Monday, September 9, 2013

Turn Over Chemical Weapons - Russia Calls Kerry's Bluff

Yesterday, numerous organizations reported that US Secretary of State John Kerry threw the dice yet again to justify an attack on Syria. What he actually did was technically offer Syria a way to avert an attack, then promptly claim that it would never happen.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57601921/kerry-we-know-assad-ordered-syria-chemical-attack-what-are-we-going-to-do-about-it/

"Asked by CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan whether there was any way, at this stage, for Assad to stop an attack by the U.S., Kerry said the Syrian leader "could turn over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week. Turn it over. All of it. Without delay, and allow a full and total accounting before that, but he isn't about to do it and it can't be done."



His handlers, not satisfied with the last line of their boss's statement, went even further in an effort to dismiss the hypothetical scenario. 

"Jen Psaki, a State Department spokesperson, said later that Kerry's one-week ultimatum was not meant to be taken literally.

"Secretary Kerry was making a rhetorical argument about the impossibility and unlikelihood of Asad turning over chemical weapons he has denied he used," Psaki said. "His point was that this brutal dictator with a history of playing fast and loose with the facts can not be trusted to turn over chemical weapons otherwise he would have done so long ago."


These guys are a joke. You can't offer terms for peace then in the same breath assert that your target can't or will not live up to them.

The great part was that the Russians eagerly took Kerry up on his offer:


"Russia is ready to immediately join work on the establishment of international control over chemical weapons in Syria as such control will help prevent a military attack on the country, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said.

"We don't know whether Syria will agree to it, but we will immediately join work with Damascus if establishing international control over chemical weapons in that country helps prevent attacks," Lavrov said in a special press statement issued on Monday.

Russia calls on Syria to join the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), put its chemical weapons storage facilities under international control, and expects a prompt reaction to that proposal from the Syrian government.

We have given our proposal to Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Mualem and we expect a prompt and, I hope, positive response," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in Moscow on Monday.

"We are calling on the Syrian government to reach agreements about the putting their chemical weapons storage facilities under international control, subsequent destruction of these weapons, and on the full-fledged joining to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)," he said......"


Want something better than that? Syria basically answered "Is that all? Why didn't you say so?"

http://abcnews.go.com/International/syria-welcomed-russian-proposal-destroy-chemical-weapons/story?id=20198655

"Syria’s foreign minister immediately gave a thumbs-up to the unexpected pitch from its most powerful ally.

“Syria welcomes Russia’s proposal for Damascus to put its chemical weapons under international control,” Walid al-Moallem said......"


The moral of the story is to never assume that you opponent will not take you up on your offer.

Separate of the March chemical attack that was, according to a 100-page report made by the Russians and submitted to the UN, very likely the work of the rebels (Below), a German media outlet reports that German intelligence has evidence that Syrian military officials used chemical weapons in defiance of Assad's prohibition in August (second link).  http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/09/05/201268/russia-releases-100-page-report.html#.Ui56OtKTiSo) 



Now for the last note for tonight - Glenn Beck gives a very solid reason why the Saudis and Qataris are willing to fund our mercenary services on an attack on the Syrian government:



"......Beck explained that there are two oil and natural gas pipelines that have been vying for access to Syria, one of which would go through Iran and Iraq, the other of which would go through Qatar and Saudi Arabia. The latter was denied by Syria, Beck said, much to the dismay of Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

Beck then noted that John Kerry said certain Arab countries have offered to pay for a U.S. strike on Syria.

“Wow, the kindness of their hearts! Or is it the kindness of their radical Islamist hearts?” Beck said. “It’s all about money and oil. They want a pipeline, and they are prepared to do anything to get [the pipeline that benefits them] as opposed to [the other] pipeline.”


Classic - we are close to becoming the paid thugs of the sultans with the petrodollars. 


Sunday, September 8, 2013

Sen. Lindsey Graham - No Syria Strike Equals Nuclear War

Quick Brief:

During the homily/sermon at mass this morning, no mention was made (in my church) for a call for amnesty for illegal immigrants. Those who were here at the beginning of the week caught that I had made a proposal* for patriotic Catholic Americans in the event that Catholic leaders in the US followed through with the reported September 8th push that would seriously undermine our Republic. I will see what news reports come in from across the nation tomorrow.

*Hint- the proposal has potential for a powerful effect but did not entail actually leaving the Church. There is a lot of text that precedes the actual proposal (Below in Gates of Vienna), but given that Catholics are centuries removed from acting against the Church while remaining in in it every way, I felt that an explanation was necessary.
*http://gatesofvienna.net/2013/09/the-secession-of-a-pleb/.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Main post:

The push to install Islamists in Syria and risk a breakout of a major and destructive war has taken a new turn. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina has made what may someday  turn out to be the most bizarre claim of the century - that a failure to attack Syria may be the cause of a nuclear war.

Out of all the 1984 Doublethink/Newspeak comments that I have ever encountered, this one has got to be the closest to a realization of George Orwell's picture of a dystopian future for the West (and that includes Nancy Pelosi's claim that her Catholic faith leaves her with no option but to support abortion):

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/08/lindsey-graham-implies-failure-to-strike-syria-may-result-in-u-s-getting-nuked/

"Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who has been a vocal supporter of striking Syria, appeared to imply that if the U.S. doesn’t take military action against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime a nuclear war may ensue.
“I believe that if we get Syria wrong, within six months – and you can quote me on this – there will be a war between Iran and Israel over their nuclear program,” Graham told a gathering of supporters in South Carolina Wednesday, according to U.S. News and World Report."



[Just in case the Senator was being laughed at (if those in attendance could in fact gather their thoughts for levity after such a bold-faced lie) he continued with a predicted outcome that was supposed to cause the people in the Palmetto State and the New York Metropolitan Area to panic and plead for their elected official to save them]

“It won’t come to America on top of a missile, it’ll come in the belly of a ship in the Charleston or New York harbor,” he added........

“If we get Syria wrong, if we show weakness here regarding Assad’s chemical weapons utilization, you’re almost ensuring a war between Israel and Iran over their nuclear program, and we will surely get drawn into that,” Graham said Tuesday.

“So to the American people: if you’re worried about the Iranians getting a nuclear weapon, as I am, the last card to play to stop that is how we handle Syria,” he added."


When I read this, I must have looked at the article like a deer staring into the headlights of a vehicle for about two minutes.

Does anyone remember the children's story about Chicken Little running about declaring that the sky is falling?

Did he make a bet with John  McCain to see who could make the most stupid statement about Syria?

What Graham is saying is that the very act of refusing to risk an escalation that could result in a nuclear war will actually make such a scenario more likely.

He shamelessly conflated Iran's nuclear program - a reality that is more likely to become a problem if the US does attack Syria, with a civil war that has seen the Iranian government sending aid to the Syrian government. If anything, attacking a government that Iran supports would make it more likely that Iran may enter the fray. On top of that, wouldn't the leaders of Iran be worse than naive if they did not conclude that they were next on Obama's hit list? 

Attacking Syria will in no way make a conflict between Israel and Iran any more probable. In fact, one Syrian official recently threatened to attack Tel Aviv if the US attacks his nation. Graham asks us to believe that, just maybe, if we attack a government that Iran supports, the latter may decide to be nice to Israel. Given the gravely threatening statements made by Iran's leadership in recent years concerning Israel, the Senator must think that we are the most ignorant people on the face of the earth - either that or he was drugged without his knowledge prior to speaking. 

Graham has committed an outrageous and plainly despicable act. Not only did he pretend to believe that a course that would make an escalation less likely would somehow make it more likely, he also implied that our military capabilities would suffer. He wants us to think that that our satellites, Air Force, and Navy would  then not be able to detect in advance or even stop nuclear-armed submarines from entering two major US harbors. 

We need to contact our legislators again and let them know that we will not be treated like sheep. Graham so desperately wants a fight - one that will be of no risk to him, that he stooped so low as to tell us that the wolf would show up at our door if we do not help the Islamists who (half or more by some estimates), are routinely murdering and raping Syrian Christians. 

The man is a shameless coward, and now I want to know what he has to hide. Only someone fearful of being exposed for wrongdoing would out-snake oil salesman Obama. 






Saturday, September 7, 2013

More Reports of Obama Setup of Syrian Government

Revision - On 9/10/13, I added this link from a post that was published a few days before.
http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2013/08/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-gas-un.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Main post:

While Obama got little support for an attack while at the G20 Summit-

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/06/us-russia-g-idUSBRE98315S20130906


".....But there was no joint statement on Syria, despite a 20-minute one-on-one talk between Obama and Putin on the sidelines of the summit on Friday, following a tense group discussion on the civil war over dinner late on Thursday.

"We hear one another, and understand the arguments but we don't agree. I don't agree with his arguments, he doesn't agree with mine," Putin told a closing news conference dominated by questions about Syria.......

Chinese President Xi Jinping tried to dissuade Obama from military action during talks on Friday, telling him that Beijing expected countries to think twice before acting. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned against military action that did not have the approval of the U.N. Security Council.

Unable to win Security Council backing because of the opposition by veto-wielding Russia andChina, Obama is seeking the support of the U.S. Congress instead......"

-this situation still has the potential to get ugly, but at least it gives time for cooler heads to prevail:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/07/europeans-urge-u-s-to-delay-syrian-military-action-until-u-n-inspectors-finalize-report-on-alleged-chemical-attack/

"European foreign ministers on Saturday endorsed a “clear and strong response” to a chemical weapons attack that strongly points to the Syrian government, but they urged the U.S. to delay possible military action until U.N. inspectors report their findings"


.....The French still seem oddly enthusiastic about a strike:

"Later, at a news conference in Paris with French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, Kerry said “this is not the time to be silent spectators to slaughter” and that “this is not the time to allow a dictator unfettered use of some of the heinous weapons on earth.”......."

"A statement read at the end of the ministers’ meeting by the EU’s foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, said the Aug. 21 attack was a “blatant violation of international law, a war crime and a crime against humanity.”

Information from a wide variety of sources confirmed the chemical attack, according to the statement, and “seems to indicate strong evidence that the Syrian regime is responsible” as it is the only party “that possesses chemical weapons agents and the means of their delivery in a sufficient quantity.”


Meanwhile, the claims that the accusations are being leveled at the wrong party - indeed that the entire chemical weapons attack was either wholly falsified - or true but actually an act of the rebels working in conjunction with the US, keep coming in:


"A nun in Qara, Syria, claims she has “evidence” proving video footage of the deadly chemical attack in Syria was fabricated. Mother Agnes Mariam el-Salib, mother superior of St. James Monastery, told Russia Today that she plans to submit her findings to the United Nations Human Rights Commission......"

[The article then questions the credibility of the source that made the report of the nun's claims]

"Here’s what she considers to be “key evidence” in her research:

The key evidence is that Reuters made these files public at 6.05 in the morning. The chemical attack is said to have been launched between 3 and 5 o’clock in the morning in Guta. How is it even possible to collect a dozen different pieces of footage, get more than 200 kids and 300 young people together in one place, give them first aid and interview them on camera, and all that in less than three hours? Is that realistic at all? As someone who works in the news industry, you know how long all of it would take.

The bodies of children and teenagers we see in that footage – who were they? What happened to them? Were they killed for real? And how could that happen ahead of the gas attack? Or, if they were not killed, where did they come from? Where are their parents? How come we don’t see any female bodies among all those supposedly dead children?

I am not saying that no chemical agent was used in the area – it certainly was. But I insist that the footage that is now being peddled as evidence had been fabricated in advance. I have studied it meticulously, and I will submit my report to the UN Human Rights Commission based in Geneva."


The link below, which is followed by the article it referenced notes that The Blaze was unable to secure an interview with the writer of the Global Research article. This is admittedly disappointing as the article has a tremendous amount of detail - so much in fact that I find it hard to believe that the claims are false. Also, considering the routine nature of the lies dished out by the Obama administration and Obama's win-at-all-costs narcissism,  I am not inclined to dismiss anything outright:



*Here is the bulk of the article:


"There is a growing volume of new evidence from numerous sources in the Middle East — mostly affiliated with the Syrian opposition and its sponsors and supporters — which makes a very strong case, based on solid circumstantial evidence, that the August 21, 2013, chemical strike in the Damascus suburbs was indeed a pre-meditated provocation by the Syrian opposition.........

On August 13-14, 2013, Western-sponsored opposition forces in Turkey started advance preparations for a major and irregular military surge. Initial meetings between senior opposition military commanders and representatives of Qatari, Turkish, and US Intelligence [“Mukhabarat Amriki”] [Note that term for later]  took place at the converted Turkish military garrison in Antakya, Hatay Province, used as the command center and headquarters of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and their foreign sponsors. Very senior opposition commanders who had arrived from Istanbul briefed the regional commanders of an imminent escalation in the fighting due to “a war-changing development” which would, in turn, lead to a US-led bombing of Syria.

The opposition forces had to quickly prepare their forces for exploiting the US-led bombing in order to march on Damascus and topple the Bashar al-Assad Government, the senior commanders explained. The Qatari and Turkish intelligence officials assured the Syrian regional commanders that they would be provided with plenty of weapons for the coming offensive.

Indeed, unprecedented weapons distribution started in all opposition camps in Hatay Province on August 21-23, 2013. In the Reyhanli area alone, opposition forces received well in excess of 400 tons of weapons, mainly anti-aircraft weaponry from shoulder-fired missiles to ammunition for light-guns and machineguns. The weapons were distributed from store-houses controlled by Qatari and Turkish Intelligence under the tight supervision of US Intelligence.

These weapons were loaded on more than 20 trailer-trucks which crossed into northern Syria and distributed the weapons to several depots. Follow-up weapon shipments, also several hundred tons, took place over the weekend of August 24-25, 2013, and included mainly sophisticated anti-tank guided missiles and rockets. Opposition officials in Hatay said that these weapon shipments were “the biggest” they had received “since the beginning of the turmoil more than two years ago”. The deliveries from Hatay went to all the rebel forces operating in the Idlib-to-Aleppo area, including the al-Qaida affiliated jihadists (who constitute the largest rebel forces in the area).

Several senior officials from both the Syrian opposition and sponsoring Arab states stressed that these weapon deliveries were specifically in anticipation for exploiting the impact of imminent bombing of Syria by the US and the Western allies. The latest strategy formulation and coordination meetings took place on August 26, 2013. The political coordination meeting took place in Istanbul and was attended by US Amb. Robert Ford.

More important were the military and operational coordination meetings at the Antakya garrison. Senior Turkish, Qatari, and US Intelligence officials attended in addition to the Syrian senior (opposition) commanders. The Syrians were informed that bombing would start in a few days.

“The opposition was told in clear terms that action to deter further use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime could come as early as in the next few days,” a Syrian participant in the meeting said. Another Syrian participant said that he was convinced US bombing was scheduled to begin on Thursday, August 29, 2013. Several participants — both Syrian and Arab — stressed that the assurances of forthcoming bombing were most explicit even as formally Obama is still undecided.

The descriptions of these meetings raise the question of the extent of foreknowledge of US Intelligence, and therefore, the Obama White House. All the sources consulted — both Syrian and Arab — stressed that officials of the “Mukhabarat Amriki” actively participated in the meetings and briefings in Turkey. Therefore, at the very least, they should have known that the opposition leaders were anticipating “a war-changing development”: that is, a dramatic event which would provoke a US-led military intervention.

The mere fact that weapon storage sites under the tight supervision of US Intelligence were opened up and about a thousand tons of high-quality weapons were distributed to the opposition indicates that US Intelligence anticipated such a provocation and the opportunity for the Syrian opposition to exploit the impact of the ensuing US and allied bombing. Hence, even if the Obama White House did not know in advance of the chemical provocation, they should have concluded, or at the very least suspected, that the chemical attack was most likely the “war-changing development” anticipated by the opposition leaders as provocation of US-led bombing. Under such circumstances, the Obama White House should have refrained from rushing head-on to accuse Assad’s Damascus and threaten retaliation, thus making the Obama White House at the very least complicit after the act.

Meanwhile, additional data from Damascus about the actual chemical attack increases the doubts about Washington’s version of events. Immediately after the attack, three hospitals of Doctors Without Borders (MSF: médecins sans frontières) in the greater Damascus area treated more than 3,600 Syrians affected by the chemical attack, and 355 of them died. MSF performed tests on the vast majority of those treated.

MSF director of operations Bart Janssens summed up the findings: “MSF can neither scientifically confirm the cause of these symptoms nor establish who is responsible for the attack. However, the reported symptoms of the patients, in addition to the epidemiological pattern of the events — characterized by the massive influx of patients in a short period of time, the origin of the patients, and the contamination of medical and first aid workers — strongly indicate mass exposure to a neurotoxic agent.” Simply put, even after testing some 3,600 patients, MSF failed to confirm that sarin was the cause of the injuries. According to MSF, the cause could have been nerve agents like sarin, concentrated riot control gas, or even high-concentration pesticides. Moreover, opposition reports that there was distinct stench during the attack suggest that it could have come from the “kitchen sarin” used by jihadist groups (as distinct from the odorless military-type sarin) or improvised agents like pesticides.

Some of the evidence touted by the Obama White House is questionable at best.

A small incident in Beirut raises big questions. A day after the chemical attack, Lebanese fixers working for the “Mukhabarat Amriki” succeeded to convince a Syrian male who claimed to have been injured in the chemical attack to seek medical aid in Beirut in return for a hefty sum that would effectively settle him for life. The man was put into an ambulance and transferred overnight to the Farhat Hospital in Jib Janine, Beirut. The Obama White House immediately leaked friendly media that “the Lebanese Red Cross announced that test results found traces of sarin gas in his blood.” However, this was news to Lebanese intelligence and Red Cross officials.
According to senior intelligence officials, “Red Cross Operations Director George Kettaneh told [them] that the injured Syrian fled the hospital before doctors were able to test for traces of toxic gas in his blood.” Apparently, the patient declared that he had recovered from his nausea and no longer needed medical treatment
. The Lebanese security forces are still searching for the Syrian patient and his honorarium.

On August 24, 2013, Syrian Commando forces acted on intelligence about the possible perpetrators of the chemical attack and raided a cluster of rebel tunnels in the Damascus suburb of Jobar. Canisters of toxic material were hit in the fierce fire-fight as several Syrian soldiers suffered from suffocation and “some of the injured are in a critical condition”.

The Commando eventually seized an opposition warehouse containing barrels full of chemicals required for mixing “kitchen sarin”, laboratory equipment, as well as a large number of protective masks. The Syrian Commando also captured several improvised explosive devices, RPG rounds, and mortar shells. The same day, at least four HizbAllah fighters operating in Damascus near Ghouta were hit by chemical agents at the very same time the Syrian Commando unit was hit while searching a group of rebel tunnels in Jobar. Both the Syrian and the HizbAllah forces were acting on intelligence information about the real perpetrators of the chemical attack. Damascus told Moscow the Syrian troops were hit by some form of a nerve agent and sent samples (blood, tissues, and soil) and captured equipment to Russia.

Several Syrian leaders, many of whom are not Bashar al-Assad supporters and are even his sworn enemies, are now convinced that the Syrian opposition is responsible for the August 21, 2013, chemical attack in the Damascus area in order to provoke the US and the allies into bombing Assad’s Syria. Most explicit and eloquent is Saleh Muslim, the head of the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) which has been fighting the Syrian Government. Muslim doubts Assad would have used chemical weapons when he was winning the civil war.

“The regime in Syria … has chemical weapons, but they wouldn’t use them around Damascus, five km from the [UN] committee which is investigating chemical weapons. Of course they are not so stupid as to do so,” Muslim told Reuters on August 27, 2013. He believes the attack was “aimed at framing Assad and provoking an international reaction”........"


Now for this one- The Pentagon may possibly be telling the truth that the hacker faked emails that the US was involved in the chemical attack, but our senior military leaders have gained a reputation for saying whatever Obama wants them to say, so I can't make a call either way. As children learn from the fable The Boy who Cried Wolf, once you have told enough lies, people are not likely to believe you even when you do tell the truth. Mind you, even if the hacker did falsify the emails, the statements that he used to create the emails may still have described something that did in fact happen. If the cops have proof, including video, eyewitness recognition, and fingerprints that a particular individual  robbed a bank, and I falsely say that he also robbed the butcher shop next door, what I said does nothing to take away from the evidence about the bank robbery.


"Pentagon officials say a hacker’s claim that he has official military emails proving U.S. intelligence agencies were involved in framing President Bashar Assad’s regime for the Syrian chemical attacks is “totally false.”

And now the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command, known as the CID, is investigating the incident.

The digital thief claims to base his assumptions on revelations made in emails he said he hacked into belonging to U.S. military and Pentagon officials.

Those emails, along with the hackers’ story, were originally posted in the Daily Opinion blog on the British Telegraph on Sept. 1, from the hacker’s post on pastebin. He also claims to have hacked the emails of 18 other Pentagon officials.

“Army is aware of the situation and the hacking incident, and it has been referred to the Army CID for investigation,” Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Damien Pickart told TheBlaze.

“There is no truth to those emails,” he added. “No truth whatsoever. It is totally false.”

Pickart, who speaks on behalf of the Pentagon’s cyber affairs issues, said the email addresses used by the hacker were accurate but the content of the emails was falsified....."


Meanwhile, a US Congressman gets the award for the Understatement of the Year:


"Rep. Michael Grimm said he has withdrawn his support for military action in Syria because he has lost faith in President Barack Obama’s ability to lead.

Grimm (R-N.Y.) first said he supported taking action against President Bashar Assad’s regime, but announced Thursday he had changed his mind.

“What’s changed the most is the president’s leadership has degraded,” Grimm said Friday on Fox News........"


I hope that the People don't accept Obama's snake oil salesman pitch when he speaks on Tuesday in an attempt to drum of public support for his plan to topple the Syrian government and bring in the Islamists to rule a once-stable nation.






Friday, September 6, 2013

The Mob Shuts Down a Bakery But Are Not Satisfied

I put off posting on this topic as Obama's Syrian aspirations had to take precedence.

This is a long and very sad story about a family, the radical gay agenda, a new anti-chivalry that takes the place of good, the cowering of those who want to do right but fear the mob, the price of principles and dignity, and the soft-totalitarianism of our society.

I will begin with excerpts from previous posts:

http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2013/02/baker-refuses-cake-for-fake-wedding.html

"An Oregon man may have broken the law and is facing a state investigation after refusing to bake a cake for a same-sex couple’s wedding, KATU reports.......

It started on Jan. 17 when a mother and daughter showed up at Sweet Cakes by Melissa looking for the perfect wedding cake.

“My first question is what’s the wedding date,” said owner Aaron Klein. “My next question is bride and groom’s name … the girl giggled a little bit and said it’s two brides.”

Klein apologized to the women and told them he and his wife do not make cakes for same-sex marriages. Klein said the women were disgusted and walked out.

“I believe that marriage is a religious institution ordained by God,” said Klein. “A man should leave his mother and father and cling to his wife … that to me is the beginning of marriage.”


That exchange resulted in the most vicious of threats, widespread boycotts of both the bakery and any vendor that did business with the owners, and the opening of an investigation by the State of Oregon for discrimination of a protected group.

The price of earning a livelihood in the United States of today is your dignity and your principles. 


"It's the new Kristallnacht - only so far no windows have been broken.

When the Jews of Germany were sufficiently isolated and most people were too afraid to speak in protest, gangs were turned loose on the businesses owned by these loyal citizens.

Store windows were smashed in wholesale manner , Jews were harassed and beaten, and several thousand of them disappeared outright.. "The Night of Shattered Glass" prefigured the state of things to come for this minority.

When the State and society affirm and give their silent approval to hate, this is what happens.

The mob has been sent to ruin the business that the owners have worked so hard to build. If you do not acquiesce to the New Order, not only will your business be targeted for destruction, but so will anyone who does business with you. You will be financially ruined. This will be the pattern to be followed for all similar situations in the future.

As our contributor Scipio noted, if these measures to force people to abandon their principles and dignity do not work (And maybe even if they do), massive acts of vandalism will follow - and the police will likely do little or nothing is response. Those who stand for something in which they believe are the only truly bad people, and political leaders will pressure the cops to back off.


To make things worse, the regular, average citizen has been cowed into joining in with the massive boycott. [Including canceling previously-made cake orders] Weak and cowardly people have allowed themselves to be so intimidated by the possibility of being called homophobic that they too have stopped buying products from this store. I find more far more fault with these people than with the haters themselves - the latter can only succeed when everyone else is afraid to stand up for what is right.
Men used to be the protectors of society and culture. Now their honor is measured by how much they support the wholesale degradation of women in the abortion clinic and by their support for defiling the institution of marriage.

Women used to be the glue that held society together; no sane man would fail to be chastened by a woman's admonition. Now women have become the instruments of societal destruction. Today they use their ability to influence men to force their husbands to assist with the tearing down of society.

-and while we do all of this, we pat ourselves on the back for a job well done.

The Crime of our era is the failure to be complicit in the degradation of marriage
The Sin of our era is the refusal to mock God's work.

As noted [in previous posts] if vendors refuse to sell to gays simply due to the customer's sexual practices, then they clearly would be in violation of the law. What Washington State wants is to expand the scope of laws protecting people from discrimination to force anyone who operates a business to engage in actions that may be completely contrary to one's principles.

Nazism is not illegal in the US. If a member of a neo-Nazi Party walks into a store owned by a Jewish person, or anyone else for that matter, and orders a product or service custom-made for Hitler's birthday, then the vendor should certainly be within his rights to refuse to fill that order. A vendor cannot refuse service simply because of someones affiliations, but the law cannot rightly be held to force a vendor to participate in an event for that organization."

Want something less severe? OK, how about a vendor that refuses to make t-shirts sponsoring a Harbor Seal hunt? The vendor would not be able to refuse to make t-shirts with other messages/logos for a customer solely due to his grisly occupation, but the law again cannot be used to force someone to take actions that would effectively make one complicit in the smashing of little seal heads. [I hunt deer, and a vendor could not refuse my business due to my method of spending some of my spare time, but that same t-shirt vendor may well tell me that he will make no shirts for a hunting and fishing exposition and have done nothing wrong.]

[I'll bet you -as we say in the US, dollars to donuts, that a Muslim baker would not be given any problems for refusing to provide services for a gay wedding. Considering what Muslims believe about Jesus, he probably would not make a cake for Easter either.]

Our society is more fully cleaved in two than we have been since the Civil War. In the earlier instance, the side that initiated a political break was doing so to protect an institution that could not be defended. In our case, I submit that one side will need to effect a political break in order to protect itself from a fabricated institution that cannot be defended being forced upon it.

People tend to be too fearful or sentimental to support changing the political makeup of our nation, but it is either change that or watch our entire society be run into the ground.

Kid yourselves no longer - They will not stop until they get everything that they want.

At what point will enough be enough for you?


Recently, the owners had to close their business down and the mob rejoiced: 


"In May, TheBlaze told you about Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, an Oregon-based bakery that has fallen under intense scrutiny. Throughout 2013, the Christian couple and their business have been in the midst of a media firestorm after refusing to make a wedding cake for a lesbian couple.

From threats to vicious phone calls and e-mails, the Klein family has been inundated with angry responses. Now, Aaron and Melissa have announced that they are shutting down their shop.

In a brief phone interview earlier this month, Melissa told TheBlaze that the couple has continued to face upheaval following their faith-based decision. Just days after we spoke, she and her husband announced that this past weekend was the family’s last at its current location.

The business will be transitioning, with the Kleins operating, instead, from their home...."


Just in case anyone else had the idea to take a stand for what marriage actually is or refuse to cower before the mob and the weight of civil prosecution, the mob continued with their attacks even after the bakery was closed:


“......already planning to harass me,” she told TheBlaze. “They’re just continuously doing this. They just don’t want me to be in business at all.”
But the harassment has also come in some very eerie forms, Melissa claims. In the early morning hours on Monday, the baker claims that someone broke into the Sweet Cakes truck, a vehicle the family uses to advance its business. The truck was parked in the Kleins’ driveway. This was particularly nerve-wrecking for Melissa and Aaron, astheir home, where the truck was located, is in a highly secluded area — one that is nowhere near where their former shop.

“Somebody came up into our driveway and rummaged through our truck and took stuff out,” she said. “The really strange thing is, they didn’t steal anything, they just made a mess. It kind of was a little creepy.”

The culprit didn’t take any money, she said, which was also odd, as the truck contained cash. While she’s definitely shaken by the incident, Melissa said that she feels safe, as her husband is a hunter who is trained to use a firearm. When he’s home, she’s fine, but when Aaron is out of the house, Melissa admitted that she does get a little scared.

The harassing e-mails haven’t stopped either. Melisa shared just a few of the messages she has received of late:
One message with the subject line “racist maggots” [ Note that Leftists use the word "racist" so regularly and without thought that this was likely a reflexive act] read, “People like you will burn in HELL, you racist pigs.

Another read, “Your homophobic rants will not be forgotten and you will go out of business. This is the 21st century, a**holes.”

And another: “Do everyone a favor and fall off a cliff.”

One individual made it very personal: “Honey it would take a lot to make your ugly a** look good! You are ugly inside and out!”

And finally: “Maybe your god will send you some cat food to eat when you are living on the street?”.."


If anyone is able to articulate to me a means of making repairs to our society without formally and politically effecting a break between the two fully separate nations within the United States, I am willing to listen. 




Thursday, September 5, 2013

Obama's Syria Plan Going Up in Flames

In addition to the obvious, which is referenced in the title, this situation is actually becoming more dangerous by the day.

Obama appears to have backed off his "red line" statement about the use of chemical weapons being the last straw that would necessitate a military strike. Well, he actually did not back off, he just lied and claimed that he never stated this in the first place; he now says that the world set the red line. For a  man who has spent his entire life having others affirm anything he says happened or exists despite what actually did happen or exist, Obama is not treading on new soil.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/05/rush-limbaugh-says-this-obama-flip-flop-is-so-bad-its-psychopathic/

"Earlier this week, President Barack Obama reframed his “red line” rhetoric in regards to Syria and the use of chemical weapons, saying it was the “world,” not him, that “set a red line.”

Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh on Thursday expressed his disbelief at the claim, which he called “psychopathic.” According to the online Merriam-Webster dictionary, “psychopathic” is defined as: “of, relating to, or characterized by psychopathy or antisocial personality disorder.”

Limbaugh is not alone in his confusion over the statement.

Obama last year clearly stated that Syria would cross a “red line” that would “change my equation” if he used chemical weapons on his own people....."


At this point, however,  I am concerned that his narcissism is going to spiral out of control. This clown appears to be capable of actions far more rash than - say, an uncle who has had enough of a disrespectful nephew and punches him at a family event. For all of his faults, G.W. Bush never gave us cause to be this fearful.

Now Obama has brought upon himself and the United States the possibility that Russia will provide real material help to the Syrians to deal with any potential military strikes. Understandably, considering the fact that Obama has ignored every statement (or counsel) made or offered by Putin, Russia is noting that they are not ruling out the possibility of  sending missile shield material to fend off a US attack:


"....Putin escalated concerns about the fallout from any strike when he indicated in an interview published Wednesday that his country could send Syria and its neighbors in the region the components of a missile shield if the U.S. attacks....."


The White House would prefer that we forget that nerve gas was also used in March of this year. Russia is not about to let the world forget.


"Russia has delivered a 100-page report to the United Nations that claims Syrian rebels are responsible for a sarin gas attack in March 2013 — an overlooked incident, it says, in the wake the alleged sarin attack in August that the United States and other nations say the Syrian government is behind, McClatchy news reports.

According to a statement posted to the Russian Foreign Ministry’s site late Wednesday, the March 19, incident in Khan al Asal, a town outside the city of Aleppo, was the reason U.N. investigators were in Syria when the Aug. 21 attack took place......."


An apologist for John Kerry may note that the Secretary of State was only following orders when he made his statements last week to Congress, but as we learned from the Nuremberg Trials, "I was following orders" is not a defense when wrongdoing is involved. Putin is also not one to leave a lie unnoticed: 



"Things aren't exactly warming up between the Obama administration and Vladimir Putin, even as President Obama arrived in St. Petersburg for the G-20 summit.

Putin called Obama Secretary of State John Kerry a liar over Kerry's testimony this week before Congress.

The question may be al-Qaeda's influence on the Syrian rebels, an issue Kerry has downplayed.

Speaking to his human rights council Wednesday, Putin said, "This was very unpleasant and surprising for me. We talk to them (the Americans), and we assume they are decent people, but he is lying and he knows that he is lying. This is sad."

Putin has criticized Obama administration claims that Bashar Assad's government attacked the rebels with chemical weapons......"


As I noted in yesterday's post that even the Left-wing Israeli paper Haaretz came out against a strike, two more ultra-liberal organizations have joined in. Both the Huffington Post and The New York Times published articles about the problems with a military strike. 

The first one concerns a possible and hoped-for shortage of votes in the House of Representatives.


"WASHINGTON -- This sucker could go down. And unlike the Wall Street bailout, there is unlikely to be a do-over.

A resolution authorizing military force against Syria barely made it out of the hawkish Senate Foreign Relations Committee -- with the majority of Republicans opposing it -- and now is facing withering skepticism in Congress. While the Senate appears poised to come to some type of agreement, the "People's House," as it is known, is showing much more reluctance to approve the deeply unpopular bombing resolution. "Peace may well have a chance," said one top House GOP aide.

Public opinion surveys have been reflected in the outpouring of calls, emails and letters that have flooded House offices, running, say lawmakers, at more than 9 to 1 against intervention. The opposition spans the political spectrum.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) said on Twitter that his delegation is unpersuaded and that public reaction has been fiercely opposed. Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.), who represents the libertarian opposition within the GOP, said that he's also seeing intense disapproval........"


For The New York Times, the issue is the barbarism of far to many (easily over half in some estimates) of the rebels forces.


"As the United States debates whether to support the Obama administration’s proposal that Syrian forces should be attacked for using chemical weapons against civilians, this video [in link], shot in the spring of 2012, joins a growing body of evidence of an increasingly criminal environment populated by gangs of highwaymen, kidnappers and killers.
The video also offers a reminder of the foreign policy puzzle the United States faces in finding rebel allies as some members of Congress, including Senator John McCain, press for more robust military support for the opposition...........

Across much of Syria, where rebels with Western support live and fight, areas outside of government influence have evolved into a complex guerrilla and criminal landscape.

That has raised the prospect that American military action could inadvertently strengthen Islamic extremists and criminals.......


Much of the concern among American officials has focused on two groups that acknowledge ties to Al Qaeda. These groups — the Nusra Front and the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria — have attracted foreign jihadis, used terrorist tactics and vowed to create a society in Syria ruled by their severe interpretation of Islamic law.

They have established a firm presence in parts of Aleppo and Idlib Provinces and in the northern provincial capital of Raqqa and in Deir al-Zour, to the east on the Iraqi border.

While the jihadis claim to be superior fighters, and have collaborated with secular Syrian rebels, some analysts and diplomats also note that they can appear less focused on toppling President Bashar al-Assad. Instead, they said, they focus more on establishing a zone of influence spanning Iraq’s Anbar Province and the desert eastern areas of Syria, and eventually establishing an Islamic territory under their administration........."


['They" (below) refers t aides of a rebel leader named Abdul Samad Issa, who appears to be in on the game for revenge - his father may have been put to death by the Syrian government] 

"But, they said, one of his tactics has been to promise to his fighters what he calls “the extermination” of Alawites — the minority Islamic sect to which the Assad family belongs, and which Mr. Issa blames for Syria’s suffering.

This sentiment may have driven Mr. Issa’s decision to execute his prisoners in the video, his former aide said. The soldiers had been captured when Mr. Issa’s fighters overran a government checkpoint north of Idlib in March."


Issa and his crew claimed that the executed soldiers had videos in their cellphones of rapes that they (the soldiers) had committed. Given the untold number of rapes committed by the rebels, this accusation has as much credibility as the rebel claim that the Syrian government - and not the rebels, used nerve gas. 


In the link below, there are four photos that are believed to be made by military personnel in which the subjects hold signs stating that they want no part of an attack in Syria.



If we do not put a stop to this, we could easily find ourselves at war - and not against a small country, but against a nation that we should have befriended and helped after the dismantling of the USSR. Most f that was G.W. Bush's fault, but Obama is doing everything in his power to make the situation worse. 

It is time to turn our ships around and get out of there at least until things settle down. 




Wednesday, September 4, 2013

Obama, Kerry Digging Deep Syrian Hole

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/09/03/Kerry-Claims-Obama-Not-Asking-Americans-to-Go-to-War-but-Won-t-Take-Boots-on-the-Ground-Option-Off-Table

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/04/senates-syria-resolution-appears-to-leave-room-for-putting-boots-on-the-ground/

The war-mongering that we are currently witnessing is unprecedented in the history of the United States. That is saying a lot; we have Yellow Press incidents such as the times leading up to the Spanish-American war and WWI (just to name two) that pale in comparison to what we are witnessing today in this nation.

John McCain pulled his support for a military strike on Syria, but only so that another proposal could be made one that allows even more military action against Syria than missile strikes. That's it John, instead of doing the right thing, demand more of the wrong thing than you wanted in the first place.

John Kerry's (Read Obama's) plan is to leave a proposals so open-ended as to allow for troops to be deployed to Syria  in order to take control of chemical weapons stores. Another great ,move, let's drop the military strike idea and demand approval that US troops operate inside Syria.

-This while even the United Nations (of which I am no fan) Secretary General Ban Ki - Moon has made it clear that striking Syria could easily make the situation worse. Specifically  "...unleash more turmoil and bloodshed in that nation's civil war."

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/1.545260

Do you really want to laugh? take a look at the link. Haaretz is a Left-wing newspaper that regularly engages in misinformation about the Israeli-Arab conflict and does everything that it can to undermine its own country. If even Haaretz has joined in with the common-sense crowd, then we must admit that something is obviously wrong with a  strike against Syria.


OK, let's get a short count of some major players-

The People of the United States - No

Russia - Nyet 

China - No

Great Britain - No

United Nations - No

India - No (Don't laugh, they have a large and strong military)

[Revised 9/5/13 (I forgot) The Pope - No}

Italy - The nation is not prepared for the inevitable  flood of refugees that will inundate Europe in the event of a strike. (Italy is already overwhelmed with refugees from the North African coast and those who have fled Syria)

Germany - Not committing either way (elections are coming soon)

France - Yes (Obama gets one here)



That's 6 [7 with revision] - 1 with two abstaining or advising caution.

The Nobel Peace Prize recipient has painted himself into a corner. The problem, is, the rabid narcissist may not care and stomp his feet all over the wet paint just to get his way.

The result of military intervention will likely be a full-blown cleansing of Christians in Syria:

http://www.trevorloudon.com/2013/09/the-planned-destruction-of-christians-in-syria/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium














Tuesday, September 3, 2013

Putin Calls for Protecting Christians, Indentifying with Christian Faith and Culture

http://c.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/high-tide-and-turn/2013/aug/2/putin-world-leaders-should-unite-end-anti-christia/

This is very big. The Western media will now find it harder to demonize Vladimir Putin.

Last week, I noted the irony at the fact that a former officially atheistic nation was sending warships to the Mediterranean with the (despite official claims) mission to remind the US that driving out a Syrian ruler who has protected Christians may not be such a great idea. I have written numerous posts abut the plight of Alawites and Christians in rebel-held regions of that nation and called for Russian military intervention to put a stop to the vicious persecutions.*(Links below)

The following is a big step in the right direction:

"August 2, 2013 — Vladimir Putin said last week that he observes “with alarm” that “in many of the world’s regions, especially in the Middle East and in North Africa, inter-confessional tensions are mounting, and the rights of religious minorities are infringed, including Christians and Orthodox Christians.”

The Russian president made his comments at a meeting with Orthodox Christian leaders in Moscow. He urged the international community to take steps towards preserving the rights of Christian people worldwide and preventing the violence that they suffer routinely in dozens of nations around the globe.........

The Russian Orthodox Church’s chief ecumenical officer, Metropolitan Hilarion, warned of “secularization in disguise of democratization” and of a “powerful energy today [that] strives to finally break with Christianity, which controlled its totalitarian impulses during 17 centuries.”

“Eventually,” Hilarion said, “it unconsciously strives to set up an absolute dictatorship that demands total control over each member of society.
Don’t we move to it when ‘for the sake of security’ we agree to obligatory electronic passports, dactyloscopy [fingerprint identification] for everyone, and photo cameras occurring everywhere?”.........

[The] Christian community that still identifies Russia with communism, Cold War tensions and the brutality of Stalinism is in for a shock if Putin follows through on his comments. They underscore that the world has changed. In the wake of the “war on terror,” the U.S. is no longer seen as a guardian of justice and liberty. Now one of her traditional enemies is poised to defend ideals that America no longer cherishes.

[About changes since the disintegration f the USSR]

What’s changed since then? Putin hinted at it when he said the church in Russia had been a “moral compass” to many who were looking for help, hinting at the recent century of misery and struggle that the Russian people have endured. He also acknowledged the role that the church has played in “culture and education,” adding, “The adoption of Christianity became a turning point in the fate of our fatherland.”

Why is the Russian leadership suddenly recognizing the priceless value to their nation of the Christian virtues they condemned for so many years? It’s simple. The Russian people have learned the hard way about the cultural devastation and decline that results from the rejection of the happy principles that have bolstered the western world for so many centuries.

Russia is a nation that has tasted of the fruit of the self-destructive anti-ethical policies that so much of the western world has come to label “progressive.”

They already tried dismantling the natural institution of family, and replacing it with state control and regimentation. As a result, they are suffering a demographic crisis, with the highest abortion rate in the world. Russians have more abortions than live births.

They already tried out the scheme of deconstructing the faith of individuals and replacing it with a collectivistic, subservient society where people owe nothing to an eternal, unchanging God, but everything to a transient, ever-evolving state. This didn’t serve as any kind of cultural liberation..........."


Protecting Christians, a return to identifying with the ancient faith and culture of a nation, a rejection of the radical  liberal agenda under the guise of Democracy, I cannot recall one instance in which I have seen all of these subjects treated by high-ranking leaders. 
My High school senior son needed the computer as today was his first day of the school year, so I did not get to prepare a post until later in the evening; consequently, I will be brief.
Our media and political leadership have been lying to us about Russia - Putin in particular, for a very long time. He has boldly opposed the radical gay agenda, made it clear that he will not allow his nation's churches be desecrated, opened his nation to persecuted Afrikaners from the horrors**of ANC-run South Africa, challenged Obama on his accusations about Syria and warned the same to refrain from a military strike.
Now he has become the only world leader of whom I am aware that has called for cooperating to protect Christians and, along with the Metropolitan Patriarch, has for Christians to return to their Christians and national identities.
He is on his way to building a much better nation than that into which the Western Left (along with with our shameful inaction) is making ours.

Monday, September 2, 2013

Catholic Proposes Strike Against Catholic Church on Immigration

Quick brief first:

I can't authenticate the photos in the link as being from actual members the US military, but the message is still clear -
we may be seeing stirrings of protests against an intervention in Syria by our own service members.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/02/treason-or-free-speech-are-these-anti-syria-strike-pictures-from-u-s-military-members-okay-blaze-poll/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Main post:

I am a lifelong practicing Catholic who has taught CCD for six years. Also, for over twenty years I have been engaged in explaining and defending Church doctrine against its detractors. As those who have read my previous posts know, however, I have never held back from calling out Church leaders when they are wrong.

The following post (excerpts below) was generously given a place by the gracious hosts of Gates of Vienna. A little over a week ago, Breibart and the Washington Times (Links in GOV post) reported that the US Catholic Conference of Bishops is planning a big move on immigration for September 8th, 2013 (This coming Sunday). A representative of the Conference's office on immigration has stated that they are calling for Parish Priests to use the homily (sermon) for that Sunday to be used to exhort the faithful to take action that will be an effective betrayal of their own country; they want the laity to join them in telling our elected legislators that we want amnesty for illegal immigrants.

I won't go into detail here, but this overreach is to much. In the post, I propose that, in addition to telling our elected officials that we do not want people to be rewarded for flouting the laws of our nation, we also take real action against the Church if she wants us to act in a manner contrary to the good order of our nation. The actual proposal is in the GOV post and I will not spoil it here.

I could also call out the Church for another reason. Aside from a wrongful political overreach, the Church is, by encouraging the rewarding of illegals acts, also remiss in her duties. The Right to Property is a crucial part of the Natural Law and is codified in the Ten Commandments. It does not take a biblical scholar to point out that that right also applies to groups of people or nations. In Genesis, Abraham and Lot made an agreement that specified who was to receive what region in which to live and earn a living. Of course in our faith there is no “Greek and Jew,…… barbarian, Scythian…”, but our beliefs does not obligate or allow us to disregard laws that are not inherently wrong.


http://gatesofvienna.net/2013/09/the-secession-of-a-pleb/#more-30465

Excerpts below:

"The Catholic Church has for the most part avoided falling completely to the onslaught of radical feminism, and it has at least belatedly come to address issues of discipline with ultra-liberal priests and nuns that use their positions to advance agendas that are not part of Church practice. The magisterium has also finally demonstrated an effort to rid the church of pedophiles in her sacerdotal ranks.

She has resisted the implied demands of many in of the secular world that Christian churches (not Muslims, of course, their faith is sacred) drop any reference to sin regarding just about any sexual practice. Of particular credit to the Catholic Church in the United States is the Bishops’ refusal to meekly accept the patently unconstitutional demands that contraception, abortifacients, and abortions be paid for by the Church. I don’t know how this will end, but their stand on this issue is noble as well as being the correct one in the long run.

In short, the Church has for the most part defended her teachings and doctrine and has ended the horrific and indeed sinful indifference to the existence of pedophiles among the clergy.

Where the Church, particularly in the United States but also in Western Europe, has failed her faithful has been on social issues. In a bizarre twist of Liberation Theology that threatened the outlook of the Church in decades past, The Church of the West (as opposed to the eastern Churches) has taken positions that run contrary to the good order and integrity of the very civilizations and societies that have protected the Church and allowed her to develop free of molestation and subjugation.

If any country absorbs a reasonable number of immigrants, the process of assimilation is likely to move at a predictable if not always smooth pace. But if the same nation permits too many into its boundaries within too short a time and without minimal demands placed on new arrivals, assimilation becomes untenable; the invaded nation stands at risk of losing its sense of identity. Further, should those numbers of immigrants go unchecked, as America seems determined to do with eleven million (or more) people pouring in from Central and South America, the nation will begin to assume the ungovernable, corrupt and lawless characteristics of those same places the newcomers fled in the first place...........

Few would dispute the wisdom of having many self-sufficient, lawful nations. Instead, we face the reality of few democracies to whom all would flee for asylum from the dead-end despair in their native lands. In an attempt to avoid this, Western nations have been more than generous in material and financial aid to all sorts of countries without seeing any appreciable improvement in those places. We all have heard the analogy of opening up your home or wallet to the point that you are no longer in a position to help but instead become yourself someone in need of others’ aid. That maladaptation — having no secure personal boundaries — ends in ruin..............

The last time [European] Catholics had to engage in hostilities with forces under Church command was during the reunification of Italy in the 19th century.

Prior to those days, however, it was far from unusual for a Catholic citizen of a Catholic-majority state to participate in a conflict against forces under Papal command. History is replete with instances of, for example, Italian, Norman, French, and German forces contesting military and political control of disputed regions.

Even if we do not count the Spanish Armada, which also sailed away to its ultimate demise with full Papal approval, we still have the earlier and smaller fully Papal force that landed in Ireland with the unsuccessful mission to raise the Irish up against the Protestant English monarchy.

The Hapsburg Emperor Charles V himself, who sought to bring vast regions of Catholic Europe under a unified rule, also dispatched forces (which included Lutheran troops whoreally had a field day) in a sack of Rome.

Recall that English Catholics as a whole joined with their Protestant fellow-citizens when the Armada, mentioned above, did threaten their country.........

Excepting the Nativist period (the worst of which was quite short), the United States has been a nation in which Catholics can exercise the beliefs and yet be model citizens in manner quite different from Catholics of Western Europe. This was noted both by Orestes Brownson and Alexis de Tocqueville. Free of the memory of traditional entanglements mixing Church and state, as well as the lack of history in the US of supporting the old feudal order, Catholics did, in Tocqueville’s words (Democracy in America (Library of America)) —

"constitute the most republican and the most democratic class of citizens which exists in the Unites States:"

Brownson concurred in both his Union of Church and State and Works (Orestes Brownson : Selected Political Essays (Library of Conservative Thought)):

"…we lose nothing of Catholicity, nothing of its vigor and efficiency; we lose simply certain special favors of the government, and are relieved in turn from certain burdens at times almost too great for the church to bear, imposed by the government as the price of those favors. The loss is a great gain, and it is far better for the interests of the church to lose the favors and be freed from the burdens, than it is to retain the favors and bear the burdens."
Meanwhile, in modern-day America, I am not proposing that Catholics rise up against their Church. However, I do assert that we cannot stand by idly while those who occupy high-level ecclesial and lay positions in our Church use the pulpit and telephone to bully the flock into acquiescence, or threaten our few brave political leaders with the loss of elections if they don’t toe the line.

Catholics need to be cognizant of the critical differences between the authority of the Church on doctrinal matters, and the civic duty of the citizen to his country and his society. No statement from a Conference of Bishops nor a Papal declaration on an internal American matter such as immigration can ever be binding on individual Catholics. Indeed, the believer must always be ready to differentiate between the two swords of church and state.

At the moment our national integrity is threatened by a massive influx of people who entered America illegally. Granting them amnesty (again), no matter what euphemism is employed to do so, will be a grievous blow to our civic society and to our culture. Church officials have no more right to tell legislators how to handle this issue than I have to buy a plane ticket to Rome, take a taxi to the Vatican City, and demand to be given citizenship and a place to live.

Of course we may and should contact our elected officials to inform them that on this issue the Church does not speak for us. In addition, there is another option, a more direct approach........"


If you want to see the details of the proposed strike, please go to the Gates of Vienna link.







Sunday, September 1, 2013

Obama Pressuring Congress on Syria Attack

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/01/kerry-confident-congress-will-back-syria-attrack-but-lawmakers-express/

In act that effectively acknowledges that Obama's all to arms has resulted in the clearest proof yet of his rapidly vanishing influence (and increasing suspicion that the accusations are false*), the White House has gone into panic mode:

In response to the following report, I attempted to contact my Congressman, but his official (House of Representatives) email service was out of service. I have to wonder if this is happening in any other House offices. It of curse could be a result of a deluge of emails that have strained the system. I know that this smacks of paranoia, but I also cannot rule out the possibility that the White House wants to make sure that they have a free hand in strong-arming our Representatives. I would not be surprised if  they took steps to ensure that their Congressional targets have no input from their constituents to offer in defense of an intended "No" vote.

"The Obama administration, bolstered by evidence the Syrian government used lethal sarin gas on its own people, expressed confidence Sunday that Congress would back President Obama’s decision for a military strike on the Middle East country.

However, the president and his inner circle worked furiously over the weekend to win congressional support, appearing on Sunday shows, holding classified briefings and making calls to Capitol Hill leaders.

A senior administration officials told Fox News that the president, Vice President Joe Biden and Chief of Staff Denis McDonough made phone calls on Sunday to senators and House members urging them to vote in favor of the authorization of military force in Syria.

The official called the lobbying effort a "flood the zone" strategy, in an apparent acknowledgement of just how hard winning Capitol Hill approval will be.
The effort was preceded by Secretary of State John Kerry blanketing the Sunday shows and administration official proceeding with a round of weekend briefings, as Capitol Hill lawmakers said Obama may not have the votes right now......"

No doubt thoroughly brow-beaten by his narcissistic boss for failing to rally the world in support of the much-desired attack, Secretary of State John Kerry has again taken to assuring us that the Syrian government (and not the rebels, who have much less to lose ), were the perpetrators of the nerve gas:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/01/kerry-says-assad-regime-used-sarin-gas/

"Secretary of State John Kerry said on Sunday that Syria used Sarin gas in the chemical weapons attack on the Damascus suburbs earlier this month.

Earlier Kerry had said a “nerve agent” had been used, but did not specify which one. His comments, which he called a “very important recent development,” came this morning on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” according to Politico.

Kerry, who appeared on all five Sunday shows, added that the case against Syria continues to grow....."


Meanwhile, the rest of the world joins most in the US in expressing their opposition to a military strike:



Protesters around the world took to the streets to protest Saturday for and against a possible U.S.-led attack on Syria, as President Barack Obama announced he would seek congressional approval for such a move........"


[After a brief nod to the very few who voiced their support for a strike.....]
".......The demonstrations erupted on both East and West coasts of the United States, and cities in between..........

"The conflict's been going on for, what, almost 2 years now. Estimates are 100,000 Syrian civilians have been killed and all of a sudden the U.S. government has manufactured the excuse of the use of chemical weapons in Syria to use that excuse to intervene in Syria," said Tristan Brosnan, 25, of Washington.

Later, in Los Angeles, about 200 people shouting "Hands off Syria" protested against a possible American strike. They waved signs reading "No More War" and police said they wrote up more than 40 citations after demonstrators sat in street intersections and blocked traffic. Police reported two arrests.

In Boston, more than 200 protesters demonstrated in the Boston Commons against the possible use of American force. They chanted "Don't Bomb Syria!" repeatedly, and at least one speaker said congressional authorization wouldn't make an attack acceptable.

More than two dozen protesters gathered at the Arkansas Capitol to oppose a possible U.S. attack. Some wore T-shirts proclaiming "NO U.S. INTERVENTION IN SYRIA."......

In downtown Chicago, about 40 people walked quietly in the rain, circling a sculpture in Daley Plaza. Some carried signs that read "No War In Syria" and "Shut It Down.".........


In London, more than 1,000 protesters carrying Syrian flags and placards marched to Downing Street and rallied in Trafalgar Square. Some hailed the parliament's vote Thursday against British participation as a victory.

And about 700 people turned out for an anti-war demonstration in Frankfurt, Germany, police said. Organizers said only a "sovereign, independent Syria free of foreign interference" would make it possible for the Syrian people to shape the country's future."

Now this is ironic - even some f Obama's fellow Leftists are against a strike -

"At a protest organized by left-wing opposition parties in Amman, Jordan, Kawthar Arrar described any military intervention as "an aggression on the whole Arab world." The protesters gathered outside the U.S. embassy, chanting slogans and setting fire to American and Israeli flags."