Obama’s Desire To Idolize Fidel Shot Down

Obama Was Going To Castro’s Funeral–Until Trump Told Him This…

Reports from a White House aide confirm that Obama was planning on making the flight to Cuba to attend the state funeral for Fidel Castro, one of the worst monsters of the 20th century. After praising Castro and his regime in a statement denounced by harsh critics like Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, Obama submitted flight plans at Joint Base Andrews to take Air Force One to Guantanamo Bay.   facepalm

It seems nothing was going to stop the traitor-in-chief from finishing his legacy of hating America and embarrassing us on a global scale. Until he got a call from President-Elect Trump, that is. Dr. Ben Carson, one of Trump’s closest advisors, was in the room when the call was placed to Obama that halted the trip. Carson told The Associated Press:

Donald had really done his homework on this and found an old executive order written by Kennedy that forbids US officials from traveling to state funerals of dictators who denounce this great country. Castro held onto his hatred for America until the day he died and now he can rot in hell with it. Donald told Obama that if he went to the funeral he’d be in violation and would be locked up come January 21st. If he rescinded the order he’d be telling Americans he thought it was OK to send dignitaries to the funerals of terrorists.

Looks like Mr. Trump isn’t so “unqualified” after all, huh Barry? He just stopped you dead in your tracks from making a mockery of the American government…again. What were you planning on doing, anyway? Maybe you figured you’d show up and beg little Raul Castro for forgiveness for how horribly the US treated his murdering, power hungry monster of a brother for 50 years?

More proof that President Trump’s reign can’t come soon enough.

 

Advertisements

ISLAM WAS BANNED FROM THE USA IN 1952

 

schermata-2015-01-29-alle-23-33-28

Islam was Banned from the USA in 1952 but You’re Not Supposed to Know It!

ISLAM WAS BANNED FROM THE USA IN 1952 but Obama doesn’t want you to know that, nor does he respect or uphold US law.

The Immigration and Nationality Act passed June 27, 1952 revised the laws relating to immigration, naturalization and nationality for the United States.

That Act, which became PUBLIC Law 414, established both the law and the intent of Congress regarding the immigration of aliens to the US and remains in effect today.

Among the many issues it covers, one in particular found in Chapter 2, Section 212, is the prohibition of entry in to the US if the alien belongs to an organization seeking to overthrow the government of the United States by force, violence or by other unconstitutional MEANS.”

This, by its very definition, rules out Islamic immigration to the United States but this law is being ignored by the White House.

Islamic immigration to the United States would be prohibited under this law because the Koran, Sharia Law and the Hadith all require complete submission to Islam which is antithetical to the United States GOVERNMENT, the Constitution and to the Republic.

All Muslims who attest that the Koran is their life’s guiding principal subscribe to submission to Islam and its form of government.

Now the politically correct crowd would say that Islamists cannot be prohibited from entering the United States because Islam is a ‘religion.’

WHETHER it is a ‘religion’ is immaterial because the law states that aliens who are affiliated with any organization that advocates the overthrow of our GOVERNMENT are prohibited.

http://www.thepostemail.com/2015/12/08/public-law-414-june-27-1952/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1952

http://www.uscis.gov/laws/immigration-and-nationality-act

Public Law 414 – June 27, 1952

“THE ADMINISTRATION IS BREAKING THE LAW”

by Kevin Cannon, We the People Alabama, ©2015

The text of the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act is on the website of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)

(Dec. 8, 2015) — The Immigration and Nationality Act passed June 27, 1952 revised the laws relating to immigration, naturalization, and nationality for the United States. That act, which became Public Law 414, established both the law and the intent of Congress regarding the immigration of Aliens to the US and remains in effect today. Among the many issues it covers, one in particular, found in Chapter 2 Section 212, is the prohibition of entry to the US if the Alien belongs to an organization seeking to overthrow the government of the United States by “force, violence, or other unconstitutional means.” This, by its very definition, rules out Islamic immigration to the United States, but this law is being ignored by the White House.

The law prohibits entry of “Aliens who the consular officer or the Attorney General knows or has reason to believe seek to enter the United States solely, principally, or incidentally to engage in activities which would be prejudicial to the public interest, or endanger the welfare, safety, or security of the United States.” It also prohibits the entry of Aliens who are members of or affiliated with any organization that advocates or teaches, the overthrow by force, violence, or other unconstitutional means of the US or of all forms of law, and Aliens who publish, circulate and distribute materials teaching or advocating the overthrow by force, violence or other unconstitutional means of the US Government or of all forms of law.

Islamic immigration to the US would be prohibited under this law because the Koran, Sharia Law and the Hadith all require complete submission to Islam, which is antithetical to the US government, the Constitution, and to the Republic. All Muslims who attest that the Koran is their life’s guiding principle subscribe to submission to Islam and its form of government. Now the political correct crowd would say that Islamists cannot be prohibited from entering the US because Islam is a religion. Whether it is a religion is immaterial because the law states that Aliens who are affiliated with any “organization” that advocates the overthrow of our government are prohibited. It also prohibits those who distribute literature that advocates the overthrow of our country, which would include the Koran.

In fact, there are many verses in the Koran that command Islamists to kill those who do not submit to allah and the prophet. If Congress so desired to hold the White House accountable to the current immigration of refugees (which also must comply with the law), it has the Immigration and Nationality Act to cite. The Administration is breaking that law. The question is “Does Congress have the political will to do something about it?”

To read the law, go to this link and scroll down to Chapter 2, Section 212:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-66/pdf/STATUTE-66-Pg163.pdf. This link will take you the government printing office and the official law. I had to click on it twice to connect to it, it is real it is the law.

Time to drain the swamp!  

 

 

Do Ya smell that?

withouts

                                    Is it too late to learn something useful?

Image

Donald Trump Versus the Counterfeit Morality of Political Correctness

Donald Trump Versus the Counterfeit Morality of Political Correctness

by J.R. Nyquist—————part one of two.trumpterror

 

Presidential candidate Donald Trump suggested that Muslim immigration into the United States should be temporarily suspended. In saying this, Trump did not break one of the Ten Commandments. He did not deprive anyone of their rights. He did not vilify anyone. He did not advocate genocide or racism. But here in America, in the West, we know perfectly well that he transgressed. In saying the same thing, we might expect to lose our jobs, our relationships, our standing in the community; for we have been indoctrinated to believe that everyone is equal, and all religions are equal. We have been told that the unfairness of the world cannot be allowed. This is our new morality — a counterfeit morality which has become more precious to us than our continued national existence. 

Trump is said to exemplify racism and sexism. When he says, in genuine consternation, that he is merely talking common sense, his elite listeners shake their heads. When Trump says that his own Muslim friends agree that he is right about temporarily suspending Muslim immigration, the elite refuse to believe him. He must be demented or insane. He is not to be taken seriously. It is some kind of “stunt.” Trump tries to explain that he is motivated by considerations of public safety and prudence. The elite sneer because they believe he is merely trying to win over bigots and yahoos. From this we may infer that our present media elite regards our Founding Fathers as malicious oppressors whose sexism and racism was every bit as heinous as the most rabid Nazi. Of course the Founders were patriarchs. They believed that women and children had to be protected. They believed that raising children and taking care of a family required fully engaged mothers. Any other course would have been a disaster (and now is a disaster) They also knew that alien religions and foreign tribes were not easy to assimilate — as the long and violent race war between red Indians and white settlers amply demonstrated.

To our politically correct politicians and pundits, our Founding Fathers were class oppressors whose policies included genocide and slavery. And it is, indeed, a funny thing to have benefited from these same forebears, decrying their prudence as racism and their foresight as sexism. It is no wonder our mainstream media do not appreciate Donald Trump.

It does not occur to our modern geniuses that restrictions on immigration might be prudent under the circumstances — and might save the country from future heartbreak. It also doesn’t occur to these same people that skepticism toward abortion and feminism might have nothing to do with animosity toward women, but might stem from concerns about the survival of a nation and its culture. Such concerns are not sexist, just as concerns about Muslim immigration are not racist. Every nation and every people should consider their posterity. And so this illustrates, in a particularly vivid manner, the war that is really going on in our time. It is a war against our ancestors and against our posterity which is waged by our present leaders.

Everyone, of course, has heard of the Constitution of the United States. It is the supreme law of the land. The first ten amendments to the Constitution are known as the “Bill of Rights.” Americans today hear a great deal about “rights” and very little about the practical measures needed to ensure those rights. Many Americans have forgotten that you cannot have a constitution unless you have a country; and you cannot have a country unless you defend it against enemies, foreign and domestic. At bottom, every constitution must be construed so that national security is not compromised by a growing tangle of individual and minority rights that choke off those measures necessary for self-protection. So here we are, wrestling with the question: Do Muslims have a right of immigration into the United States? Does the Constitution’s right of religious freedom extend to foreigners who want to come here and whose religion has proven to be hostile?

constitutionshahada

Whatever we think of the Constitution, it cannot protect Muslims from the enmity which Islam generates wherever its standard has been raised. In fact, the Constitution was not written to protect the nation of Islam, or various colonies of that nation planted in our midst. The Constitution nowhere says that Muslims have the right to come to the United States, build mosques, or establish their own culture as part of a multicultural patchwork celebrated as a new kind of nation (self-negated). This is not why the Constitution was established. As stated in the Preamble, our Constitution was established “in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity….” It is worth repeating that last phrase — “to ourselves and our Posterity….” There is no reference to Muslims, explicit or implicit. They do not belong to our nation. They are not “ourselves and our Posterity.” Furthermore, we should pay careful attention to the objectives of the Constitution. How does the presence of millions of Muslims in the United States make a “more perfect Union” or “insure domestic Tranquility”? Clearly, the presence of an alien colony in our midst serves to promote disunion and unrest. How would the Arabs react if we insisted on a right of immigration to Arabia? How would they react if we began erecting Churches in Mecca?

hi-lighted because of anger toward a nation run by spineless wonders.

Wake up America! —————-i welcome responses.

 

Why are there so many versions of the Bible in English?

 

The Bible has been translated into many languages from the biblical languages of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. As of November 2014 the full Bible has been translated into 531 languages, and 2,883 languages have at least some portion of the Bibleso many Bibles

For many people this huge variety is totally confusing and they just don’t know which Bible to choose. How did we get into this situation anyway?

At the heart of the problem are two views as to what a translation should be. On one side are those who feel a translation should stick just as closely as possible to every word of the original Hebrew and Greek. They want the translation to be a literal transfer, word for word, of the original words into English. They feel this will provide the greatest accuracy possible and, after all, this is the aim, isn’t it?

Unfortunately, that approach encounters real problems. Some words simply don’t have an exact equivalent in English. The word order and the entire sentence structure just don’t match from one language to another. So these word-for-word translations are wooden and unnatural. They may be used for close study, but they often fail in terms of comprehension and readability. On the other side are those who feel a translation should transfer the message, that is, the exact thought and emotion of the original text. To do this, it should use as many words as are necessary to reproduce the idea precisely in English. You don’t really obtain accuracy, they contend, by a word-for-word translation, but you do when you convey the concept, the message, of the original, so that the reader understands it. In the end, they say, a thought-for-thought translation is actually more accurate as well as more understandable. They invite us to compare Job 36:33 in a literal translation (the venerable King James Version) and a thought-for-thought translation (the New International Version):

King James Version New International Version
The noise thereof showeth concerning it, the cattle also concerning the vapor. His thunder announces the coming storm; even the cattle make known its approach.

Of course, since the KJV dates from 1611, it contains some archaic language, but the message of the KJV in this verse is also very difficult to decipher. In the NIV in this case the thought comes through with more clarity.

Translations also differ as to the reading level of the reader. They vary from a third grade to a twelfth grade reading level. The lower reading level translations have shorter sentences, draw from a smaller English word pool, and avoid all uncommon words. Some employ a vocabulary limited to 1000 words.

Let’s review several of the best-known translations. We cited two translations in the passage just quoted, and they are the two most widely used of all English translations:

  • The King James Version is loved for the majesty of its language and for the way God has used it in ministering to millions down through the centuries. Some Christians feel that no other translation can possibly replace it.
  • The New International Version is today the most widely distributed and utilized translation in the world. It is a thought-for-thought translation, but employs a moderately traditional tone that makes it appropriate for both public worship and personal reading.
  • A recent translation that is gaining widespread acceptance and uses contemporary terminology is the New Living Translation.
  • Another widely used translation is the New American Standard Bible, which is a more literal rendition.
  • The New Revised Standard Version, is a contemporary thought-for-thought translation.

So which is the best translation?

As you can see, there are many audiences and many different kinds of readers. You should decide what kind of reader you are and estimate your reading level. Are you seeking a literal translation or one that provides a thought-for-thought presentation? Do you prefer the historic dignity of theKing James Version, the New International Version, or the very readable and contemporary New Living Translation? Consult a knowledgeable Christian and then immerse yourself in God’s Word!

Each translation has the power to transform your life. Though the cadence and the terminology may differ, the voice of God can speak to you through each one. Then the question remains: how will you respond to God’s voice as He speaks to you from the pages of this life-changing book?

For a list of translations:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_Bible_translations.

Food for thought: Could the American Bible Publishing company’s have a vested interest in stirring the confusion of “which Bible should I choose?” How about a little American Capitalism at work :”You can have any color car you want, as long as it is black.” Henry Ford.

Does anybody really care?

Imam recites Quran for the first time in the Vatican

Presented for your listening pleasure, as well as a leg up on the new catechism. The pointy headed leader of the world’s Roman Catholic Church is on a roll in his effervescent outreach to blend all religions into Rome; after all, all roads lead to Rome.

HISTORIC FIRST EVER ISLAMIC PRAYERS AT VATICAN SIGNALS START OF ONE WORLD RELIGION.historic-first-muslim-prayers-vatican-pope-francis-revelation-17-false-prophet-one-world-religion

“AND UPON HER FOREHEAD WAS A NAME WRITTEN, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.”
“These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.” Revelation 17:14
CHRISLAM WILL BE THE ONE WORLD RELIGION (Rick Warren is gushing)
The book of Revelation is quite clear when it discusses the Catholic system in chapters 17 and 18. The Vatican sitting on seven hills is called the “mother of harlots”, a pagan system of worship that has control over the whole world. She is carried by the beast, and is the enemy of God. More than that, she will rule for a period of time with complete power over kings, mighty men and all the inhabitants of the earth. The One World Religion during the time of the Great Tribulation.
Historic-first-muslim-prayers-vatican-pope-francis-revelation-17-false-prophet-one-world-religion “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
So it is with great interest that we note that the Vatican, which represents 1 billion+ Catholics around the world, and Islam which claims more than 1 billion+ Muslim adherents, have begun to merge and join forces.

The Roman Catholic Church startled the religious and secular world today, with the official announcement – admitting: “ISLAM has now become the world’s largest religion – the Vatican newspaper said in Sunday’s “Vatican City” ‘For the first time in history, we are no longer at the top: Muslims have overtaken us,’ Monsignor Vittorio Formenti said in an interview with the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano.

Al Arabiya reports this: For the first time in history, Islamic prayers and readings from the Quran will be heard at the Vatican on Sunday, in a move by Pope Francis to usher in peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Holy See officials on Friday said the evening prayers would be a “pause in politics” and had no political aim other than to rekindle the desire for Israeli-Palestinian peace at the political and popular level.

Here is what Muslims think about Jesus.muslim-koran-what-they-say-about-jesus

 

This from followers of a man who was illiterate, a bandit and took a  9 year old girl as his wife. Now there’s a theology that “The religion of men” can be proud of. Have you ordered your foot bath yet?

 

 

What Authority Rules your Life, is it The Word of God?

89. Forever, O Lord, Your word is settled in heaven. 90. Your faithfulness endures to all generations; You established the earth, and it abides. 91. They continue this day according to Your ordinances, for all are Your servants. Psalm 119:89-91 NKJV.submit-to-gods-word

This text declares the all-encompassing, absolutely authoritative Word of God as unchangingly secured in heaven, let us take note of:

  • God’s rule by His Word is changeless and eternal.

In the cycle of life, times and seasons change, though social customs, human opinions, and philosophical viewpoints wax and wane they have no effect on the constancy or authority of God’s Word.

  • Verses 90, 91 show us that God is faithful in applying the power, promise, and blessing of His Word, and also its requirements of justice and judgment. Just as He spoke and the Earth was created and is sustained, so He has spoken regarding His laws for living.

Contrary to today’s relativism, which scream’s a view that ethical truths and moral behavior depend on the individuals and groups holding them. The relativism of human thought does not affect His authority or standards.

  • Creation continues to respond by abiding in his Word (responding as His servant verse 90), man is far too often a study in contrast to this submission to the Creator’s authority. Although, not so for those who have been in rebellion in the past, and forsaken that lifestyle and coming to Christ, these folks receive a practical reinstatement of God’s Word as the governing principle for all of their life.

In John 8:47, Jesus declares “He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”  Paul also states that to respond otherwise is to compromise the level of life to which we have been called. Paul points this out in 1 Cor. 2:13-16 as “spiritual” people we are to refuse the “natural” inclinations of fallen men.

 As we hear and yield to the authority of God’s Word, we are living proof that we are no longer dominated by the world’s spirit of error. In 1 John 4:6 the Word of God tells us, We are of God. He who knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit error.

There is a fundamental difference, a distinction between the people of the world and the people of God in their respective attitudes toward who Jesus Christ is. Only by the illumination of the Holy Spirit, who is greater than Satan (the spirit of error), will true believers overcome deceiving teachers and false doctrines of man.

Tomorrow: Your Soul’s Nourishment and God’s Word.