: "Be ready always to give an answer to any man that asketh you a reason of the hope (not hate)that is in y ou with meeekness and fear". (1 Peter 3:15) Some Christians don't believe in electricity let alone computers. Are they reading from a different Bible? Are they saved? For instance of this issue of Marriage, I recall many years ago there was a big hullabaloo when Jackie Onasis accepted the "Host". She having gotton remarried against the wishes of the church. Even now the Catholic Church refuses to recognize some civil marriages (which is their legal right). I actually sent two letters to the Cleveland Diocese for clarification on this position, but being the cult that they are refused to reply. Please don't judge in your "heart" who is going to "Hell" or not. Don't forget this passage: "The first shall be last and the last shall be first". I leave you to figure that one out. When you have to answer and deal with real people like here-you improve yourself and come out of a shell of santimony. You are all over the place with your writings. Some ways of the bible in the old testament ARE harsh to us BUT that is God's way, and to HIM they are NOT harsh because HE KNOWS people's hearts before they do anything! We did not create the world and everything in it, He did, so we don't call the plays. The Old Testament is FULL of the judgement of God that is why it seems harsh, where the New Testament is on the MERCIES of God through His son Jesus Christ. Your comment about Jeremiah 29:7, I don't understand what your trying to say? But again I believe you to be taking scriptures out of context. You need to look at verses before 29:7, Start from beginning Jer 29:1 tells about Jeremiah writing letter to residue of captives (Jews) and to all that were taken away by Nebuchadnezzar. As you keep going you get to Jer 29:4 telling of the captives being led to Babylon, Jer 29:5 says the captives were to build houses, dwell in them and plant gardens, and eat the fruit of them verse 6 explains Gods plan about MARRIAGE between man and women (notice God DID NOT SAY take wives for your daughters, or take sons for your husbands) God SAID "take ye wives and BEGAT sons and daughters, and TAKE WIVES FOR YOUR SONS and give your daughters to HUSBANDS that they may bear sons and daughters that ye may INCREASE and NOT DIMINISH" That explains God's views on marriage ENOUGH to know anything OTHER than a man and woman was NOT and IS NOT a marriage in Gods eyes. Now, you may want to create in your mind a marriage but IT IS NOT! In doing all this it was Gods will in the captives to be a part of the nation and work for peace and become positive figures in society. As you keep reading after 70 years the Jews (captives) in Babylon would be set free. verse 10. As for Exodus 18:15-16 again your wrong on scripture. Moses NEVER called on God for help in that matter read again. The scripture says Moses told his father-in-law when asked what he was doing, Moses replied, "because people come unto me to enquire OF God, when they have a matter I judge between one and another, and I do make them know Gods statutes and his laws." That's what Moses' job was to do He NEVER went to God on the matter. For the record AGAIN you take scripture and TWIST it around because you are blinded. 1 Peter 3:15 does NOT mean I have to answer everything what it says is "be ready always to give an answer to every man that ASKETH you a REASON of the HOPE (which means my faith or hope, confidence) that is in you with meekness and fear, than it keeps going into verse 16. I have already told you my hope or confidence which you didn't ask but I will tell you again it is IN JESUS CHRIST as MY SAVIOR! Another question you asked about people not believing in electricity if they are saved, even though I don't believe that was a sincere question but I will answer anyway, NOT ALL PEOPLE claiming to be a Christian ARE ! For Catholics as well the ONLY ones that admit they are a sinner and repent and turn from their sins and ask Jesus in their heart to be their Lord and Savior WILL BE SAVED there is no other way to make it to heaven not even by your good works or hail Mary's. Read Romans 10:9, John 3. and Ephesians 2:8-10. And for all the Catholics out there the ONLY way for God to hear your prayers is through His son Jesus NOT Mary, read your bible don't be fooled, read 1 Timothy 2:5-6 "For there is ONE God and one MEDIATOR BETWEEN God and men, the man CHRIST JESUS verse 6 .Who gave himself a ransom for all to be testified in due time. So, after every prayer you have to say IN JESUS' NAME AMEN or God won't hear your prayer you have to go through Jesus to get to God read 1 Tim 2:5 again. And Catholics read Matt. 23:9 it says "Call NO MAN your father UPON the EARTH for ONE is your Father which is in HEAVEN. The priest don't tell you that and they don't tell you how to be saved either. You need to read the bible yourselves not just go by what man says. And all scripture in bible is given by inspiration of God.. 2 Timothy 3:16. As for Mark 10:31 or Matt 19:30 "But many that are first shall be last, and the last shall be first. Is the same as "he that humbleth himself shall be exalted, and he that exalteth himself shall be abased." And I don't judge who is going to hell, I just go by what the bible says period! I think I covered everything. Remember this is the POLITICS room and your petition post is what started all this. There is email. ]]>

<![CDATA[Let's see, the guy's only 19 and already has a criminal record including aggravated robbery and menacing? And he still roams among us free to engage in such...uh... youthful indiscretions? Might we ask why our wonderful leaders continue to advance citizen disarmament, that is, putting the rest of us who don't menace, don't rob, don't pull guns on people for gain, at the mercy of the young Mr. Brown's of the world? More at: <a href="http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Cleveland-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2008m11d13-Another-child-shooting" rel="nofollow">http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Cleveland-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2008m11d13-Another-child-shooting</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[It's advocates like yourself that give religion a bad name. I am glad you agree with everything in the Bible, so I have yet another (got a million of 'em) passage for you at Psalms 137:9-"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones (children) against the stones". It kinda has that nice sentimental Almighty ring to it, which only goes to show how much hatred there is in the Bible. After all, God apparently can't make up His mind whether to destroy us all or not? I suppose you agree with that one too or will find some way CHRISTIAN instead of a NEW TESTAMENT one. Come out of the cults, grow and live in world filled with wonder rather than hatred of others beliefs, lifestyles, behavior. You will find yourself and God too. Anything else is just really pathetic. I really find it SAD that some people that quote the bible have actually no idea what they are quoting and take it OUT OF CONTEXT! You have to look at the WHOLE Psalm and what it is talking about and if you go up to Ps. 137:4-6 the author is talking about Jerusalem (which is God's city) and NOT forgetting her and than verse 7 talking about the children of Edom (which in the bible children also can mean ( a people, nation, young ones etc..)the children here refers to the people SAYING RASE IT, RASE IT meaning the destruction of Jerusalem. The "people" are the Babylonians in verse 137:3 it was the Babylonians that held them captive and was wanting the destruction of Jerusalem. Now in verses 137:7-9 The Psalmist prays for vengeance on the children of Edom that rejoiced over the fall of Jerusalem and demanded it to be completely destroyed. This is God's city and HE WILL protect it! Please don't quote bible scripture when you have no clue what it means. Satan himself can tell you every word in the bible and has twisted the word many of times to fool the blinded and that is what your doing. In order to understand the Bible you need to ask God to open it up to you with help THROUGH HIS Holy Spirit so you can understand it or you will just be misguided. God made the rules, God CREATED man and woman and who are we to tell HIM what to do? I choose to believe in God and HIS writings (which were given through The Holy Spirit) I KNOW the bible is TRUE. I would rather believe in God and live HIS way and be saved and IF I am wrong (which I know I am not because Jesus is true) so be it I lost nothing when I die BUT IF I am right ( which I am because Jesus IS ALIVE) and when YOU die not accepting Jesus as your Lord than it will be to late to do anything and you will be hell bound for all eternity. So I will take my chances instead of caring what the world thinks! I would rather live in eternity HAPPY than worry about what little time on earth we have here and APPEASING OTHERS that will help me not in the least! And, for the record I believe OLD and NEW testaments are true the old is what we look at for what they did back than and gives insight and the new is how we are to live now! I won't argue about the Bible with you because clearly you don't understand it so save your typing on that. You need to admit your a sinner, ask forgiveness for your sins and ask Jesus in your heart to be your Lord and SAVIOUR and really mean it in your heart that is the ONLY way to salvation! Do that and ask God to open his word to you through His Holy Spirit and read/study the bible you will understand it! ]]>

<![CDATA[What is your point? All the scriptures you pointed out makes sense and I agree with them! Back in Bible days as well as TODAY a marriage was between a man and woman and was CREATED to PROCREATE that was what man and women were to do MULTIPLY! If homosexual behavior was normal you would be able to multiply WITHOUT help from the opposite sex. Now, I realize some couples (man/woman) can't have children but NOT because of ABNORMAL relations but due to medical issues which is NOT the same. Two men or two women WITHOUT HELP from the other sex CAN NOT procreate, so that is ABNORMAL and was not what God intended for the human race actually there would not be a human race if all were queer! As for war I believe in war and so does God for that matter it's all over the Bible! And your hippie comment make love not war is pathetic, I suppose you think we should have made love not war during WW1 or to Germany during WWII?? Please war is necessary sometimes and I agree on Iraq war so save your typing! ]]>

<![CDATA[I like your statement: "Laws from the begining of time." Let's look at some: Paul: "Marriage to one wife": 1 Corinthians 7:2 Polygamy begins in six generations of man: Genesis 4:19 In cases of Rape: 50 shekel fine for the man. Marriage for the woman: Deuteronomy 22:28 Exodus 20:4- "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image. Numbers 21:9-"And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it on a pole". And speaking of abominations, you would have us abolish seafood and the seafood industries with these "laws from the begining of time": Leviticus 11:10-12 You see that in the history of modern law, marriage has always been considered a legal "contract" strictly speaking. If you wish to add your religious views to it there is nothing to stop you in your church. But as you see from the above it would be very difficult for a church to enforce its ideas on a secular state. Oh, and by the way, if you are so morally righteous how do you stand on your moral values, supporting a war based on a lie and thousands and thousands dead and wounded on both sides? Like they said in the sixties: "Make Love-Not War".]]>

<![CDATA[This is a nice way to follow the events of the new preident elect Barack Obama <a href="http://www.terroristplanet.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.terroristplanet.com</a> also has a nice crime section <a href="http://www.terroristplanet.com/crimereport.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.terroristplanet.com/crimereport.htm</a>]]>

<![CDATA[Marriage SHOULD ONLY be between a man and a women PERIOD! The reason for divorces is because the LACK of MORALS and the decay of Godliness in the world NOT marriage between man a woman to blame! Politically Correctness has a lot to do with the sickness in the world as well, Brainwashing children in schools, ALLOWING pervertness and UNACCEPTABLE behaviour and speech to have a say in society and trying to STOP ANY DECENT behaviour or way of life from having rights. Your sick lifestyle (homosexual agenda) is NOT NORMAL and NOT ACCEPTED by MOST society, the MAJORITY VOTES that turned DOWN these SICK propositions shows that, so GET OVER IT! Stop trying to PUSH your way of life on society that wants NO PART OF IT! We have said along time ago the homosexual agenda is TRYING to PUSH their way of life on everyone and you say we are liars but your PROVING us RIGHT, we vote you down you try to change the WILL of the people! WE VOTED, YOU LOST AGAIN, GET THE POINT? WE DON'T AGREE WITH YOUR LIFESTYLE, you do what you want in your life BUT DON'T try and CHANGE the laws from the beginning of time and ruin OUR children!]]>

<![CDATA[Obama has gained the respect of almost everyone because he hasn't used his race to win this election. 'My people' means all of us. We are all "my People". We have waited for a change since before the civil war. We celebrate everyone in the U.S. being able to dream of being president. Tuesday was a great day for all of us no matter your color. SPEAK FOR YOURSELF, NOT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS HE GAINED OUR RESPECT OR WAS WAITING FOR A CHANGE, AT LEAST NOT THAT JERK! I would have had no problem voting for a BIRACIAL or ANY COLOR, IF the man was an honorable, PATRIOTIC, decent man, NOT Obama! And, Obama has LESS BLACK blood in him and has MOSTLY white blood and ARABIC blood in him for the record )! AND, I AM NOT OBAMA'S PEOPLE, I am an AMERICAN and he should say "WE AS AMERICANS" NOT "MY PEOPLE" as IF he is a KING which he IS NOT! His change is for SOCIALISM but the STUPID American people won't learn until Obama RUINS this nation then they will cry it wasn't his fault! As far as I am concerned Obama is NOT my president, he is the president Elect of the USA (God help us) and I respect the office he will hold but that's it. I DIDN'T vote for him and I don't AGREE with his politics so I will NOT call him my president! Call me racist, call me a bad loser (which I'm not, I'm just sad Americans are this STUPID) call me whatever you want, THAT IS MY RIGHT, as a citizen until Obama takes that from me! Most blacks that helped put Obama in office IS RACIST because by him having LITTLE black in him is what 98% of STUPID, UNEDUCATED black people voted for him for, they had no idea of the issues nor cared and that goes for the STUPID college kids as well and the STUPID white people and everyone else who voted for him, ask them why they are voting for Obama all anyone ever said whites, blacks, etc.. was because they wanted change, yet they knew NOTHING of what "CHANGE" Obama was going to bring to the USA or HOW! LIVE AND LEARN, HOLD ON BECAUSE this (CHANGE) WILL BE A LONG, BAD RIDE you IDIOTS!! Only SOME of us don't deserve it because we were smart enough NOT to vote for Obama knowing full well he will ruin America and TAKE our FREEDOM!! ]]>

<![CDATA[...I wonder what these constituents would say if they were provided the truth about the racist origins and continued discriminatory application of the gun control measures you promulgate? Have you told them about the Slave Codes, that would allow a black man to be whipped (or worse) for possession of any kind of weapon? Or the post-Civil War Black Codes, designed to keep the newly emancipated from obtaining the means of defense during the heyday of Klan terror?... <a href="http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Cleveland-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2008m11d12-An-open-letter-that-never-closed" rel="nofollow">http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Cleveland-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2008m11d12-An-open-letter-that-never-closed</a>]]>

<![CDATA[Residents of Ohio pay State taxes and Federal taxes on income. Nine states don't pay any State income tax. Our goal is the gradual elimination of State income tax for Ohio. Why? The money collected on state income is misspent, is not adequetely distributed, needlessly wasted and spent by politicians who thinks it is theirs. It is not their money, it is the money from the residents to Ohio. Accountability is lacking. Examples of mismanagement ------------------------- A 2008 special election to replace Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-Consgresswoman) was held in October. Instead of holding an election in November, a special election was established to fill a position for thirty days. It cost taxpayers six million dollars and only 12,000 votes gathered. Ohio procurement is so filled with red tape and restrictions that makes it nearly impossible for small businesses to provide bids. This leaves procurement dollars for big businesses and Unions. The result is that the lowest priced bids are never submitted and the potential saving never realized. Example: Ohio requests to purchase government vehicles. Everyone knows that buying a new vehicle, you instantly lose money by depreciation. Ohio will not consider purchasing a used vehicle even if only one years old. They opt for new because it is not their money, no incentive to save. Studies ------- Arkansas study shows the states without income tax actually create more jobs. Employment growth in the high tax states was 23.1 percent less than the national average. <a href="http://www.reformarkansas.org/policy/040109.asp" rel="nofollow">http://www.reformarkansas.org/policy/040109.asp</a> Opposition ---------- Answer: eliminating the state income tax will totally decimate our schools, public safety, roads and bridges and other crucial services. Reply: Schools, public saftey, roads and bridges seem to be doing just fine in the 9 states without State income tax. Answer: Ohio will go bankrupt. Reply: Frugile use of federal money should be the incentive for any shortfall. If that fails to materialize, we need new politicans that recognize the importance of fiscal discipline and that act in the resident's best interest. Conclusion ---------- We will all be paying more Federal income taxes over the next four years regardless of what the Obama admin proposes. We are at the mercy of the feds, nothing we can do about those taxes. Ohio taxes are a different story. We can and we need to eliminate this racket. JOIN OUR EFFORT FOR OHIO FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY. WE WANT THIS ON THE NEXT BALLOT.]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Cleveland-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2008m11d11-What-wont-prevent-Clevelands-next-shooting-death" rel="nofollow">http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Cleveland-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2008m11d11-What-wont-prevent-Clevelands-next-shooting-death</a> ...Questions like these have already been asked. The answers are already known, but they just don't serve the agenda of those who value your control over your freedom...]]>

<![CDATA[Hussein received a humanitarian award from the UN for improving educations of Iraqis. Hussein orders chemical weapons to be used against Kurdish civilians. The world fear Hussein. Hussein invades neighboring Kuwait. Hussein is captured and killed. Hussein announces a run for the Presidency. Hussein defeats arch nemisys Clinton. Hussein is promoted by the mainstream media. World polling suggests they want Hussein for President. Hussein becomes the 44th President. The world embraces Hussein. The next sentence will read....? P.s.- Christians that voted Obama. Don't you know there is only one Messiah?]]>

<![CDATA[From Women in Green:The local elections on Tuesday are extremely important. Please vote. For those who know that Eretz Yisrael is a crucial topic, here is what you need to know about pro-Eretz Yisrael candidates... <a href="http://emanuelrahm.blogspot.com/2008/11/israeli-elections-tuesday.html" rel="nofollow">Israeli Elections Tuesday</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[Do you have the Republican Virus?]]>

<![CDATA[ <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7xuvjTEoTA" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7xuvjTEoTA</a> The coverage of the presidential election is designed to be a grand distraction. This is not new, but this year, it’s more so than ever. Pretending that a true difference exists between the two major candidates is a charade of great proportion. Many who help to perpetuate this myth are frequently unaware of what they are doing and believe that significant differences actually do exist. Indeed, on small points there is the appearance of a difference. The real issues, however, are buried in a barrage of miscellaneous nonsense and endless pontifications by robotic pundits hired to perpetuate the myth of a campaign of substance. The truth is that our two-party system offers no real choice. The real goal of the campaign is to distract people from considering the real issues. Influential forces, the media, the government, the privileged corporations and moneyed interests see to it that both parties’ candidates are acceptable, regardless of the outcome, since they will still be in charge. It’s been that way for a long time. George Wallace was not the first to recognize that there’s “not a dime’s worth of difference” between the two parties. There is, though, a difference between the two major candidates and the candidates on third-party tickets and those running as independents. The United States Has Essentially a One-Party System <a href="http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20081010.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20081010.htm</a> The two parties and their candidates have no real disagreements on foreign policy, monetary policy, privacy issues, or the welfare state. They both are willing to abuse the Rule of Law and ignore constitutional restraint on Executive Powers. Neither major party champions free markets and private-property ownership. Those candidates who represent actual change or disagreement with the status quo are held in check by the two major parties in power, making it very difficult to compete in the pretend democratic process. This is done by making it difficult for third-party candidates to get on the ballots, enter into the debates, raise money, avoid being marginalized, or get fair or actual coverage. A rare celebrity or a wealthy individual can, to a degree, overcome these difficulties. The system we have today allows a President to be elected by as little as 32% of the American people, with half of those merely voting for the “lesser of two evils”. Therefore, as little as 16% actually vote for a president. No wonder when things go wrong, anger explodes. A recent poll shows that 60% of the American people are not happy with the two major candidates this year. This system is driven by the conviction that only a major party candidate can win. Voters become convinced that any other vote is a “wasted” vote. It’s time for that conclusion to be challenged and to recognize that the only way not to waste one’s vote is to reject the two establishment candidates and join the majority, once called silent, and allow the voices of the people to be heard. We cannot expect withdrawal of troops from Iraq or the Middle East with either of the two major candidates. Expect continued involvement in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Georgia. Neither hints of a non-interventionist foreign policy. Do not expect to hear the rejection of the policy of supporting the American world empire. There will be no emphasis on protecting privacy and civil liberties and the constant surveillance of the American people. Do not expect any serious attempt to curtail the rapidly expanding national debt. And certainly, there will be no hint of addressing the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationship with big banks and international corporations and the politicians. The Media has kept this candidate and all third party candidates out of mainstream media --because they don’t want any information or anyone Candidate that feels the same way and has the same opinions as many Americans to be heard. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7xuvjTEoTA" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7xuvjTEoTA</a> There is only one way that these issues can get the attention they deserve: the silent majority must become the vocal majority. This message can be sent to our leaders by not participating in the Great Distraction - the quadrennial campaign and election of an American President without a choice. Just think of how much of an edge a Vice President has in this process, and he or she is picked by a single person - the party’s nominee. This was never intended by the Constitution. Since a principled non-voter sends a message, we must count them and recognize the message they are sending as well. The non-voters need to hold their own “election” by starting a “League of Non-voters” and explain their principled reasons for opting out of this charade of the presidential elective process. They just might get a bigger membership than anyone would guess. Write-in votes should not be discouraged, but the electoral officials must be held accountable and make sure the votes are counted. But one must not be naïve and believe that under today’s circumstances one has a chance of accomplishing much by a write-in campaign. The strongest message can be sent by rejecting the two-party system, which in reality is a one-party system with no possible chance for the changes to occur which are necessary to solve our economic and foreign policy problems. This can be accomplished by voting for one of the non-establishment principled candidates - Baldwin, Barr, McKinney, Nader, and possibly others. (listed alphabetically) Yes, these individuals do have strong philosophic disagreements on various issues, but they all stand for challenging the status quo - those special interest who control our federal government. And because of this, on the big issues of war, civil liberties, deficits, and the Federal Reserve they have much in common. People will waste their vote in voting for the lesser of two evils. That can’t be stopped overnight, but for us to have an impact we must maximize the total votes of those rejecting the two major candidates. For me, though, my advice - for what it’s worth - is to vote! Reject the two candidates who demand perpetuation of the status quo and pick one of the alternatives that you have the greatest affinity to, based on the other issues. A huge vote for those running on principle will be a lot more valuable by sending a message that we’ve had enough and want real change than wasting one’s vote on a supposed lesser of two evils. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1LMoWqXrE4" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1LMoWqXrE4</a> “The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.” Carroll Quigley – Author of Tragedy & Hope Categories: General Election, Ron Paul's Speeches Tags: National Press Club -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtCZpVPz8VE" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtCZpVPz8VE</a> <a href="http://november5.org" rel="nofollow">http://november5.org</a> Now is the time to rapidly shift the focus to Congress. <a href="http://november5.org" rel="nofollow">http://november5.org</a> Bringing our efforts to bear on Congress is the only way we can achieve a single-payer system of health care, a living wage comparable to that at the end of the 1960s -- $10 -- and a less belligerent foreign policy. In each Congressional district we need to start organizing ourselves -- and quickly Though some of us are now involved with the new effort at November5.org, Please visit that website and sign up today. Let your friends and family know about it. We're all shifting direction, and the faster we go about it the better. Mainstream Media Fraud Violates Integrity of Election <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMx_UnV-fKM" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMx_UnV-fKM</a> Bill Moyers on Monopoly Media <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vA5z-quW2E8" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vA5z-quW2E8</a> The Constitution: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0KWx-OEHHs" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0KWx-OEHHs</a> The Revoluton: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5BRF4juyT0" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5BRF4juyT0</a> Mainstream Media is selling another war <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwxzt4iPkNE" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwxzt4iPkNE</a> VOTE THIRD PARTY: DEMAND THIRD PARTY BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DEBATES AND BE IN THE MEDIA AS MUCH AS THE OTHER TWO CANDIDATES. <a href="http://www.thirdpartyticket.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.thirdpartyticket.com/</a> Sign the petition with like-minded individuals: <a href="http://gopetition.com/online/21979.html" rel="nofollow">http://gopetition.com/online/21979.html</a> <a href="http://november5.org" rel="nofollow">http://november5.org</a> Now is the time to rapidly shift the focus to Congress. <a href="http://november5.org" rel="nofollow">http://november5.org</a> Bringing our efforts to bear on Congress is the only way we can achieve a single-payer system of health care, a living wage comparable to that at the end of the 1960s -- $10 -- and a less belligerent foreign policy. In each Congressional district we need to start organizing ourselves -- and quickly Though some of us are now involved with the new effort at November5.org, Please visit that website and sign up today. Let your friends and family know about it. We're all shifting direction, and the faster we go about it the better. Cleveland Rocks! ]]>

<![CDATA[This is something I keep wondering what will they/we do if the lawsuits do actually prove that Obama is not a naturalized citizen of the United States of America? Could he still be a President? Who would be the President? Would we have another election? Would Bush stay in? Would they impeach him and if so how would they do so? Share your thoughts and read this: <a href="http://mobiusinformer.wordpress.com/2008/10/18/what-if-obamas-not-eligible-to-become-president/" rel="nofollow">http://mobiusinformer.wordpress.com/2008/10/18/what-if-obamas-not-eligible-to-become-president/</a> Thank you Ohio for picking him! We owe it all to you! ]]>

<![CDATA[I'm celebrating Obama winning and you an Palin can go back to Alaska to play hockey. "Just another shallow Palin supporter"- get over it she lost..................................................................]]>

<![CDATA[YOU KOOL AID DRINKER, HOW ABOUT DOING SOME RESEARCH INSTEAD OF (OPENING YOUR MOUTH AND REMOVING ALL DOUBT)(FIGURATIVELY SPEAKING OF COURSE)WATCHING AND BELIEVEING THE BIASED MEDIA! A DAY OR SO THAT WILL BE PROVEN FALSE ALSO COME ON THE PERSON SPEWING THIS DIDN'T HAVE THE GUTS THEY WERE ANONYMOUS GO FIGURE!]]>

<![CDATA[To all people interested in what their government did on 9/11: You can look at this information, freely available but not in the mainstream media. It offers a radically different perspective on the history and events of 9/11 and afterward. This perspective is richly supported by hundreds of facts. The 9/11 Truth movement provides answers to dozens of key questions about 9/11 that the U.S. government will not even attempt to answer. For this information and these questions and answers, please read on. See also www.911truth.org Which of these 2 scenarios do YOU think is closer to the truth and reality about 9/11? 1) People in the top level of the U.S. government (including the military and intelligence agencies) anticipated the hijackings, were warned by 11 countries, and decided not only to allow the hijackings to succeed but planted explosives in the World Trade Center to blow it up and magnify the results so that they could blame the Arabs and sway U.S. public opinion to justify a pre-determined war in Iraq and Iran? or 2) People living thousands of miles away directed by a former U.S. ally (Osama bin Laden) created 9/11 which has resulted in the deaths of over 1 million innocent people in Iraq and the physical devastation of Iraq, a U.S. military presence (occupation) and much greater control of the Iraqi oil supplies by American oil companies. Everybody agrees that 9/11 was a CONSPIRACY. We differ only on WHO was behind it: al Qaeda or the U.S. government? Was Uncle Sam or al Qaeda more able to: 1) Cause the U.S. Air Force and NORAD to "stand down" and fail to intercept any of the 4 hijacked planes as they flew across the U.S. See for example the testimony of Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta. This is a big deal! <a href="http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/270705testimonycensored.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/270705testimonycensored.htm</a> 2) Cause the Pentagon and NORAD to lie to the 9/11 Commission! Yes they did. Says who? Says Lee Hamilton and Thomas Kean, the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission. They said so in their book Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission. <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/911hamilton.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/911hamilton.html</a> 3) Cause FBI headquarters to sidetrack several independent investigations which would have caught Al Qaeda and potentially prevented the attacks (Chicago, Minneapolis, Phoenix, and Able Danger in Washington, D.C.) <a href="http://www.justacitizen.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.justacitizen.com/</a> <a href="http://www.judicialwatch.org/printer_2469.shtml" rel="nofollow">http://www.judicialwatch.org/printer_2469.shtml</a> <a href="http://www.judicialwatch.org/printer_wrightcase.shtml" rel="nofollow">http://www.judicialwatch.org/printer_wrightcase.shtml</a> <a href="http://www.prisonplanet.com/FBI_agent_I_was_stymied_in_terror_probe.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.prisonplanet.com/FBI_agent_I_was_stymied_in_terror_probe.htm</a> <a href="http://www.wanttoknow.info/abledanger911" rel="nofollow">http://www.wanttoknow.info/abledanger911</a> 4) Cause the President and Vice President to call Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle one weekend and ask him to limit the scope of Congress' investigation into 9/11, the Joint Inquiry. They wanted Congress to ONLY look at the failures of the intelligence agencies and nothing else. Daschle and Congress complied. <a href="http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/inv.terror.probe/" rel="nofollow">http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/inv.terror.probe/</a> From this website: <a href="http://www.911truth.org/article_for_printing.php?story=20050519154200725" rel="nofollow">http://www.911truth.org/article_for_printing.php?story=20050519154200725</a> "Furthermore, it appears that Cheney -- along with Bush -- was reluctant for 9/11 to be investigated: When then Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle appeared on NBC's Meet the Press in May 2002, he said Cheney had, on January 24 that year, urged him not to investigate the events of September 11. Daschle added that four days later Bush made the same request. When the program's moderator Tim Russert asked: "It wasn't, 'Let's not have a national commission, but let's have the intelligence committees look into this,' it was 'No investigation by anyone, period'?" Daschle replied: "That's correct." He added that the request had been repeated on "other dates following."30 5) Cause Bush to take 441 days to appoint a Commission to investigate 9/11. It took that long and a tremendous amount of effort from some of the widows of 9/11 victims including the "Jersey Girls". For a great movie on this go to www.TeachPeace.com/movies and look for the movie called "9/11 Press for Truth". <a href="http://teachpeace.com/911pressfortruth.htm" rel="nofollow">http://teachpeace.com/911pressfortruth.htm</a> 6) Cause Bush to issue an executive order on October 5, 2001 prohibiting anybody except the Secretaries of in the Department of State, Treasury, Defense, the U.S. Attorney General, the CIA or the FBI from disclosing "classified or sensitive law enforcement information" to anybody except for 8 members of Congress, leaders in both parties. In other words don't tell Congress about 9/11! <a href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/gwb100501.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/gwb100501.html</a> <a href="http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=civilliberties_129&scale=0#civilliberties_129" rel="nofollow">http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=civilliberties_129&scale=0#civilliberties_129</a> 7) Cause the 9/11 Commission to ignore testimony of many witnesses who provided tons of information suggesting that 9/11 was an inside job, including completely ignoring the collapse of Building 7. See the Sibel Edmonds page "Just a Citizen" and these: <a href="http://www.william911.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.william911.com/</a> Also you can bring up the entire 9/11 Commission Report and do a search for key words, such as Building 7. <a href="http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/fullreport.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/fullreport.pdf</a> 8) Cause the Families Steering Committee to not believe the answers to their questions by the 9/11 Commission, or cause the Commission to ignore 70% of those questions. <a href="http://www.911truth.org/downloads/Family%20Steering%20Cmte%20review%20of%20Report.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.911truth.org/downloads/Family%20Steering%20Cmte%20review%20of%20Report.pdf</a> 9) Cause the government, nearly 7 years after 9/11, to withhold almost every single photograph and videotape taken of the Pentagon on 9/11. The Pentagon is probably the most heavily photographed and secure buildings in the world. Yet video tapes from a Sheraton Hotel, a Virginia Department of Transportation camera, and a gas station for Pentagon employees were all confiscated by the FBI within minutes after the attacks. None has been released to the public. Nor have any others, other than 4 frames released by the government which do not, in fact, show a Boeing hitting the Pentagon. <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/16/pentagon.video/index.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/16/pentagon.video/index.html</a> 10) Pass U.S. laws that restrict Americans' freedom. For example, the USA Patriot Act was passed in a frenzy by the Congress, which took very little time to actually read the Act. It is unconstitutional in that it violates the rights of Americans to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. It gives the government broad powers to invade our privacy, and makes it accountable to no-one. For example, the President can now, because of the Military Commissions Act from October, 2006, designate anybody as an enemy combatant and thrown them in jail, without showing any evidence of any quality and without that person having access to any court to protect himself from the Presidential abuse of power. The U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 says, "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." This principle of "habeaus corpus", (Latin for "show me the body", meaning more broadly show me the evidence that's the basis for the charges against me) is cental to the American system of justice. Bush and the Congress ran right over it with the Military Commissions Act. For a free copy of a DVD showing some of the evidence that 9/11 was a U.S. government project, send your name and mailing address. You will learn a lot! Watch a free movie on line. There are several I recommend. Loose Change 2nd edition, which you can find at: www.Loos