Monday, August 4, 2014

Another point of view worth reading...

Paul on Homosexuality
By: James David Fox / Writer
Earlier today I was sent the link to a video that was created by someone I have in the past had a great deal of respect for and have considered a friend of mine. This individual spoke on what is "NATURAL" and what is "UNNATURAL," leading into a case against gay marriage. On this issue he used as his basis Biblical text 1st Corinthians Chapter 6, Verse 9.

Quoting from the KJV of the Bible it reads:

"1 Corinthians 6:9 King James Version (KJV)

9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind."

Now, I understand that most Christians use this version of the Bible and modern day translations have taken off from this same version and understanding, especially ENGLISH versions of the Bible.

I myself am a Christian and I do own and read the KJV of the Bible, however, I also realize that the New Testament was written in GREEK and NOT English. So in my Biblical study I include the original Greek in order to fully understand the meaning of what ever Scripture I am reading. So therefore I must also include the original Greek text to the exact same Scripture in the Bible.

Quoting from the Original Greek of the Bible it reads:

"1 Corinthians 6:9 Original Greek Version

9 ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι θεοῦ βασιλείαν οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν; μὴ πλανᾶσθε· οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται

9 ē ouk oidate oti adikoi theou basileian ou klēronomēsousin mē planasthe oute pornoi oute eidōlolatrai oute moichoi oute malakoi oute arsenokoitai"

Let's take a look at the word "arsenokoitai," Paul used in Corinthians that so many are taking to mean gay or homosexual.

That's a great study in itself because Paul could have used many words if he intended to blast gays and lesbians. Yet Paul used none of those available words, choosing instead to coin an interesting new word, arsenokoitai.

Despite what some scholars allege, arsenokoitai is never used in any extant Greek literature with our modern meaning of homosexual. The best evidence available today indicates that arsenokoitai described shrine prostitutes. That is the learned opinion of Philo, a contemporary of both Jesus and the apostle Paul and one of the most widely read Jewish intellectuals in the first century.

In the Atlantic, Conor Friedersdorf lays out both the reasons why President Obama should fire CIA director John Brennan, and the reasons why it would be dangerous for him to do so. Essentially, they’ve both been doing some really shady stuff, regarding both the US Constitution and international law, which they’ve both been covering up and lying about. Firing Brennan could bring more of these activities into the light, which would hurt Obama’s reputation. However, what we already know about Obama should eviscerate any shred of respectability he might have in anyone’s mind.
Brennan is currently under fire for bugging the computers of the Senate committee tasked with investigating the legality of CIA “enhanced interrogation” techniques. The CIA was mining Senators’ computers and emails to gather information on the investigation so they could begin working to discredit their reports. Brennan also lied to the Senate Intelligence Committee about it, saying, “That's just beyond the scope of reason in terms of what we would do.”

Now he’s apologized, weeks ahead of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report. It’s expected to be a scathing indictment of the CIA, showing that they exaggerated the effectiveness of enhanced interrogation techniques to the public, fed journalists fake “leaks” and lied to members of Congress, downplaying the brutality of their information extraction practices and the extent to which they used them.

Now several Senators and even the New York Times editorial board is calling for his resignation. As Friedersdorf points out, Brennan's CIA “broke laws and undermined the separation of powers core to our democracy.”

While firing Brennan would be the best thing for the American people, it would also open up the possibility that he would start talking. He could talk about Obama’s secret drone killing program.

The President has repeatedly illegally used the state secrets justification to prevent information about extrajudicial killings from coming out into the public. Even Congress isn’t properly briefed on who Obama is killing or why. Obama blocked the release of a memo on the justification for killing two American citizens without trial, even though upon its eventual releaseit became clear that the information posed no threat to US safety. So the President is trampling on the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution and then refusing to acknowledge it or explain what the legal justification might be.

The latest abuse of the state secrets privilege is Obama’s DOJ refusing to explain why they’re refusing to allow a PhD student back into the US. And what was the reason both for the refusal to let Rahinah Ibrahim back in the country and for refusing to acknowledge why she wasn’t allowed? An FBI agent had checked the wrong box. The “state secret” was a coverup for incompetence.

The entire drone war in Pakistan could only be legal if the country consented to the killings, and there’s little evidence it has, and public statements indicate it hasn’t.

NSA spying has far exceeded its legal and Constitutional bounds and President Obama has lied about both the scope of the spying and what he knew and when. Trade alliances with allies such as Germany are in jeopardy because of NSA spying, and along with them billions of dollars in economic growth.

In fact, as NSA director James Clapper has repeatedly lied to Congress, with zero reproach from the Obama Administration, the only way anyone knows anything about just how far illegal NSA wiretapping and surveillance of American citizens who have not been accused of any crimes has gone is due to whistleblowers like Edward Snowden. And how has the Obama Administration, the “most transparent administration in history” dealt with these heroic individuals, the only check against lying and law-breaking government agencies? The Administration has prosecuted more whistleblowers than any administration in US history.

I guess what I don’t get is what in the world John Brennan could reveal about President Obama which could possibly tarnish his reputation any further. He’s literally trampling on the Constitution, killing citizens without trial, disregarding the Fourth Amendment and allowing his goons to lie about it with zero consequences. And that’s what we know about! Fire John Brennan, Obama. You can’t get any lower.
Here’s a wacky idea. Let’s win the war against our jihadi enemies.
Yeah, it’s certainly an outside the box idea. All we hear right now – in fact, all we’ve heard for decades – is about peace processes and negotiations and ceasefires. On and on they go, one after another, always crashing on the rocks of intransigence by people who hate our allies and who hate us. Maybe we need some fresh new ideas, some outside-the-box thinking.

How about we and our allies destroy our enemies? After all, the best peace plan is victory.
Wait, hear me out. You know, it wasn’t that long ago that we Americans and our allies won wars.

Sure, it’s unfashionable to talk about winning today, but we have much to learn from history. And history teaches that if you pummel your enemies into submission, they tend to submit and stop trying to murder you and your kids.

I’m not necessarily talking about emulating the original Middle East peacemakers, the Romans, who got tired of Carthage’s attitude and leveled the city, killed the men, sold the women and children into bondage and sowed the fields with salt. But then, on the other hand, we haven’t had a lot of problems with the Carthaginians in the last couple millennia.

Let’s look closer to our own time. Ulysses S. Grant famously refused to accept anything except unconditional surrender, and set about grinding his Confederate opponents into dust. General Grant was quite popular around the old Schlichter family place, the rebels having burned down the town of Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, where my family lived.Note that Chambersburg hasn’t been burned down since.

Also note that Grant and his Unions troops faced brave, determined and skilled warriors in the Confederates. Today, we and our allies typically face untrained, gutless losers who cower behind women and children when they aren’t trying to talk them into blowing themselves to bits inside a school bus.

Even Democrats used to embrace the idea of victory. As hard as that is to believe, it was Democrat Harry Truman who decided that, given the choice of either a whole bunch of the enemy dying or a whole bunch of the enemy dying plus a whole bunch of Americans and allies also dying, since the enemy started it they could do the dying alone. He nuked Hiroshima, and when the Japanese didn’t give up, he nuked Nagasaki. And the Japanese gave up.And they haven’t been a problem since.

When our enemies decide to embark on a war, someone’s going to die. I vote that it be them instead of us. Sadly, many of our political leaders and media mavens don’t see it that way. They whine because so few Israelis have died in comparison to Hamas. They seem to think we have some sort of moral obligation to suffer casualties. Perhaps they’d feel differently if they had even been around any.

My great-great grandfather was in the Union Army. I expect he was quite pleased that he didn’t have to go for round two with the rebels. Both of my grandfathers were in the Pacific getting ready to help invade Japan when Harry tossed the hot rocks. There’s a fair chance at least one of yours was too.I’m glad they didn’t have to hit those beaches – an invasion of Japan would have been an unspeakable bloodbath, both for the military and civilians of Japan and, more importantly, for the warriors of the United States and our allies.

Yeah, I place a higher value on the lives of our troops and those of our courageous allies than upon those of our enemies. Call me crazy.

One should ask presumptive President Hillary Clinton about that.A tape from September 10, 2011, just came out with Bill Clinton talking in Australia about how he could have killed Osama bin Laden in the 1990s, but held back because it might cause perhaps 300 civilian casualties. Of course, the next day bin Laden killed 3000 Americans. Was that the right choice, Ms. Clinton?What would you do?

Do you think Bill made the right choice in not taking out bin Laden because he bravely surrounded himself with 300 civilians even though it cost us 3000 Americans?

That’s a really good question. And that’s why no one in the mainstream media will ever ask it. Okay, Jake Tapper might, but that’s why he’ll never get within 10 miles of Her Majesty.

War is an ugly and terrible thing. That’s why you should avoid it. But the only thing worse than getting sucked into a war is not winning one. We went into Korea, stopped short of victory, and we’re still there dealing with that freak show dynasty. We refused to achieve victory in Vietnam, and millions died throughout Southeast Asia when the communists proceeded to do what communists always do. We have refused to do what was needed to achieve victory in Afghanistan and that garden spot is already reverting to the Stone Age.
We had victory in Iraq, but squandered it. All that blood spilled for nothing – pathetic. Now the jihadis are sweeping in and conducting a real #waronwomen. Even the most dedicated single payer health care advocate has to recoil from ISIS’s mandatory cliterodectomy program.

Our leaders insist Israel show “restraint” and urge a truce. Except everyone knows that the only chance for peace in the long term is the utter destruction of Hamas. You can’t negotiate peace where the other side’s bottom line bargaining position is that you die.

We need to unequivocally and unreservedly support our allies in their war against our shared enemies.As I discuss in my new book, Conservative Insurgency, a speculative future history of the struggle to restore our system and culture, we need to rebuild our shrunken military and aggressively confront and destroy threats to our nation. We can’t wish away the fact that our enemies want us dead. What we can do is make it clear that if they choose to make war upon us, over or covert, they are the ones who will get to do the dying.
Kerry: Netanyahu is such “a stubborn head” that he “refuses to understand anything”
Pamela Geller / Atlas Shrugs

The Obama regime continues to betray America’s strongest ally and the only stable democracy in the Middle East.
“Why everyone’s losing trust in America,” by Benny Avni, New York Post, July 31, 2014:
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is such “a stubborn head” that he “refuses to understand anything.” So says Secretary of State John Kerry, reports the French weekly Le Canard Enchaine.
Though satirical, Le Canard is known for excellent ties with French political insiders — especially with the Foreign Office in Paris, where, according to the paper, Kerry mocked the Israeli leader to several foreign ministers while seeking a Gaza cease-fire last week.
Bad enough to bad-mouth an allied leader to Europeans who’ve been less than supportive of your ally. Worse to do it also in the presence of officials of two nations that are patrons of the terrorists that ally is now fighting. Worst of all to do it where your foolish comments will get leaked to the public.
That Le Canard dropped its scoop Wednesday, after a host of Obama officials had spent days insisting that Kerry supports Israel, is just more salt in the wound.
This is not just about Israel. It’s about every nation pondering what it means to be a US ally.
The Jewish state, after all, is actively fighting a bitter enemy, as its reputation as a civilized nation is smeared around the world, its legitimate war compared to the Nazis’ extermination camps.
At such times, Israel needs...

“Palestinians” present Egypt with draft of Gaza truce demands

  / Jihad Watch
The opening of the border crossings would allow Hamas jihadists to commit jihad/martyrdom suicide attacks against Israeli civilians with impunity, as they did before the border crossings were closed.

The Israelis should not grant even one of these demands, and probably won’t unless Barack Obama pressures them to do so. The Israelis’ response should be exactly what Michael Corleone’s is in this video:

“Palestinians present Egypt with draft of Gaza truce demands," Times of Israel, August 3, 2014:
CAIRO, Egypt — A Palestinian delegation including Hamas presented its joint demands on Sunday to Egyptian mediators in Cairo for a truce with Israel, including an end to the Gaza blockade, officials said.
The delegation, which included members of president Mahmoud Abbas’s Palestinian Authority and Gaza’s Hamas rulers, met the Egyptian mediators late in the day even as Israel began pulling some of it forces out of Gaza.
Cairo is to relay the demands to Israel, which balked at sending negotiators after accusing Hamas of breaching a 72-hour truce soon after it began on Friday.
The Palestinians, who met earlier on Sunday to hammer out a joint position, agreed on “a ceasefire; Israeli troop withdrawal from Gaza; the end of the siege of Gaza and opening its border crossings,” said Maher al-Taher, a member of the delegation.
The Palestinian demands also include fishing rights up to 12 nautical miles off Gaza’s coast and the release of Palestinian prisoners demanded by Hamas and Abbas, said Taher, a senior official with the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
A Hamas official confirmed the agreement, saying: “These are the main points, but they must be discussed with the Egyptians. We hope things go smoothly.”
A Hamas official also said the group would meet Monday with Egypt’s intelligence chief, and expected Cairo to pressure Israel to accept the demands, Israel Radio reported.
Earlier, Hamas deputy political chief Moussa Abu Marzouk, based in Cairo, told Palestinian news outlet Al-Quds the group had managed to push Egypt toward accepting its position, and away from Israel’s earlier-accepted deal for an unconditional ceasefire.
Cairo, a traditional broker in Palestinian-Israeli conflicts, has moved to isolate Hamas on its eastern border after the Egyptian military overthrew the Islamist government last year.
Egypt had proposed an unconditional ceasefire followed by talks between Israel and Hamas early into the 27-day conflict, which an emergency services spokesman in Gaza claims has cost the lives of more than 1,800 Palestinians, hundreds of whom Israel says were armed combatants.
Abu Marzouk said that “we are interested in reaching a ceasefire, lifting the siege, and for our people to live like other nations on earth; enjoying freedom of travel, import and export. There should be no buffer zones or [areas] we cannot come near.”
Hamas was unable to accept the Egyptian conditions when they were first presented in mid-July, Abu Marzouk explained, but now Palestinians had come to Cairo with a unified list of demands.
“Had we accepted the Egyptian initiative at the time, many things would be imposed on us which we cannot accept today,” he said….

Defense Panel: Obama Making U.S. Too Weak

by / Personal Liberty Digest
Defense Panel: Obama Making U.S. Too Weak
The National Defense Panel appointed to conduct independent reviews of the Nation’s military readiness warned last week that President Barack Obama is making the U.S. Armed Forces too weak to respond to growing global threats.

A new report out from the panel said that defense budget cuts and the Obama Administration’s assertions that the U.S. should have a smaller military in the President’s 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) leave the U.S. with a military that is “inadequate given the future strategic and operational environment.”

According to the defense experts, the U.S. is in need of upgrades and expansions to meet global challenges that cause the Nation to have to respond to multiple threats at once.

From the report:
The Air Force now fields the smallest and oldest force of combat aircraft in its history yet needs a global surveillance and strike force able to rapidly deploy to theaters of operation to deter, defeat, or punish multiple aggressors simultaneously. As a result of the budget constraints imposed by the 2011 Budget Control Act, the Air Force’s Bomber, Fighter and Surveillance forces are programmed to drawdown to approximately 50% of the current inventory by 2019. In the panel’s opinion, the programmed reduction in the Air Force’s decisive enabling capabilities will put this nation’s national security strategy at much higher risk and therefore recommends increasing the number of manned and unmanned aircraft capable of conducting both ISR and long range strike in contested airspace.
We are convinced the 2014 QDR’s contemplated reduction in Army end strength goes too far. We believe the Army and the Marine Corps should not be reduced below their pre-9/11 end-strengths – 490,000 active-duty soldiers in the Army and 182,000 active Marines–bearing in mind that capability cannot always substitute for capacity.
According to the panel, the White House’s current plan for the military is focused too heavily on providing justification for defense spending cuts and not enough on keeping the U.S. in a strong position to respond to global threats.

In order for the military to be powerful enough to protect the Nation, the defense experts argue, the U.S.’s fighting force must be able to operate equally in multiple theaters.

“We find the logic of the two-war construct to be as powerful as ever and note that the force sizing construct in the 2014 QDR strives to stay within the two-war tradition while using different language.

But given the worsening threat environment, we believe a more expansive force sizing construct — one that is different from the two-war construct but no less strong — is appropriate.”

Poll: Americans Want GOP in Charge of Congress

By Greg Richter / Newsmax
More Americans want to see Republicans maintain control of the House — and they want the GOP to take over the Senate — in November's midterm elections, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist poll.
According to those responding, 43 percent want to see Republicans running both houses of Congress, with 41 percent in favor of Democrats running both chambers. The results fall within the poll's margin of error of 3.9 percentage points.

Those polled also were asked whether they thought Congress had been productive or unproductive in its current session. Almost three-quarters said Congress had been unproductive, with 50 percent saying it had been very unproductive.

Nineteen percent said Congress has been productive, with 3 percent saying it has been very productive.

NBC News reported that the current Congress is on track to become the least productive in the modern era. The statistics used are based on the number of bills signed into law.

Though most polled wanted to see Republicans running things on Capitol Hill, more respondents identified themselves as Democrats. Twenty-six percent identified as soft Democrats, and 19 percent as strong Democrats. Twenty-four percent called themselves soft Republicans, and 18 percent strong Republicans.

The poll was conducted July 28-31 and involved 634 registered voters.
Selling off control of America one piece at a time
By: Diane Sori

What pray tell has our country come to, and what pray tell has my beloved state of Florida allowed, as a Middle Eastern company...Gulftainer...was recently awarded a 35-year, $100 million concession agreement to 'supposedly' boost cargo operations at Port Canaveral...a port NOT far from the Trident Turning Basin which the Navy uses to support our fleet of nuclear ballistic missile submarines...and a port perilously close to the Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral where our space launches take place...or at least they did until Obama cut their funding.

And while it's claimed by port officials that the new container and cargo terminal that will be built is expected to contribute more than $630 million to Florida’s economy, is expected to bring $280 million in revenue to Port Canaveral, and is expected to generate more than $350 million in tax contributions, that does NOT change the fact that this is an Arab-owned company, and you do NOT deal with the enemy even if that enemy is dressed in sheep's clothing...period.

And you especially do NOT deal with the enemy in a time of war or when our allies are fighting for their very existence against the brethren of those trying to set-up shop at our ports.

Now gaining its much wanted foothold into the U.S. marketplace, the Gulftainer deal...finalized in late a deal that we're just starting to hear about now. And I wonder if our dock workers union realizes they will now be working for muslims...that they will now be working for a company that has two different terminals in Iraq... has terminals in Brazil, Russia, and Lebanon (of Hezbollah infamy), and that they'll be working for a company that between 2012 and 2013 picked-up the operation of eight terminals throughout the Middle East...more than any other port operator in existence there to date. And Gulftainer operates inland transportation and freight companies in countries with major political unrest...countries such as Pakistan, Turkey, and Russia...countries currently at odds with the U.S.

And this is a company that while based in the United Arab Emirates...which is 'supposedly' friendly towards the U.S., it is in reality anything but as the UAE itself has been named as a source of terrorist funding over the years. In fact, the 9/11 Commission reported that much of the money for the 2001 9/11 attacks flowed through UAE's open financial sector. And it's also important to remember that the UAE's foreign policy is based upon 'cooperation-based relations' with all countries of the world...kumbaya nonsense on a global scale...and that includes sending foreign aid (over $15 billion per year) to Arab and muslim America's enemies...NO matter that Obama considers America's enemies his friends.

Also, Gulftainer is a subsidiary of Gulf Stevedoring Contracting Company (GSCCO), which is based in of all places Saudi Arabia...the very country whose king Obama so loves to bow down to. And their parent company in turn is the Crescent Group... and YES their logo is based upon the islamic crescent. And they in turn have operations in the countries of Egypt, Pakistan and Yemen (two countries very unfriendly to the U.S.), Canada, Montenegro, Tunisia, and Argentina, just to name a few, in addition to their continuing operations in both the UAE and Iraq, where they're expanding their operations NO matter that the country falls a bit more to ISIS every day.

And now this Arab-owned company with ties to Saudi Arabia has been given what amounts to free reign over one of the most strategic ports on our Atlantic coast... more happiness courtesy of the Obama administration...and sadly courtesy of Florida's governor Rick Scott who could have stopped...or at least stalled...this deal but didn't.

I cannot stress enough that now an Arab-owned company has been given a port of entry into the U.S. to possibly control...or should I say to close their eyes to...certain goings on that are rift at ports worldwide. And even though the major concern at U.S. ports is NOT really with the terminal operators themselves per se, still it is with those who screen the containers before they enter our ports. And with an Arab company now wanting and getting control of even one of our ports red flags need to be raised NO matter the cries 'but it's good for the economy.' And let me say here and now that it is NOT as this contract could have and should have been awarded to an American owned company...period.

Remember, smuggling items into containers happens all the time, and most times the items smuggled can be traced back to those who load the trucks, trains, and ships, and can continue on down the line up until the container gets sealed and loaded. And with the huge amount of guns and weapons, counterfeit goods, and drugs currently moving unscathed via containers into our country, is it really that much of a stretch to imagine that a dirty bomb...or worse...could indeed be moved to its intended destination through them as well, for a device could be hidden in a container on a ship docked at a U.S. port...docked at Port Canaveral perhaps. And that could very well happen as port operators with ties and allegiances to the muslim world look away, and with a media doing the bidding of the traitor-in-the White House you know the truth will NOT be reported on...that is until it's too late or even if it's reported on at all.

Thankfully, U.S. Congressman Duncan Hunter (R-CA)...chairman of the House subcommittee on Coast Guard & Maritime Transportation...has called for a full national security review of this very questionable deal. In a July 29th letter to U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, Hunter raised his concerns about the possible risk to U.S. national security this deal might afford.

“It is my understanding that the agreement marks the first time a Middle Eastern company will fully operate a U.S. cargo terminal,” Hunter's letter stated. Continuing on he wrote that “It is critical that before this agreement proceeds, CFIUS determines whether a terminal operation agreement with Gulftainer presents any risk or impact to U.S. national security.

Also stating that the purpose of his inquiry was NOT to terminate the agreement per se, but that "This should be the case for all investments in which foreign investors acquire or gain operational control of critical U.S. infrastructure used in international trade," Duncan said, but again I will unequivocally say that NO foreign company should have any control whatsoever of any U.S. infrastructure...or of any U.S anything for that matter.

And what should raise even more red flags is that this company had wanted to set up shop in Jacksonville as their first choice, but was wisely turned down by the Jacksonville Port Authority. And then Gulftainer, in the blink of an eye, pushed ahead with wanting into Port Canaveral. And lest I forget, Gulftainer is in talks with other U.S. ports in other states, and that is NOT good at all folks as it seems the economic takeover of America has indeed truly begun without a shot being fired by the enemy.

And while Gulftainer will be operating under a lease and will NOT purchase outright any port property, remember that back in 2006, there was a major controversy over security concerns about the purchase of several U.S. port operations by Dubai Ports World, which also happened to be based in the UAE. Thankfully, Congress, in a 62 to 2 vote, forced Dubai Ports World to abandon plans to enter the U.S. port market after lawmakers cited security concerns and argued that foreign governments should NOT own strategic assets such as U.S. ports. And their response was to the immediately sell off their American port operations.

In fact, after this deal fell apart, Congress passed a law requiring all overseas cargo containers to be inspected before they’re loaded onto a U.S.-bound ship, but to this day that law has NEVER gone into effect...gee I wonder why...sarcastically said.

And while this deal with Gulftainer is claimed to have been fully vetted and gotten clearance to move forward from ain't that a joke...the U.S. Department of the Treasury... another joke...the Federal Maritime Commission, and the Florida Department of Transportation... questions must be raised as to why we have allowed an Arab country...a muslim now control one of our nation's most critical ports and why we are allowing that company to possible gain control of other ports throughout our country.

But I think we all know the answer to that one and it starts and ends with Barack HUSSEIN Obama's nefarious agenda for our beloved America...but I think you all know that or by now you all should.

And that my friends is the saddest thing of all.