Special Thank-You's Are in Order.

First off, a huge thank-you to all of my fellow bloggers and others who've left "Welcome Home" messages for Dave. He's home now...and, doubtlessly enjoying it.

Next, I would like to extend my sincerest grattitude to the man who made my snappy new banner...Jay Adkins.
Jay does awesome work. All that I told him was that I would like to incorporate an antique radio mic., and the banner should "match" the template already in place. A couple of days (yes, days!) later, BAM!!! My g-mailbox held my shiny new banner. First try was a knock-out!
If you need any web design done, give him a look-see. I can practically guarantee that you won't be disappointed. Jay is a pleasure to work with...and best of all...CHEAP!
Low overhead makes this possible. If you want to contact Jay, or view his work, simply visit Daddy Hoo, Jay Adkins.net, or skip directly over to his Design Site.

Thanks again to all of you. Now to get my writing up to par with that new banner=D.

Why is the left so afraid of the "neo-cons"???

I'm getting sick and tired of the leftists in this country giving credit for all that is happening in this country to the Neo-cons. They fear and loathe them.
I, for one, am at a loss as to why.
"The neo-cons started the war in Iraq"
"The neo-cons rigged the elections for Bush!"
"The neo-cons want to rule the world!"
"We must stop the neo-cons!"
I'm sick of it...and I intend to set the record straight.
As one of the few card carrying members of the Knight's Templar, The New World Order, The Illuminati, AND the Corporate War Machine...I can tell you that the "neo's" are the least of your worries.(To the liberals, that is)
Come on, Rove is a smart guy and all, but do you really think that he could rig two elections, premeditate a war in Iraq (and use 9/11 as an excuse to take out the most progressive liberals in the world...Uday an Qusay Hussein), cause Iran to start to develop nuclear weapons, get Nettanyahu's panties in a wad over it (so he'd bomb Iran after he's "elected" PM of Israel), and leave the entire middle east in chaos???
No. That was us. All of us.
You don't understand...your Ultra-Con overlords only want what's best for you. And we know what's best for you. Frankly, your liberalism itself is of our doing. (And all the while the people at the DU thought it was Rove's mind control device.) We've had the good people at a certain voting machine company perfecting that one for years.
How did we manage to accomplish all of this without getting caught???
We've been doing this for a long time. John Kennedy came close to finding our top secret meeting place. As did Nelson Mandella (he later vowed never to speak of us again.) What most of you don't know, is that raw crude contains a very valuable life-extending element called Gopinium. This is what allows us to remain hidden for decades without getting cought. Twenty years from now, you'll see me on the street and say "You look just like a guy I knew around the turn of the century."
And I'll say "Look, you sniveling liberal, nobody has given you permission to speak to one of your overlords" and you'll cry, because it's true.
So, keep worrying about the neo's. That's why we put them there. Now, on with the task at hand...

linked @ Stop The ACLU

Stop The ACLU Blogburst

crossposted from Stop The ACLU

ACLU : FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

WASHINGTON - The American Civil Liberties Union today expressed disappointment with the failure of the House to protect the liberty and freedom of innocent Americans when that body adopted flawed legislation to reauthorize the Patriot Act. The White House and its allies had placed enormous pressure on lawmakers to adopt the proposal that now heads to the Senate.

The ACLU noted that the conference report fails to require individualized suspicion before people's financial, medical or library records can be gathered by the FBI, as unanimously adopted by the Senate.ACLU Website

This is nothing more than feeding unnecessary paranoia for those who live in a state of Orwellian fear. First of all, I can't understand why people are so afraid of someone seeing their library records. If it's a public library, it's a public record. That includes any library that accepts public funding, which means virtually all college and high school libraries as well. There is a check and balance involved, because before someone's records can be obtained only after being approved by a federal judge. It would be a total waste of time for the FBI to care what someone is looking at in a Library, unless some other act of theirs puts up a flag that an investigation should be warranted. The ACLU are using scare tactics, creating the fear of Big Brother invading the libraries, when in fact investigators in ordinary criminal cases have been able to gain access to library records long before 9/11. The Feds already had these tools for cases in domestic criminal activities, the Patriot Act only extends these tools to investigators to use against terrorists.

Alberto Gonzales writes in the Washinton Post

Those who voice concern that Congress is rushing to reauthorize the expiring provisions fail to recognize the oversight it has conducted. In 2005, Congress held 23 hearings focused on reauthorization and heard from more than 60 witnesses. The Justice Department was pleased to provide witnesses at 18 of those hearings, with more than 30 appearances by our experts. I testified three times, explaining the importance of the act, responding to concerns and directly addressing the act's critics. My testimony was informed not only by the successes of the act but also by my personal meetings with representatives from groups such as the ACLU and the American Library Association. During the reauthorization discussion, I asked that certain provisions be clarified to ensure the protection of civil liberties, and Congress responded.

For example, Section 215 of the act permits the government to obtain records on an order issued by a federal judge. I agreed that the statute should allow a recipient of such an order to consult a lawyer and challenge it in court. Further, I agreed that Congress should make explicit the standard under which such orders are issued: relevance to an authorized national security investigation. In 2001 one prominent Democratic senator agreed that the "FBI has made a clear case that a relevance standard is appropriate for counterintelligence and counterterrorism investigations, as well as for criminal investigations."

The president has said that our number-one priority is preventing another catastrophic terrorist attack. Congress must act immediately and reauthorize the Patriot Act before the men and women in law enforcement lose the tools they need to keep us safe.

It isn't suprising that the ACLU would be against this, after all we are talking about an organization that thinks Gitmo detainees have the right to remain silent when interrogated. However, for the ACLU to pretend they care about people's privacy is a joke. The ACLU have been against the Patriot Act since it was first introduced. There have been no verified civil liberties abuses in the four years of the act's existence. Where privacy matters are concerned, the ACLU's record is much more tainted.

Just last year, the ACLU came under fire over privacy concerns.

The American Civil Liberties Union is using sophisticated technology to collect a wide variety of information about its members and donors in a fund-raising effort that has ignited a bitter debate over its leaders' commitment to privacy rights.

Some board members say the extensive data collection makes a mockery of the organization's frequent criticism of banks, corporations and government agencies for their practice of accumulating data on people for marketing and other purposes.

Daniel S. Lowman, vice president for analytical services at Grenzebach Glier & Associates, the data firm hired by the A.C.L.U., said the software the organization is using, Prospect Explorer, combs a broad range of publicly available data to compile a file with information like an individual's wealth, holdings in public corporations, other assets and philanthropic interests.

The issue has attracted the attention of the New York attorney general, who is looking into whether the group violated its promises to protect the privacy of its donors and members.

"It is part of the A.C.L.U.'s mandate, part of its mission, to protect consumer privacy," said Wendy Kaminer, a writer and A.C.L.U. board member. "It goes against A.C.L.U. values to engage in data-mining on people without informing them. It's not illegal, but it is a violation of our values. It is hypocrisy."

The organization has been shaken by infighting since May, when the board learned that Anthony D. Romero, its executive director, had registered the A.C.L.U. for a federal charity drive that required it to certify that it would not knowingly employ people whose names were on government terrorism watch lists.

A day after The New York Times disclosed its participation in late July, the organization withdrew from the charity drive and has since filed a lawsuit with other charities to contest the watch list requirement.

The group's new data collection practices were implemented without the board's approval or knowledge, and were in violation of the A.C.L.U.'s privacy policy at the time, said Michael Meyers, vice president of the organization and a frequent and strident internal critic. Mr. Meyers said he learned about the new research by accident Nov. 7 in a meeting of the committee that is organizing the group's Biennial Conference in July.

He objected to the practices, and the next day, the privacy policy on the group's Web site was changed. "They took out all the language that would show that they were violating their own policy," he said. "In doing so, they sanctified their procedure while still keeping it secret."

The ACLU has no room to talk. They need to sit down and shut up. The Patriot Act is a vital tool for law enforcement to keep us safe. The Senate does not need to let this important legislation expire.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com or Gribbit at GribbitR@gmail.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already onboard.

Iran Forging Iraqi Ballots

The following excerpt is turning out to be most likely bogus...the NY Times will now go into the same file as Newsweek. I am leaving this post up as my reaction has not changed. -M. Sheldon
from NY Times Hat tip to Jay

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Dec. 13 - Less than two days before nationwide elections, the Iraqi border police seized a tanker on Tuesday that had just crossed from Iran filled with thousands of forged ballots, an official at the Interior Ministry said.

The tanker was seized in the evening by agents with the American-trained border protection force at the Iraqi town of Badra, after crossing at Munthirya on the Iraqi border, the official said. According to the Iraqi official, the border police found several thousand partly completed ballots inside.

The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly, said the Iranian truck driver told the police under interrogation that at least three other trucks filled with ballots had crossed from Iran at different spots along the border.

The official, who did not attend the interrogation, said he did not know where the driver was headed, or what he intended to do with the ballots.

The seizure of the truck comes at a delicate time in Iran’s relations with both Iraq and the United States. The American government has said Iranian agents are deeply involved in trying to influence events in Iraq, by funneling money to Shiite political parties and by arming and training many of the illegal militias that are bedeviling the country.

Agents of the Iranian government are believed to be supporting the two main Shiite political parties here - the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq and the Dawa Party -with money and other assistance. Both parties support a strong role for Islam in the Iraqi state; however, compared with the Iranian government itself, which is a strict theocracy, the Iraqi version is relatively moderate.

In recent months, American officials in Baghdad and Washington, along with their British counterparts, have contended that sophisticated bombs have been smuggled across the border from Iran, and that some of them have been used against American and British soldiers. The bombs are thought to be far more sophisticated than most of the powerful but rather rudimentary ones used to attack American tanks and convoys here.

I, for one, am totally at a loss. Tehran doesn't want the democratic process to take place in Iraq???
Listen, people...At least three other trucks carrying these ballots have entered the country. This is obviously terrible news in and of itself. But allow me to get inside the heads of the terrorist organization that is Ahmadinejad's Iran. The sole reason for taking this action has to be to get at Israel from her neighboring country.
Big deal, right? It's just Israel, after all.
The problem with this line of thinking is that you will have to ignore the fact that Israel is the single greatest friend the US has in the Middle Eastern region. Add to this the fact that Tehran has actively (successfully?) been attempting to produce a nuclear arsenal, and that Saddam's loyalists have the know-how, and you've got a "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" situation.
Need further explanation?
The Saddamists in Iraq will help Iran get their nuclear weapons program running in a relatively short period of time, IF Iran gets them elected into positions of power in Iraq so as they can go back to the "status quo" of terror that was in place during Saddam's regime.
The Iraqi people now have their chance to shine. I predict that they will stand tall against these spineless Iranian thugs. They will prevail.
For you who doubt this...I'll make you a wager. If the Iraqi people rise up, you'll change your voter registration to Republican. If they fold, as the dems would have you believe...I'll admit that I was wrong all along...which is hard for me to do.
More will come on this subject as the situation develops.

Christians and Capital Punishment.

I have, since my youth, been considered by those close to me a author of good advice. So, it is no surprise that with "Tookie" Williams' execution being immanent, I have been asked on several occasions the same question...
"Isn't it un-Christian to kill?"
The answer is all but simple. You see, we get into a whole set of arguments with different printings/translations of the Bible, Christ's purpose on Earth, etc. All I know to do is answer them the best that I know how...which takes a while in matters of such seriousness.

First off, we have to realize that those famous words, "Thou shalt not kill" were originally penned in Hebrew. Directly translated, (in the King's English) this very same text would read "Thou shalt not Murder" The Hebrews had a funny way of using words that change depending on the context in which they were used. On such words, I take the knowledge of the Jewish people themselves over the most educated of King James' scribes. (Things such as this, I have previously cleared with a friend of mine, Amit, who is Israeli born and raised, and whose uncle is an 80 yr. old Orthodox Rabbi.) In which context, Murder means unlawful killing is against Mosaic law.

The question then arises, "But that's in the old testament...".
This is true, but find me one single place where Jesus said anything about abolishing the laws of God. In order to do that, it would imply that God's infinite wisdom is wrong. As it was, God had to send his son to die for the sin's of man, due to man's flaws. In fact, Jesus made it quite clear that he wasn't sent by The Father to replace the law, but to fulfill it.

Finally, there comes the arguments of "love thine enemy", etc.
While Jesus was quite clear on this, you have to read on down to see just how he meant it...He goes on to reference the Tax Collectors as the enemy. Not those who've sinned against God. Also note, he said nothing of loving enemies of God.

And then there's the Holy Scriptures that actually have Jesus in support of capitol punishment. For this one, I generally have to pull out my Bible, and prove it. I will do so for you now. {Please note that as a fundie, I pretty much use the King James version of the Bible, and will quote accordingly, It's not too hard to read, you're too lazy ;)}
St. Luke 20:9-16
Then began he to speak to the people this parable "A certain man planted a vineyard, and let it forth to husbandmen, and went into a far country for a long time. And at the season he sent a servant to the husbandmen, that they should give him of the fruit of vineyard: but the husbandmen beat him, and sent him away empty. And again he sent another servant: And they beat him also, and entreated him shamefully, and sent hi away empty. And again he sent a third: and they wounded him also, and cast him out. Then said the lord of the vineyard, What shall I do? I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him. But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come let us kill him, that the inheritance may be our's. So they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them? He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others.


Yes, for murder, capital punishment is lawful. Surprisingly, it is also lawful in cases of rapists, (Deut. 22:25) sodomy, (Lev. 18:22, 20:13) fornication, (Lev. 21:9) (Deut. 22:21-24) perjury, (Zech. 5:4) kidnapping, (Ex.21:16, Deut. 24:7) witchcraft, (Ex. 22:18) for striking or cursing father or mother, (Ex. 21:15,17, Lev. 20:9) disobedience to parents, (Deut. 21:18-21) theft, (Zech. 5:3,4) blasphemy, (Lev. 24:11-14,16,23) sabbath desecration, (Ex. 35:2, Num. 15:32-36) propagating false doctrines, (Deut. 13:1-10) refusing to abide by the decision of court, (Deut. 17:12) even homosexuals. (Lev. 20:13)

Hence it would be hypocritical to use the Bible as an end-all argument against Capital punishment.

Can they repent? Absolutely...if they actually repent, which is unlikely in most cases of such evil acts. Most feel no remorse, much less the sorrow for one's sins required for repentance. Remember, Jesus granted salvation to the thief hanging with him on the cross...but never pardoned his sentence to die.

So, the last question is about to arise, and I'm ready with my response...as I've given it many times. "But if he/she's a Christian now, isn't it wrong to execute them?"
To which I always respond, "Remember, Christians aren't exempt from God's laws, nor those of man...they are doubly tied to them.".

God Bless,
-M. Sheldon

Welcome Home...Pt.2

I'll not be around for long today, work calls. Dave has touched down in Indiana (sunday) and will be going through the headache that is military paperwork for the next few days. We'll get him "home" this weekend. Good thing is that he's stateside now, and we're thankful for that. If you'd like to leave him a message, you may do so here:
(remember, all comments moderated, so they will not appear immediately)
http://msheldon.blogspot.com/2005/12/welcome-home.html
Thanks are in order to all of my fellow bloggers who've done promos for this event...mere words on a screen cannot express the best wishes that go out to you.
-M. Sheldon