2006 MOST CORRUPT POLITICIANS

Judicial Watch Announces List of Washington’s
“Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians” for 2006
List Also Includes 6 "Dishonorable Mentions"
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today released its 2006 list of Washington’s “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians.” The list, in alphabetical order, includes:
1. Jack Abramoff, Former Lobbyist – Abramoff is at the center of a massive public corruption investigation by the Department of Justice that, in the end, could involve as many as a dozen members of Congress. Abramoff pleaded guilty to conspiracy, fraud and a host of other charges on January 3, 2006, and was sent to prison in November to serve a five-year, 10-month sentence for defrauding banks of $23 million in Florida in 2000.

2. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) – In January 2006, Hillary Clinton’s fundraising operation was fined $35,000 by the Federal Election Commission for failing to accurately report more than $700,000 in contributions to Clinton’s Senate 2000 campaign. New information also surfaced in 2006 raising more questions about Hillary and her brother Anthony Rodham’s connection to the Clinton Pardongate scandal, where presidential pardons were allegedly traded in exchange for cash and other favors.

3. Former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-CA) – In November 2005, Cunningham pleaded guilty to federal charges of conspiracy to commit bribery, mail fraud, wire fraud, and tax evasion. He was sentenced to 8 years, four months in prison and ordered to pay $1.8 million in restitution in March 2006.

4. Former Rep. Tom Delay (R-TX) – Tom DeLay, who was forced to step down from his position as House Majority Leader and then resign from Congress, decided in 2006 not to run for re-election. Congressman DeLay has been embroiled in a series of scandals from bribery to influence peddling, and was indicted twice by grand juries in Texas.

5. Former Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) – Foley left the House in disgrace after news broke that he had been sending predatory homosexual emails to a House page. A recent House Ethics Committee report indicated that Republican leaders knew about Foley’s dangerous behavior, but failed to take action. Democrats, meanwhile, shopped the story to the press to influence the elections. Outrageously, the Committee recommended no punishment for those involved.

6. Rep. Denny Hastert (R-IL) – In addition to mishandling the Foley scandal, outgoing House Speaker Dennis Hastert allowed House ethics process to grind to a halt on his watch. Gary Condit, Cynthia McKinney, William Jefferson, John Conyers, Tom Delay, Duke Cunningham, Jim McDermott, Patrick Kennedy are examples of alleged wrongdoers who faced little-to-no ethics enforcement in the House.

7. Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) – Hastings is one of only six federal judges to be removed from office through impeachment and has accumulated staggering liabilities ranging from $2,130,006 to $7,350,000. Hastings was “next in line” for Chairmanship of the House Select Committee on Intelligence until a wave of protest forced Nancy Pelosi to select another candidate. Nonetheless, Hastings is expected to continue to serve on the Intelligence Committee.

8. Rep. William “Dollar Bill” Jefferson (D-LA) – Jefferson is alleged to have accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes to help broker high-tech business deals in Nigeria. According to press reports, he was also caught on tape discussing the deals, while an FBI search of his home uncovered $90,000 in cash stuffed in his freezer.

9. Former Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) – Ohio Republican Congressman Bob Ney resigned in early November 2006, three weeks after pleading guilty for accepting bribes from an Indian casino in exchange for legislative favors. Ney was the first congressman to be convicted of a crime in the web of scandals involving former lobbyist Jack Abramoff and is expected to serve a jail sentence.

10. Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) – Senator Reid came under fire in 2006 for failing to properly report to Congress a $700,000 land deal. Reid also accepted more than $30,000 of Abramoff-tainted money allegedly in return for his ''cooperation'' in matters related Nevada Indian gaming.

Dishonorable Mentions include:
1. Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) – According to complaints released by the House Ethics Committee recently, aides to Representative John Conyers (D-MI) alleged their former boss repeatedly violated House ethics rules, forcing them to serve as his personal servants, valets, and as campaign staff while on the government payroll.

2. Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) – In May 2006, Kennedy crashed his car into a Capitol Hill barricade at nearly 3 a.m. in the morning. Kennedy blamed the incident on a reaction to prescription pills, but officers at the
scene said he smelled of alcohol. Nonetheless, they escorted him home rather than arresting him.

3. Former Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) – McKinney assaulted a Capitol Hill police officer in April after refusing to go through a metal detector. While McKinney was never forced to answer in a court of law for her behavior, she lost her bid for re-election in 2006.

4. Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) – Iraq war critic John Murtha was incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s first choice for House Majority Leader despite the ethical skeletons in his closet. Murtha is an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1980 “Abscam” scandal, which included the arrest and convictions of a senator and six congressmen. Murtha, whose current ethics continue to be questioned, lost his bid for Majority Leader to Maryland Democrat Steny Hoyer.

5. Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) – News reports surfaced in 2006 that Illinois Senator Barak Obama entered into an unusual land deal with a now-indicted political fundraiser, Tony Rezko. The complicated real estate transaction occurred when it was widely known that Rezko was under federal investigation in a political corruption scandal.

6. David Safavian, Former Bush Administration Official – Safavian, the former White House Chief of Procurement and former Chief of Staff for the General Services Administration, was indicted on September 19, 2006 on five counts of lying about his dealings with former lobbyist Jack Abramoff and obstructing a Senate investigation of his dealings. Safavian resigned from his White House position three days prior to his arrest.

“This list shows public corruption is endemic to our nation’s capital and that the anti-corruption work of Judicial Watch is needed more than ever,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The list could be much longer, as there are far too many politicians who abuse the public trust and place themselves above the law.”

###
Source: http://www.judicialwatch.org/6091.shtml

2006 BAD, 2007 WORSE?

From the events of the past year: Military Commissions Act (HR 6166); Pervasive government wire-tapping; Torture of "enemy combatants"; And constant media assisted "terror" fear-mongering, I can only expect more of the same for this "new" year.

Ecclesiastes 1:9-10 (King James Version)
The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.

What are we to expect this year? More erosion of civil-rights; Suspension of travel priviliges; More government intrusion into the everyday lives of law abiding citizens with the pretext of "Home-land Security".
Who knows? But, one thing is sure: We've come a long way, baby! And more of the "globalist" tricks will continue to transform our republic into a third-world dictatorship, for safety of course! And expect the "holy war on evil" to escalate; Also, "shock and awe" tactics will continue. My question is how much longer the citizens will tolerate "domestic shock and awe"? Are we still in the western hemisphere? Or, are we now in Limbo?

Or has our country become Colombia, or maybe Cuba? Who knows? I just can't put my finger on it any more.

.

Arsenio.

.

GOD HAS A CHURCH

God Has a Church

It is not the great cathedral,
Neither is it the national establishment
Neither is it the various denominations.
It is the people
who love God
and keep his commandments.
“Where two or three are gathered
in my name,
There I am in the midst of them.”
[Matthew 18: 20]

Where Christ is among the humble few,
This is Christ’s church,
for the presence of the high and Holy One Who inhabiteth eternity
CAN ALONE CONSTITUTE
A CHURCH
[The Upward Look, Page 315]

Source: http://www.temcat.com/Garden-Insp/god's_church.htm

GOD REJECTS SAUL

22And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.
23For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.
24And Saul said unto Samuel, I have sinned: for I have transgressed the commandment of the LORD, and thy words: because I feared the people, and obeyed their voice.
25Now therefore, I pray thee, pardon my sin, and turn again with me, that I may worship the LORD.
26And Samuel said unto Saul, I will not return with thee: for thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, and the LORD hath rejected thee from being king over Israel.
27And as Samuel turned about to go away, he laid hold upon the skirt of his mantle, and it rent.
28And Samuel said unto him, The LORD hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of thine, that is better than thou.
29And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent.

1 Samuel 15:22-29 (King James Version)

CHOOSE LIFE

1And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before thee, and thou shalt call them to mind among all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath driven thee,

2And shalt return unto the LORD thy God, and shalt obey his voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thine heart, and with all thy soul;

3That then the LORD thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath scattered thee.

4If any of thine be driven out unto the outmost parts of heaven, from thence will the LORD thy God gather thee, and from thence will he fetch thee:

5And the LORD thy God will bring thee into the land which thy fathers possessed, and thou shalt possess it; and he will do thee good, and multiply thee above thy fathers.

6And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.

7And the LORD thy God will put all these curses upon thine enemies, and on them that hate thee, which persecuted thee.

8And thou shalt return and obey the voice of the LORD, and do all his commandments which I command thee this day.

9And the LORD thy God will make thee plenteous in every work of thine hand, in the fruit of thy body, and in the fruit of thy cattle, and in the fruit of thy land, for good: for the LORD will again rejoice over thee for good, as he rejoiced over thy fathers:

10If thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which are written in this book of the law, and if thou turn unto the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul.

11For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off.

12It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?

13Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?

14But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.

15See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil;

16In that I command thee this day to love the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his judgments, that thou mayest live and multiply: and the LORD thy God shall bless thee in the land whither thou goest to possess it.

17But if thine heart turn away, so that thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them;

18I denounce unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish, and that ye shall not prolong your days upon the land, whither thou passest over Jordan to go to possess it.

19I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

20That thou mayest love the LORD thy God, and that thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him: for he is thy life, and the length of thy days: that thou mayest dwell in the land which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.

Deuteronomy 30 (King James Version)

ILLEGALS TRANSFORMING AMERICA

Romanizing America through Illegal ImmigrationBy Pastor Ralph Ovadal, April 10, 2006.

A shortened, edited version of this article appeared in the British Church Newspaper, May 12, 2006.

In recent weeks, the advocates of the "rights" of illegal Mexican immigrants, accompanied by and even led by Roman Catholic priests, have staged rallies, protests, and parades all across the United States of America. For instance, on March 25, 500,000 people took to the streets of Los Angeles, flying Mexican flags and chanting slogans such as "Viva Mexico!" Another 500,000 marched in Dallas on April 9, waving Mexican flags with "Our Lady of Guadalupe" emblazoned in the center. This outburst of protest was a response to several immigration and border reform measures working their way through the U.S. Congress. Due to the efforts of the Mexican government, the criminal neglect of our U.S. government, and a porous U.S.-Mexican border, there are now somewhere between eleven million and twenty million illegal immigrants in the United States of America.
I have been talking about this situation for years on my "Heart of the Matter" program because of the social, political, and most importantly, spiritual affects that the alien invasion is having on America. It is unfortunate that very few people have been concerned with the religious aspect of this issue. Over the past few years, I have spent time pointing out that the Roman Catholic Church is aiding and abetting the criminal invasion of America from Mexico because the illegals are almost all Roman Catholics. That church/state which maintains political, diplomatic relationships with the UN, the EU, the Russian Federation, the Organization for the Liberation of Palestine, and 174 nations around the globe is working both legally and criminally on behalf of a movement, the goal of which is to bring as many Mexicans into America as possible so as to eventually take over a large chunk of our nation for Mexico. This multifaceted movement, made up of radical organizations such as La Raza (The Race), Aztlan, and MEChA, is called Reconquista (Reconquest).
The leadership of the Roman Catholic Church has a stake in Reconquista. The pope and his henchmen are looking to turn America, founded and still a Protestant country, into a Roman Catholic country. But space requires that I narrow this discourse down to providing documentation of that just-made claim, which to some people makes me not only a "Catholic basher" but also a "white supremacist." That's what Alex Koppleman, a columnist for the Drexel University magazine Dragonfire, called me in a March 30, 2006 column in which he included this statement from an article I wrote some time ago:
. . . the Roman Catholic Church has its own plan of reconquest. She is determined to reestablish the power she once exercised over the civil governments and populations of the world. The pope, along with the Reconquista cadre, views South, Central, and North Americas as being one "from Argentina to Alaska." On several occasions, Pope John Paul II has "consecrated" this "America" to "Our Lady of Guadalupe." The Mexican people streaming across America's porous southern border are Roman Catholics. It is in the interest of the Vatican to establish as many Roman Catholics as possible in the United States of America. The pope and his partners in spiritual crime care little how the job is done—whether illegally or legally—just so it is done.1
That is a statement I stand by and which stands on solid ground. The Roman Catholic Church is determined to turn Protestant America into a Roman Catholic country, and her best bet to do that is to bring as many Catholics into our nation as possible.
To that end, the Justice for Immigrants campaign was founded by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Twenty other Catholic organizations have joined together with the bishops in a massive educational, media, and political campaign to block immigration reform in America. On its website, the Justice for Immigrants campaign lists the bishops' "criteria for the reform of the U.S. immigration system, including . . . abandonment of the border 'blockade' enforcement strategy."2 Plainly speaking, the goal is to eliminate America's security along our border with Mexico! The U.S. bishops together with their Mexican counterparts, of course with papal consent and encouragement, have determined to use Catholic treasure, influence, and manpower to erase America's border! This is not surprising to the discerning Christian. Sovereign nations have always been a hindrance to the pope's effective exercise of his office as "father of kings, governor of the world and Vicar of Christ."3
The bishops and their comrades in crime are sparing no expense or effort to influence every strata and institution of American culture. Reading the material which the Justice for Immigrants campaign has produced for distribution to school children is reminiscent of the propaganda used by the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network for the same purpose!
Mark D. Franken, executive director of Migration and Refugee Services for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, recently told the Washington Times that all of America's 197 Catholic dioceses "are in some way backing the campaign, with more than 70 being particularly active."4 As Mr. Franken points out, Catholic advocacy on behalf of the illegal alien movement is highly organized, and the troops are getting their marching orders from the top. Consider this from the Catholic Zenit News Services: "Representatives of the Holy See and of the Catholic Church in Mexico are opposing a U.S. bill on immigrants, considering it a violation of human rights. . . . On Sunday, the California Catholic Conference of Bishops appealed for full migratory reform, which will include the legalization earned by illegal workers with their effort."5 So now criminals "earn" the right to have their criminality ignored by taking a job and getting paid for it. The lack of general outrage over such Romanist remarks cannot help but remind one of Revelation 18:23—"by thy sorceries were all nations deceived."
On January 22, 2003, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, in concert with the Catholic Bishops of Mexico, issued Strangers No Longer: Together on the Journey of Hope—A Pastoral Letter Concerning Migration. This lengthy, authoritative document contains statement after brazen statement endorsing and encouraging illegal immigration from Mexico. The bishops include a glossary of terms in which they differentiate between an immigrant; a legal immigrant; a refugee; and a migrant, one who freely moves back and forth across national borders. The bishops make it clear throughout the document that their concern is for "undocumented" immigrants and migrants—the illegals.
While the majority of Americans find illegal immigration damaging and dangerous, the bishops find it otherwise: "We speak as two episcopal conferences but as one Church, united in the view that migration between our two nations is necessary and beneficial."6 Yes, the Romanists find "migration" necessary and beneficial to the cause of Rome; hence, the bishops call for an underground railroad to help illegals make it into America from Mexico:
We call upon pastors and lay leaders to ensure support for migrant and immigrant families. We urge communities to offer migrant families hospitality . . . We commend church communities that have established migrant shelters . . . We call on the local church to help newcomers integrate . . .
The reality of migration, especially when the journey entails clandestine border crossings, is often fraught with uncertainties and even dangers. As migrants leave their homes, pastoral counseling should be offered . . .7
To buttress their lawless instructions, the bishops turn to antichrists of the past:
Catholic teaching has a long and rich tradition in defending the right to migrate. . . .8
As Pope John Paul II wrote in Ecclesia in America: ". . . They often bring with them a cultural and religious heritage which is rich in Christian elements. The Church . . . is committed to spare no effort in developing her own pastoral strategy among these immigrant people, in order to help them settle in their new land and to foster a welcoming attitude among the local population, in the belief that a mutual openness will bring enrichment to all."9
Pope Pius XII reaffirms the Church's commitment to caring for pilgrims, aliens, exiles, and migrants of every kind in his apostolic constitution Exsul Familia, affirming . . . "the sovereignty of the State, although it must be respected, cannot be exaggerated to the point that access to this land is, for inadequate or unjustified reasons, denied . . ."10
Of course, the quote from John Paul takes us back to my claim that the leadership of the Catholic church is so very concerned about the "human rights" of illegals because those illegals not only add numbers to the pope's flock but also spread Romanism in America. The bishops are not shy on that point and give some straightforward instruction for equipping the illegals pouring in from Mexico: "Prayer books and guides to social and religious services should be provided along the way and at the points of arrival. The migrants should be reminded of their role as evangelizers."11 It is one thing for a religion to equip its followers as "evangelizers," but it is quite another thing when they are being equipped as criminals violating the border of a free nation.
The bishops' pastoral letter is far from being the only documentation which could be given to prove that the Roman Catholic Church is unlawfully using illegal Mexican immigrants to build her power base in America. For instance, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of Washington, D.C. said this about illegals in El Paso Times: "They . . . come with the values that are so needed in the United States today. . . . This is a special moment in the history of the Catholic church and the history of migration."12
Archbishop José Gómez of San Antonio, speaking of the illegals, boldly points out: "[T]he values they bring . . . is [sic] making North American culture return to its Christian roots. . . . The values of the immigrants are very basic, reflecting a profound Catholicism."13 Anyone who knows America's history would contest the suggestion that our nation has Catholic roots. Quite the opposite!
Cardinal Norberto Rivera, Mexico's archbishop, is jumping the gun in his claim that America is now a Catholic nation; but he is right on all other counts when he says, "In the north the emigrants, Mexicans and those who pass through Mexico, are bearing the faith to the north of our continent. Only five years ago the [Catholic] church was in the minority in the United States, it is now the majority."14
Of course, the Catholic bishops are the generals in the offensive against America's sovereignty, security, and Protestant identity. The thousands upon thousands of diocesan and religious order priests are the frontline troops who are charged with turning rhetoric into reality. As might be expected, the priests tend to be even blunter than their bishops with regard to the Catholic church's "human rights" work on behalf of illegal Mexican immigrants. For instance, consider this from Priest Paul Marx, as quoted in the well-respected Catholic paper, the Wanderer, May 6, 1987: "America is a dying nation. I tell the Mexicans when I am down in Mexico to keep on having children, and then to take back what we took from them: California, Texas, Arizona, and then to take the rest of the country as well."15
As is plain from that quote, the Vatican's corrupt campaign to funnel illegal "evangelizers" into America did not start in 2003; but it is increasingly out in the open, more aggressive, and more anti-American. For instance, the 2003 pastoral letter of the Mexican and American bishops openly decries the "xenophobic and racist attitudes"16 of those Americans who are demanding an end to the alien invasion from Mexico. They are also outraged that our border patrol would actually arrest individuals criminally crossing our borders. "Alarmingly, migrants often are treated as criminals."17 The bishops echo the shrill charges of the leftist Reconquista crowd when they speak of "reports of physical abuse of migrants by U.S. Border Patrol agents"18 and claim that "the U.S. record of handling undocumented unaccompanied minors from Mexico and other countries is shameful."19
Oh, and did I mention that in 2003 the bishops also suggested a Catholic commission "study the possibility of a more comprehensive preparation and assignment of clergy, religious, and lay people who dedicate themselves to pastoral accompaniment of migrants"20? Isn't that subtle—Romanist-trained guides for the illegal aliens breaching our borders from Mexico? But, as the bishops gloated in their letter, "This cross-border collaboration has already reaped positive results."21 It certainly has. The Roman Catholic Church in America has been reinvigorated, and its prospects are bright if only the move toward immigration reform and the resecuring of America's borders can be staved off.
The pope and his people do not care one whit about the economic and social effects of their campaign to Romanize America. They do not care that we now have thousands of vicious MS-13 gang members, illegals from Central America, roaming the streets of American cities. The scarlet and purple cadres couldn't care less about the danger that unsecured borders pose for the citizens of America in this day of Islamic Jihad. The woman who has ridden the beast in the past wants to get back in the saddle again in the worst way. The predominately Protestant nature of America's culture and our traditional defense of our national sovereignty are obstacles which stand in the way of the world without borders which is in Rome's best interest. The bishops, of course in compliance with their boss's wishes, have seen the benefit of America's porous border and are determined to seize the moment: "Now is the time for both the United States and Mexico to . . . work toward a globalization of solidarity."22
And speaking of solidarity, we will end this brief reminder of the cold, calculating ambition of Rome with this closing encouragement to lawlessness by the Catholic bishops of America and Mexico: "We stand in solidarity with you, our migrant brothers and sisters, and we will continue to advocate on your behalf for just and fair migration policies. We commit ourselves to animate communities of Christ's disciples on both sides of the border to accompany you on your journey."23

Related article:Reconquista, Republicanism, and Rome
By Pastor Ralph Ovadal
Several years ago, I visited Northern Ireland and, for the first time, attained a clear understanding of the situation in that distressed corner of the United Kingdom. As I learned about the Troubles in Ulster, I saw parallels to an increasingly dangerous situation in the southwest portion of the United States of America.
Endnotes1. Ralph Ovadal, "Reconquista, Republicanism, and Rome," Pilgrims Covenant Church, June 30, 2004, http://www.pccmonroe.org/Ecumenism/Reconquista.htm. Back to text.2. Justice for Immigrants: A Journey of Hope, "About the Campaign," June 9, 2005, http://www.justiceforimmigrants.org/learn_about_justice.html. Back to text.3. Holy See Press Office, "Tiara," April 3, 2001, http://www.vatican.va/news_services/press/documentazione/documents/sp_ss_scv/insigne/triregno_en.html. Back to text.4. Guy Taylor, "Coast-to-coast 'movement' rages on," Washington Times, March 28, 2006, http://washingtontimes.com/national/20060328-122322-8369r.htm. Back to text.5. Zenit, "Church Concerned Over U.S. Immigration Bill, Bishops Say It Would Violate Human Rights," Zenit.org, March 28, 2006, http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=86757. Back to text.6. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and Conferencia del Episcopado Mexicano, Strangers No Longer: Together on the Journey of Hope, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Migration and Refugee Services, January 22, 2003, http://www.usccb.org/mrs/stranger.shtml. Back to text.7. Ibid. Back to text.8. Ibid. Back to text.9. Ibid. Back to text.10. Ibid. Back to text.11. Ibid. Back to text.12. Louie Gilot, "Immigration reform church goal, cardinal says," El Paso (TX) Times, June 24, 2005, http://www.borderlandnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050624/NEWS/506240376/1001. Back to text.13. José Gómez, "Latin Influence and the Future of the Church in U.S.: Interview With Archbishop José Gómez of San Antonio," Zenit.org, June 20, 2005, http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=72938. Back to text.14. Allan Wall, "The Virgin Of Guadalupe And The U.S. National Question," Memo From Mexico, Vdare.com, August 27, 2002, http://www.vdare.com/awall/quadelupe.htm, quoting El Universo (Mexico), July 28, 2002, http://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=12846&tabla=primera_H. Back to text.15. Brenda Walker, "America's Vaticrats Wish You Happy National Migration Week!" January 11, 2006, Vdare.com, http://www.vdare.com/walker/060111_migration.htm, quoting the Wanderer (St. Paul, MN), May 6, 1987. Back to text.16. USCCB, et al., Strangers No Longer. Back to text.17. Ibid. Back to text.18. Ibid. Back to text.19. Ibid. Back to text.20. Ibid. Back to text.21. Ibid. Back to text.22. Ibid. Back to text.23. Ibid.

Source: http://www.pccmonroe.org/Ecumenism/romanizingamerica.htm

AN URGENT PLEA TO ROMAN CATHOLICS

"Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." Proverbs 30:5-6
"For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass.The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:but the word of the Lord endureth for ever.And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you." I Peter 1:24-25

The religious system known as the Roman Catholic Church began to take definite shape in the Fourth Century. As the years rolled by, the Roman Church increasingly exercised power which was not hers under God's system of delegated authority; and she increasingly promulgated unbiblical doctrine even as she persecuted those who obediently clung to the Word of God. In this, the Roman Catholic Teaching Magisterium has made itself an adversary of God's revealed Word, the Bible. The Word of God and the word of the Roman Church are at direct odds with each other on many foundational issues including, most critically, how one receives forgiveness and salvation from God. It is impossible for one to be obedient to both the Roman Church and the Bible, just as it is impossible to follow both the pope and Jesus. In the short space allowed by this tract, I would like to point out a few of the doctrines held by the Roman Catholic Church which are in direct conflict with God's Word (Mat. 15:8-9). Due to space constraints, I will not directly quote the RCC documents which contain the doctrines I am dealing with, and I will simply reference Bible passages. I assume Catholics will know where the Catholic teachings are found, or they will contact me for documentation. I pray that they read the Scripture verses referenced, which are representative of many more verses in each case.
The Roman Catholic Church teaches that the pope is Christ's vicar (representative, voice) on earth, the Holy Father, and head of Christ's Church and that he is infallible in matters of faith and morals when speaking officially in that office. Peter is held to be the first pope.
Roman Catholic claims concerning the papacy and Peter are soundly refuted by God's Word. The Holy Spirit, not the pope, is the voice of God to men's consciences convicting of sin and confirming the Word of God (Jn. 14:26, 16:7-8; I Cor. 2:12-13; Eph. 6:17). The Bible nowhere sets up one man as the head of the Church, but instead clearly states that Christ is the Head of the Church (Col. 1:18; Eph. 1:22, 5:23).
Peter never led others to believe that he was the head of the Church, but instead referred to himself as "an elder" (I Pet. 5:1-3). Peter is never portrayed in Scripture as being the head apostle or "pope"; in fact, at key times in the beginning of the Church, other apostles seem to be in charge in a given situation (Acts 15:1-30). Further, if Peter was acting as the "Holy Father" in Rome, then a reading of Paul's letter to the Romans would seem to imply that Paul did not have much respect for Peter as the infallible head of the Church (Rom. 1:11-15)! By the way, God's Word clearly commands Christians not to address anyone in a spiritual sense as "father" (Mat. 23:9). In light of the Roman Catholic claims about their first pope, it seems more than a little strange that only James and Jude wrote less of the New Testament than Peter wrote. There is a plethora of other biblical evidences which make it obvious that the Roman Church is dead wrong when it comes to its claims about the papacy.
Surely, the checkered and at times sordid history of the papacy is also proof that the pope is not the infallible, holy vicar of Christ. Some popes have been fornicators, homosexuals, and murderers as even Roman Catholic historians admit. Many have been grasping political opportunists. Popes have anathematized their predecessors, wielded power over civil rulers in an ungodly fashion, and presided over horrific, brutal events for which the modern Roman Church has ended up offering tepid apologies under great pressure. How could such men be the "vicar of Christ"? The Roman Catholic Church is in great conflict with God's Word over the papacy. Which will you believe?
The Roman Catholic Church teaches that the bread and the wine of the Eucharist are Christ's actual, physical body and blood.
This doctrine is wrongly based on a figure of speech Jesus used to stress His disciples' need to remain in and fully trust Him; to learn from Him; to live for Him; to rely upon, obey, and follow Him in all things (Jn. 6:48-58). Jesus also said that He is "the door" (Jn. 10:9) and "a light" (Jn. 12:46). The Bible identifies Jesus as a "Lamb" (Jn. 1:29) and as a "rock" (1 Cor. 10:4). There are times when God's Word uses figures of speech to stress an eternal truth. Those instances are always obvious, but apparently not to the Roman Church Magisterium.
Jesus Christ, the firstborn among many brethren (Rom. 8:29, Col. 1:18), for our sake possesses a resurrected, glorified body (Phil. 2:5-11, Jn. 20:26-27) just as His followers will one day possess (I Cor. 15:35-58). He sits at the right hand of God the Father (Rom. 8:34). Christ's body cannot be, and is not, split up thousands of ways every day by Roman priests all over the world in the Mass. Further, if Christ meant for us to literally eat His flesh and drink His blood, He would have been commanding us to commit cannibalism, an abominable violation of God's law. During the Last Supper with His disciples, Jesus was physically present when He handed out the wine and bread saying, "This is my body . . . my blood . . ." (Lk. 22:17-20).
Through the Mass, the Roman Church teaches its members to literally worship the bread and the wine, and her priests claim to have the power to turn those physical elements into the Son of God and then "immolate" Him on their altar. In this they profess to repeatedly kill the Lord Jesus Christ and sacrifice Him for the remission of sin! The Scriptures make it clear that Jesus' death on the cross was fully sufficient to provide salvation for all who repent and believe the gospel (Heb. 7:27, 9:12, 9:26-28, 10:10; I Pet. 3:18). What Jesus Christ has commanded His followers to do as a "remembrance" of His death and their inheritance of eternal life through belief in Him (Lk. 22:19-20), the Roman Church has turned into a blasphemous, pagan ritual which misleads millions and keeps them in bondage, separated from Christ and salvation. No true Christian can have any part of it (I Cor. 10:20-22).
The Roman Catholic Church teaches that, for salvation to be gained, one must do certain works and participate in certain sacraments ordained by the church.
To receive salvation, one must be justified before God. In other words, the penalty for one's sins must be paid so that the justice God demands is satisfied (Rom. 3:24, 5:8-9). Jesus paid the penalty for sin with His blood. The Bible tells us that once a sinner repents of his sins, believes the gospel, and calls upon the name of the Lord for salvation, he is justified by faith for the sake of Christ (Mk. 1:15; Rom. 5:1, 10:9-13). The Roman Church insists that the sinner must also do certain works to achieve justification with God and that Christ's death was not fully sufficient to secure forgiveness and eternal salvation for the believer. However, the Scriptures teach over and over that, while all men are commanded to obey God's holy law and live holy lives, it is impossible to achieve justification and resulting salvation through the law or by any work of obedience but only by faith (Rom. 3:28; Gal. 2:16, 3:11; Eph. 2:8-9). While true salvation will result in righteous works, salvation does not in anyway result from righteous works. Those who teach that man must do certain works to achieve salvation are presumptuously teaching that man can do the impossible and satisfy God's perfect standard of justice and holiness by human efforts. They are also blasphemously teaching that once those works have been done, God must grant salvation or owe the worker a debt (Rom. 4:4-5)! The Roman Catholic Church cannot be the true Church since it teaches this false gospel (Gal. 1:8-9)!
The Roman Catholic Church insists that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was born without sin, lived a sinless life on this earth as a virgin, and was assumed into heaven.
The Roman Catholic Church contradicts the Bible with these claims and many others that they make about the mother of Jesus. Mary was a young woman whom God sovereignly chose to bear the Messiah. She was a virgin until after His birth, and then Joseph "knew" her (Mat. 1:25). In other words, their relationship was physically consummated after Jesus was born. To say otherwise is to indulge in the same flight of fantasy as the homosexuals who claim the sodomites who wanted to "know" Lot's two guests merely wanted to become acquainted with them (Gen. 19:5)! It is also to ignore the unimpeachable biblical evidence that Jesus had natural brothers and sisters, some of whom are even named in the Scriptures (Mk. 6:3). Mary was a pure, godly woman, no doubt; but she was not sinless any more than she was a perpetual virgin. Mary spoke of "God my Saviour" (Lk. 1:47). Mary, like every human being, belonged to Adam's fallen race and needed a Savior! The Scriptures tell us, "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" (Rom. 3:23). Nowhere does the Bible tell us that Mary was an exception to that rule just as it nowhere tells us that she was assumed into heaven.
The Roman Catholic Church practices baby baptism and teaches that baptism is necessary for salvation.
God's Word clearly commands that baptism is to follow salvation. Belief in the gospel and the resulting spiritual rebirth is a necessary prerequisite for baptism (Acts 8:12, 8:36-38). Although in some cases, households—whole families of new believers—were baptized by an apostle just as happens occasionally today, nowhere does the Bible make allowance for baby baptism.
The Roman Catholic Church forbids priests to marry.
This too is unbiblical and condemned in the Scriptures as a "doctrine of devils" (I Tim. 4:1-3). Even under the Mosaic Covenant, the priests were allowed to marry. The man the Roman Catholic Church claims was the first pope was married (I Cor. 9:5)! Here again, the Roman Church is teaching a false doctrine and wresting the Scriptures (II Pet. 3:15-18). Will you believe God's Word or trust your eternity to a church which legislates and upholds a doctrine of devils?
These are a few of many instances where the Roman Catholic Church's doctrines are in direct contradiction to God's Word. In light of this, Roman Catholics must choose to either believe the Roman Catholic Magisterium or believe the Word of God. It is a choice with profound eternal consequences (Mt. 7:21-29). The Roman Catholic Church insists that its traditions and the Bible are to be given equal weight. This is bad enough; but the reality is that whenever the Roman Church's teachings clash with the Word of God, it is always the Church's doctrine which is upheld while the Word of God is explained away. If you are a Roman Catholic, I care deeply about you; and that is why I urge you to consider all the fundamental ways in which your church is in serious conflict with the Word of God and then choose which you are going to believe. You cannot have it both ways. You cannot serve two masters. This is not a choice between being a Roman Catholic or a "Protestant." It is the choice between being a Roman Catholic or a Christian.
If you want to be forgiven of your sins, born again, and filled with the blessed assurance of salvation (Rom. 8:16), then believe the Word of God instead of the Roman Catholic Church. Confess your sins to God rather than to a priest. Call upon the name of the Lord for salvation instead of praying to Mary and "the saints" and relying on pagan rituals. Then follow Jesus and live your life according to God's Holy Word instead of the corrupt decrees of Rome.
—Pastor Ralph Ovadal
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."John 8:32

Source: http://www.pccmonroe.com/Ecumenism/urgent.htm

ROME'S LIMBO

The Man of Sin will change the eternal destiny of millions with a word: Benedict XVI attempts to put limbo into limbo.


British Church Newspaper – 8th December 2006
Dr Clive Gillis

The present writer trained in operative obstetrics under a devout Irish Roman Catholic Senior Registrar in the late sixties when infant mortality was higher than it is now.
I have witnessed the heart rending screams of terrified Romanist mothers when an infant died at birth. There was the desperate attempt to locate a priest to make a mercy dash to the hospital, followed by a conspiracy to fudge the time of the infant’s death to give the mother hope that the priest had arrived in time, when really she knew in her heart that the baby was consigned to limbo for all eternity. The whole business was agonising, dishonest and sickening.
Limbo is a word greatly over used in common speech and literature and, of course, by journalists. The headline writers had a field day following the Pope’s attempt in early October to dismiss the idea. As the BBC put it, “Vatican is to review state of limbo”.
‘Not official’
All the comment was along the same lines ‑ that the concept has never been official church teaching. But everybody knows Rome’s aversion to doctrine in dealing with bereaved parents, and rubbish it in private. Others believe that Pope Benedict was too intellectual to entertain woolly concepts, or that limbo was putting Rome at a disadvantage in competing with the Muslims who believed that dead infants went to heaven.
Monstrous foundations
So it is time to look at limbo and appreciate the monstrous foundations of this fiction before Rome can cover her tracks. And if she does succeed in extinguishing limbo, including a convincing explanation as to what happens to all its little inhabitants as a result, verbal tradition may remain the only evidence that this weird fabrication ever existed. Tangible historical evidence of limbo is already quite scarce.
Limbo comes from the Latin LIMBUS meaning a hem, border, or something distinct from that to which it is attached. It blossomed as a theological concept in medieval times.
The obvious place to look for an insight into the medieval mind is Dante’s Divine Comedy. Here he describes how “midway” in this life he “awoke to find (himself) in a dark wood, where the right road was wholly lost and gone”. He then describes a mammoth trek which led him on a bizarre journey through hell, onto purgatory, and finally to paradise, as he searched for the “beatific vision” of the glorified Christ. What a contrast to the apostle Paul’s comment in 2 Corinthians 5:8, “We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord”! Even bearing in mind the general opinion that Dante’s, “version of this region is more generous than most,” we nevertheless discover in the Divine Comedy that Rome has inspired some horrific imagery and appalling concepts.
Dante, having entered “the hall way of the futile” and passed through “Hell gate”, encounters Charon, ferryman of the dead across the Acheron, a “joyless” great river of Hell. Once across Dante descends to the First Circle of Hell’s pit. This is Rome’s Limbus patrium which is defined in her own words as “the temporary place or state of the souls of the just”. It is in stark contrast to the never ending Limbus infantium, “the permanent place or state of those unbaptised children . . . dying without grievous personal guilt (that) are excluded from the beatific vision on account of original sin alone”.
There are no agonised cries here, simply a crescendo of sighs, “quivering for ever through the eternal air ... their sorrows multiplying”. These hapless “sorrowers” are held here, “not for sin but because their merit lacked its chief fulfilment ... baptism”. These poor, unbaptised infants say, “For such defect alone ‑ no other wrong ‑ we are lost ‑ without hope we ever live and long (for the beatific vision)”.
One suspects many Romanists have never heard of Limbus patrium but every Roman Catholic is chillingly aware of Limbus infantium otherwise known as limbo.
Reformed position
The Reformed position concerning infants dying un‑baptised is clearer. The Westminster Confession Ch X sec 3 states “Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit”.
But this could imply that there are elect infants who go to Heaven and un‑elect infants who go to Hell. Subsequent commentary on this passage from the Westminster Confession has tended to be along the lines of the Declaratory Statement of the USA Free Presbyterians in 1903 which stated, “We believe that all dying in infancy are included in the election of grace, and are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who works when and where and how He pleases.”
William Shedd in his book on Calvinism thought this Declaratory Statement was not necessary and that the Puritan authors of the Confession had simply not commented upon the extent of the election, but Shedd assumes that they felt that it encompassed all dying in infancy.
The Book of Common prayer 1662 states in the rubric, “It is certain by God’s Word, that children which are baptized, dying before they commit actual sin, are undoubtedly saved”.
The Church of England made no clear pronouncement on the position of the unbaptised infant but the minister had to accompany the coffin to the interment and the infant buried in consecrated ground. Anglican formularies seem to follow Scripture in not expressing a definite opinion on the subject but neither did they deny the infant salvation. It has been suggested that this was to prevent infanticide. The churches that have a problem are those like Rome that teach baptismal regneration.
Roman Catholicism built its limbo from the human ebb and flow of 1500 years of teaching by church fathers, theologians and popes, with each seemingly harsh edict tempered by a softer one in the way that human beings deal in their own affairs. But Pope Benedict, who claims loudly never to have believed in limbo himself, may find this unofficial fudge now so settled in the Romanist psyche that it is harder to ban it than it would be to shed a crisper teaching.
One person who was influential in advancing the idea of limbo was Pope Innocent III (1161‑12160). He reckoned that un‑baptised babies would suffer, “no other pain whether from material fire or the worm of conscience except the pain of being deprived forever of the vision of God”. However, Thomas Aquinas felt that, if the babies were conscious of their loss, this was worse than Hell. He therefore taught that un‑baptised infants never come to know spiritually what they are missing but might have a natural inkling, hence the crescendo of wistful sighs in Dante’s limbo.
Decrees of urgency
The agonies of those suffering the loss of baptised infants in this world are however heightened by decrees on the urgency of baptising infants to outwit the spectre of death stalking the infant. An early pope (AD 385) wrote “We desire infants ... in want of the water of holy baptism be succoured with all possible speed ... Enough of past mistakes”. The Council of Florence 1439 was so convinced of the efficacy of the actual act of water baptism that it decreed, “in case of necessity ... laymen or laywomen or even pagans or heretics may baptise provided they observe the Church’s form and intend to do what the Church does”.
Threat from Islam
One interesting conjecture, put forward in the press, is that Benedict, and indeed his predecessor John Paul II, who also mooted the discontinuation of limbo in favour of “a more coherent and enlightened way”, were both motivated by the threat from Islam. The BBC reckoned that this was an, “attempt by the Vatican to prevent people in developing countries with high infant mortality rates turning to Islam ‑ Muslims believe the souls of stillborn babies go straight to paradise”.
Equally widely reported is the red hot denial of Father John MacDaid, a theologian and principal of the Catholic Heythrop College at the University of London, that competition with Islam has anything to do with the move. He insists “I don't think there is any rivalry here”. Heythrop is of course the old Jesuit institution incorporated into the university but continuing the traditional Jesuit ethos. Heythrop now promotes itself as, “a natural . .. forum for the study and practice of the encounter between Christianity and the other major religious traditions ... The Centre is committed to ... fostering the practice of interreligious dialogue".
An internet search confirms that at popular level Muslims do solidly believe that if any baby dies the infant goes straight to heaven forthcoming to indicate that this general belief is Quran based. The author’s search seems rather to support one polemicist in the view that, “there is not a single verse in the Quran which says all infants that die go to Paradise”. And since the “overwhelming majority of Muslims” consider hadith (supplementary writings about what Mohammed said, did or approved of) to be essential supplements to and clarifications of the Qur'an, their pronouncements on this topic, also now accessible with search engines, are notable. They seem to show that Mohammed himself did not think it possible to know the fate of dead babies (See box below).
Could it be that the learned Jesuits have seen in this question of the fate of those dying in infancy an opportunity to enter into dialogue with Islam?
Sahih Muslim, Book 033: A'isha, the mother of the believers, said that Allah's Messenger (may be upon him) was called to lead the funeral prayer of a child of the Ansar. I (A'isha ) said: Allah's Messenger, there is happiness for this child who is a bird from the birds of Paradise for it committed no sin nor has he reached the age when one can commit sin.
He said: ‘A’isha, per adventure, it may be otherwise, because God created for Paradise those who are fit for it while they verse yet is their fathers loins and created for Hell those who are to go to Hell. He created hem for Hell while they were yet in their father's loins.
Sahib Muslim, Book 033: Abu Huraira reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) was asked about the children of the polytheists who die young. Thereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: It is Allah Who knows what they would be doing.

Source: http://www.ianpaisley.org
Email:eips_info@yahoo.co.uk

CHRISTIAN CHARACTER

1Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work,
2To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men.
3For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another.
4But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
5Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
6Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
7That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
8This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.
9But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
10A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;
11Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.
14And let our's also learn to maintain good works for necessary uses, that they be not unfruitful.
15All that are with me salute thee. Greet them that love us in the faith. Grace be with you all. Amen.
Titus 3:1-11, 14&15. KJV.

MAY I QUOTE YOU, MR. PRESIDENT?

May I Quote You, Mr. President?
by Rodrigue Tremblay

Here is a selection of quotes from President George W. Bush with accompanying dates and sources:

#1: "International law? I better call my lawyer; he didn't bring that up to me." George W. Bush, December 12, 2003.

#2: "We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace."/George W.Bush's Address to the United Nations General Assembly, September 21, 2004.

#3: "...for a century and a half now, America and Japan have formed one of the great and enduring alliances of modern times. From that alliance has come an era of peace in the Pacific."/Remark made by President George W. Bush to the Diet, Tokyo, Japan. February 18, 2002, even though the U.S. and Japan have been openly at war with each other.

#4: "One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief....My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it....If I have a chance to invade..., if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it."/remarks made by Bush to author and Houston Chronicle journalist Mickey Herskowitz, who met GWB many times in 1999, to write a biography.

#5: "These people are trying to shake the will of the Iraqi citizens, and they want us to leave...I think the world would be better off if we did leave..."/This was said by Bush during the presidential debate of September 20, 2004]

#6: "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."/Bush's remarks video clipped in Washington, D.C., as he signed the Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2005, on August 5, 2004.

#7: "Well, I think if you say you're going to do something and don't do it, that's trustworthiness." [Bush's remark during a CNN Online Chat, August 30, 2000]

#8: "I believe God wants me to be president" is a Bush's statement that came during a meeting with Rev. Richard land, head of the public policy arm of the Southern Baptist Convention, in 1999.

#9: [I was] "chosen by the grace of God to lead at that moment", is a Bush's quotation reported by Michael Duffy in Time magazine immediately after 9/11.

#10: "God told me to strike at al-Qaeda and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them" comes from a remark made by Bush to Palestinian negotiator Nabil Shaath, made to and reported by BBC News on Thursday, October 6 2005.

#11:"I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn't do my job" is a Bush's remark to a group of Amish people he met with privately on July 9, 2004, and as published by the Lancaster New Era, July 16, 2004.

#12: "The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for 'entrepreneur'" comes from a remark made by Bush during a discussion of the French economy during the 2002 G8 summit in Kananaskis, Alberta, as reported in The Times (London), July 9, 2002,

#13: 'There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.' is taken from a video of Bush's remarks in Nashville, Tennessee, September 17, 2002.

#14: "Ariel Sharon ... is a man of courage and a man of peace" is a quote reported by Glenn Kessler, in the Washington Post of Tuesday, June 3, 2003.

#15: "See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda." comes from remarks Bush made during a Social Security Conversation at the Athena Performing Arts Center in New York on May 24, 2005.

#16: "I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace" is taken from a Bush's speech at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, D.C., June 18, 2002.

#17: "This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous. And having said that, all options are on the table" is a widely known remark that Bush made during a press conference, after a meeting with EU leaders, on February 22, 2005.

#18: "Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction" is taken from Bush's speech at the Midwest Airlines Center, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on October 3, 2003.

#19: "The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him" was recorded at a Bush's White House press conference in Washington, D.C., on September 13, 2001.

#20: "I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority" was recorded at George W. Bush's White House press conference in the James S. Brady Briefing Room, Washington, D.C., on March 13, 2002.

#21: "We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories...for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them" is a statement Bush made in Washington, D.C., on May 29, 2003.

#22: "Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties [in Iraq]" is a statement made by Bush during a discussion in early 2003 about the Iraq war with Christian Coalition founder Pat Robertson in Nashville, Tennessee, and as quoted by Robertson himself.

#23: "Many Iraqis can hear me tonight in a translated radio broadcast, and I have a message for them: If we must begin a military campaign, it will be directed against the lawless men who rule your country and not against you" comes from the transcript of a Bush's speech made on March 17, 2003, days before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

#24: "Brownie (Michael Brown of FEMA), you're doing a heck of a job" is still fresh in everybody's memory; it is a public statement made by Bush about Michael D. Brown, head of Fema, following Hurricane Katrina, at Mobile Regional Airport in Mobile, Alabama. on September 2, 2005.

#25: "I'm also not very analytical. You know I don't spend a lot of time thinking about myself, about why I do things" was recorded by journalists aboard Air Force One, on June 4, 2003.

#26: "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator" is taken from an audio clip of President-elect George W. Bush, at a photo-op with congressional leaders during his first trip to Capitol Hill, Washington, D.C., Dec. 18, 2000; it was also reported on Online NewsHour, Washington, DC, December 18, 2000.

#27:"I'm the commander — see, I don't need to explain — I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being president." can be found in Bob Woodward's book "Bush at War".

#28: “I don’t have the foggiest idea about what I think about international, foreign policy” can be found in Bob Woodward's book "State of Denial."

#29: "It's amazing I won. I was running against peace, prosperity, and incumbency" is a comment made by George W. Bush, on June 14, 2001, to Göran Persson, unaware he was still on live TV.

#30: "It's very important for folks to understand that when there's more trade, there's more commerce" is a Bush's remark made during a meeting of leades of the Americas, in Quebec City, Canada, April 21, 2001.

#31: "I would still invade Iraq even if Iraq never existed"
George W. Bush's remark made to the Press-Telegram, Monday, August 21, 2006.

#32: "Like generations before us, we have a calling from beyond the stars to stand for freedom."
George W. Bush's acceptance speech at the Republic National Convention, on September 2, 2004.

#33: “Americans will speak of the battles like Fallujah. with the same awe and reverence that we now give to Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima.”
George W. Bush, November 10, 2006

#34: "We cannot rule this [an Israeli attack against Iran] out. And if it were to happen, I would understand it."
George W. Bush, November 2, 2006 (in a conversation with French President Jacques Chirac]

#35: "You can't distinguish between Al Qaeda and Saddam [Hussein] when you talk about the war on terror."
George W. Bush, September 25, 2002

#36: "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th attacks."
George W. Bush, (remarks made after a meeting with members of the Congressional Conference Committee on Energy Legislation, September 17, 2003)

#37: "When he [Saddam Hussein] chose to deny inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him."
George W. Bush, March 21, 2005, (N.B.:145 U.N. inspectors were in Iraq in December 2002 and in January 2003, just before the March 20, 2003 American –led invasion of Iraq)

#38: "You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror."
George W. Bush, September 6, 2006 (in an interview with CBS News Anchor Katie Couric)

#39: "I would say the best moment of all [in office] was when I caught a 7.5 pound perch in my lake."
George W. Bush, May 7, 2006 (while being interview by the German newspaper Bild am Sonntag)

#40: "You work three jobs? … Uniquely American, isn't it? I mean, that is fantastic that you're doing that."
George W. Bush, February 4, 2005 (comment made to a divorced mother of three, in Omaha, Nebraska)

#41: "We will make sure our troops have all that is necessary to complete their missions. That's why I went to the Congress last September and proposed fundamental — supplemental funding, which is money for armor and body parts and ammunition and fuel."
George W. Bush, September 4, 2004, (during a speech in Erie, Pa.)

#42: "It is clear our nation is reliant upon big foreign oil. — More and more of our imports come from overseas."
George W. Bush, comment made on September 25, 2000

#43: "I hope you will join me to pay down $2 trillion in debt during the next 10 years. ... We should approach our nation's budget as any prudent family would."
George W. Bush, statement made on February 27, 2001 (N.B.: From 2002 to 2006, the cumulative federal budget deficit has exceeded one and a half trillion (1.5 trillion) dollars)

#44: "Therefore, I, George W. Bush, Governor of Texas, do hereby proclaim June 10, 2000, "Jesus Day" in Texas and urge the appropriate recognition whereof, in official recognition whereof, I hereby affix my signature this 17th day of April 2000."
George W. Bush, April 17, 2001 (Governor Bush's "Jesus Day" 2000 Proclamation day of prayer)

#45: "We feel our reliance on the Creator who made us. We place our sorrows and cares before Him, seeking God's mercy. We ask forgiveness for our failures, seeking the renewal He can bring".
George W. Bush, March 30, 2002, (in a radio broadcast)

#46: "...But what if God has been holding his peace, waiting for the right man and the right nation and the right moment to act for Him and cleanse history of Evil?
George W. Bush, January 28, 2003, State of the Union address

#47: "The Columbia is lost. —The same Creator who names the stars also knows the names of the seven souls we mourn today. The crew of the shuttle Columbia did not return safely to Earth but we can pray they are safely home."
George W. Bush, on February 1, 2003, (comment made after disaster struck the space shuttle Columbia)

#48: "The best way to fight evil is to do some good. Let me qualify that—the best way to fight evil at home is to do some good. The best way to fight them abroad is to unleash the military."
George W. Bush, April 8, 2002, (in a speech in Knoxville, Tennessee)

#49: "We are going to correct the imbalances of the previous administration on the MidEast conflict"..."We are going to tilt it back toward Israel."
George W. Bush, (comment made on January 30, 2001)

#50: "As a leader, you can never admit to a mistake; that is one of the keys to being a leader."
George W. Bush, (comment to biographer Mickey Herskowitz, in 1999)

Posted, November 23, 2006, at 12:30 pm

Source: http://www.thenewamericanempire.com/blog

COMPROMISE

Jesus Himself never purchased peace by compromise. His heart overflowed with love for the whole human race, but He was never indulgent to their sins. He was too much their friend to remain silent while they were pursuing a course that would ruin their souls,---the souls He had purchased with His own blood. He labored that man should be true to his higher and eternal interest. The servants of Christ are called to the same work, and they should beware lest, in seeking to prevent discord, they surrender the truth. They are to "follow after the things which make for peace" (Rom. 14:19); BUT REAL PEACE CAN NEVER BE SECURED BY COMPROMISING PRINCIPLE. And no man can be true to principle without exciting opposition. A Christianity that is spiritual will be opposed by the children of disobedience. But Jesus bade His disciples, "Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul." Those who are true to God need not fear the power of men nor the emnity of Satan. In Christ their eternal life is secure. Their only fear shoud be lest they surrender the truth, and thus betray the trust with which God has honored them.

The Desire of Ages, Ellen G. White, 1898, pag. 355-356.

BLIND OBEDIENCE

Ex-Opus Dei Members Decry Blind Obedience

By CHARLOTTE SECTOR

May 16, 2006 — It's been more than 15 years since Tammy DiNicola left Opus Dei, but she still tries to raise awareness about the secretive and conservative Roman Catholic group.
DiNicola, 37, considers herself a faithful Catholic despite her falling out with Opus Dei, which she joined while she was in college. She stayed with the group for nearly three years. After her painful departure, she founded a support network in 1991 with other families of former Opus Dei members to shed light on what they believe are Opus Dei's true intentions.
With the upcoming release of the movie of "The Da Vinci Code," which casts Opus Dei as the villain, DiNicola's Opus Dei Awareness Network, or ODAN, has suddenly gained more attention.
"I really do feel God let me go through all this so I could be a spokesperson," DiNicola said. "If there was nothing wrong with Opus Dei, we wouldn't need to exist." ODAN isn't out to attack Opus Dei, but it would like to see more transparency.
Opus Dei lends no credence to ODAN except to express dismay at members who leave Opus Dei.
Changed Personality
DiNicola still believes the organization is untruthful in its vocation.
"Everything they do is couched in beautiful terms, sanctifying work and love, but in reality the whole process is deceiving and couched in orchestration," she said.
DiNicola was a freshman at Boston College when she went on her first Opus Dei retreat. Her parents rejoiced that their daughter took the time to deepen her faith while at school.
Without telling her parents, DiNicola joined Opus Dei and in her junior year became a numerary, a lay person who pledges celibacy and devotion to God's teachings. She moved into an all-female Opus Dei residence and slowly broke her ties with outside friends and family.
"I could tell I was a different person," she said. "When I was back home, people were devastated at how distant I was."
Her mother didn't like the change in DiNicola's personality and begged her to consider other options within the church, she said.
It was too late.
DiNicola said she had already fallen prey to what she now considers a controlling organization.
"All choices are made for you when you're in a group. You're not allowed to question anything," she said.
Her mail was read, her salary was handed over and she needed approval before reading anything or leaving the residence, she said.
"If you wanted to shop, you needed permission," DiNicola said.
Opus Dei acknowledges that many members hand over portions of their salaries but says that there is no truth behind allegations of excessive control, and that its only intention is to teach and coach.
Mother Teresa Did It
Obedience came in all sorts of ways.
She said she was presented with the cilice, a spiked chain that members strap around their upper thigh to prove their devotion. Wearing it "is not presented as an optional thing," DiNicola said.
"I think a few people in Opus Dei just mildly slap it on their back while reciting prayers," Opus Dei spokeswoman Terri Carron told ABC News' "Good Morning America." "Mother Teresa, everybody knows her life, most people wouldn't think she needs penance, but she did practice penance."
Carron also refutes the claims of excessive control.
"You have to understand that people who are giving themselves up — as I do as a supernumerary — the idea anyone would be controlling me is rather absurd," Carron said.
Dennis Dubro, 55, spent 17 years in Opus Dei before abandoning the group, and he disagrees with Carron. In his view, supernumeraries, those in the less-formal category of membership that allows people to have families and live in their own homes — are clueless about the organization's real intentions.
"I was in levels of leadership and like an onion, the outer core never finds out about these things," Dubro said. Supernumeraries make up about 70 percent of the 87,000 members worldwide, with the core representing about 20 percent.
Dubro grew close to Opus Dei while he was a student at MIT, and he eventually became a numerary. Opus Dei sent him to Australia to oversee a boys dorm, which is when he started to question the organization.

"As you move into leadership, they test your obedience and see how loyal you are," Dubro said. He likened the experience to loyalty in the Mafia, saying that he became a puppet.
"You are expected to stand up and tell the world that you are acting in your own name when you carry out the secret indications of your directors," he said. Dubro became dismayed by the manipulative elements of the organization, from the complexity of its finances to its lack of transparency.
Easy to Join, Harder to Leave?
His disloyalty led to his departure, although he said Opus Dei doesn't let its members go freely, despite what it says.
"When you talk to your spiritual director about things like that [leaving], he tells you that you will go to hell if you abandon your God-given vocation," Dubro said.
In DiNicola's case, her parents became more and more concerned in 1989 when she turned down their invitation to come home for Easter. With the help of the local clergy and a psychologist, DiNicola spent hours in counseling.
She recalls the time as extremely painful, but eventually she came to wonder why, if Opus Dei's teaching focused on friendship, it entailed abandoning her family. In addition, she found the constant pressure to recruit new members misleading and contrary to the doctrine of spreading the good word through charitable work.
She distanced herself from Opus Dei and moved in with her sister, readjusting slowly to living independently again.
"I soon realized that Opus Dei had squashed my true emotions, and so every day was an emotional roller coaster ride for months," she said.
Opus Dei's Carron counters that things don't always work out in life.
"You have to understand, this is a lifelong commitment," she said. "Many people go into a lifelong commitment, whether it's Opus Dei or a marriage, and sometimes they don't quite gel, sometimes it doesn't work for them and they get out of it and it's very sad when it ends."
DiNicola interprets her departure another way.
"I feel like I have been healed of the abuse," she said. "I felt God showed me the truth."

Source: http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=1856656&page=1

CONFEDERACY

Associate yourselves, O ye people, and ye shall be broken in pieces; and give ear, all ye of far countries: gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces; gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces.

Take counsel together, and it shall come to nought; speak the word, and it shall not stand: for God is with us.

For the LORD spake thus to me with a strong hand, and instructed me that I should not walk in the way of this people, saying,

Say ye not, A confederacy, to all them to whom this people shall say, A confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid. Isaiah 8:9-12

ECUMENISM OR INQUISITION?

CAN TWO WALK TOGETHER, EXCEPT THEY BE AGREED? AMOS 3:3.

Ever since VATICAN II {1962-1965}, there has been a concerted effort to unite all the churches to the "Mother Church". The goals of Vatican II, have almost been achieved in recent years; When most confessions admit that there is a need for all religious groups to put aside their doctrinal differences, and unite on the beliefs they hold in common. For the good of all, (they claim) their distinctive dogmas should be made less prominent. Also no religious group should proselytise. All should respect the others' beliefs, by agreeing not to disagree.

My people hath been lost sheep: their shepherds have caused them to go astray, they have turned them away on the mountains: they have gone from mountain to hill, they have forgotten their restingplace. Jeremiah 50:6 KJV.

Another goal of VATICAN II is to accentuate the "Celebration" of every event possible, such as Holi-days and feasts. Churches were induced into transforming their worship services to "Contemporary" and "Seeker-Friendly" performances. The music styles adopted are more reminiscent of Rock and Roll, and would have made most Protestants ashamed, just 40 years ago. But, now it's the "New" approach to worship the "Awesome God". "The Celebration Concept" emphasizes lively music in church services, and a spectacle atmosphere to traditional solemn worship. Where reverence was once manifested, a Carnival or Three-Ring Circus ambience is now encouraged. Mother's, Father's, Indepence, and Memorial Days are occassions for Celebration Services. Note the emphasis on these church services is excitement, not to worship the Almighty God of Israel. Trophies, Medals, gifts, plaques, and speeches have replaced sound doctrine, and the preaching of the WORD. The worship styles, and unity are the tip of the iceberg, and only window dressing that has been traded-in for window "blinds".

Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. Jeremiah 10:2 KJV.

Presbyterians, Methodists, Episcopalian, Lutherans, Baptists, Congregationalists, Quakers, Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, Pentecostals, Russian and Greek Orthodoxs, are now joined with Catholics in this new found Unity. It's as if all have renounced their long-held beliefs, and now acknowledge the Holy Roman Catholic Church as their Superior, and, role-model. Long forgotten are the memories of the executioners torturing "heretics" in dungeons, also referred as Inquisition. It would interest many of these enthusiastic "Celebrants", to know that the new pope, Benedict XVI, previously headed the Holy Office of the Inquistion", which changed its name in "1965". It now calls itself: The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and, William J. Levada, an American, is the Cardinal Prefect.

And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. Revelation 18:4 KJV.

From a "Global" perspective, it doesn't surprise me that all churches are uniting with "Rome". But, for American Protestant churches to suffer from such amnesia, and forget the recent persecutions that the Vatican conducted is inexcuseable. Let no one forget that the Jesuit Company was founded by Loyola to combat the reforms achieved by the Protestant Reformers, such as Martin Luther. To reject all the light revealed by these Reformers is baffling. Wycliffe, Tyndale, Calvin, Latimer, John Knox, John Bunyan, John Trask, Roger Williams, John and Charles Wesley: These were men who struggled and died to bring the "TRUTH" to the world; To now have some "knownothings" compromise every principle won by blood discarded for convenience? Is this the beginning of the Mark of the Beast?

"Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution." (2 Tim. 3:12)

by Arsenio A. Lembert Jr. 12/24/2006

---------------------------------------------------Photo:http://spirituallysmart.com/redmasspics.html

President George Bush walks out of St. Matthew's Cathedral with Cardinal Theodore McCarrick(Who is also a Knight of Columbus)and Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts after attending the 52nd Annual Red Mass inWashington, DC, Sunday, October 2, 2005. The Red Mass, a historical tradition within the Catholic Church, is held on the Sunday before the opening session of the Supreme Court.

SHADY LAND DEALING

Shady land dealing, thy name is Barak Hussein Obama

by Rorschach 12/18/2006 8:43 am

In 2005, Barak Obama purchased his swanky Chicago mansion for $300,000 below asking price. the wife of Tony Rezko, a Chicago property developer who had befriended and funded Senator Obama since the 1990s, bought adjoining land at the full price of $US625,000. Senator Obama went on to purchase a small strip of that land from the Rezkos for $US104,500, a fair market rate. That in of itself raises eyebrows, but there is more:

In October this year, Mr Rezko, an ally of the Governor of Illinois, was indicted for trying to obtain nearly $US5 million in kickbacks from firms that wanted to do business with the state. The US Attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, said the charges against him revealed a “frenzy of corrupt scheming”. Mr Rezko denies all the allegations.
Senator Obama knew Mr Rezko could be in trouble, yet it was he who drew the property developer’s attention to the available land. The transaction was not illegal, but it has led to speculation that Senator Obama obtained a large house surrounded by an expanse of green land at a knock-down price.
While denying that inference, Senator Obama has expressed regret about the appearance of impropriety. “It was a mistake to be engaged with (Mr Rezko) at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow him or anyone else to believe he had done me a favour,” he told the Chicago Sun-Times.
By the standards of the Windy City, home to the former mobster Al Capone, the land sale is small beer, but it runs counter to Senator Obama’s image as a politician of rare integrity.

Source: http://lonestartimes.com/2006/12/18/shady-land-dealing-thy-name-is-barak-hussein-obama/