ANDREW MALONE: Rape, murder and voodoo on the island of the damned | Mail Online

ANDREW MALONE: Rape, murder and voodoo on the island of the damned | Mail Online.

I think that it is very important for people to have some background information on Haiti so that they can understand why Pat Robertson would say that he believes that Haiti is under a curse. The news article that I have linked to will give some of that perspective. Haiti  has practiced many of the things for which God cursed the Canaanites to annihilation. When we consider what has happened to Haiti we Americans should also fear His coming judgment on the crime of abortion and the growing promotion of Sodomy.

I believe in giving to missionary work in Haiti but not much else. If God is pleased to save Haiti it will only be through the leaven of the Gospel not through more and greater foreign aid. We need to let Haitians solve their own problems and leave them alone. They need to find something the world wants and will pay for and then they will have prosperity.

When the Japanese were putting their bombed out wreck of a country back together after WWII they found that they could make money selling us cheap little wind-up toys made from recycled fruit cans. They were junk but we bought them. I played with those cheap Japanese junk cars as a kid. They would break and we would open them up and find out that they had been made from Dole pineapple cans.

There are solutions to Haiti’s problems but the will not be found at the end of a welfare line. Yes, humanitarian aid now, but no more meddling with Haiti’s affairs after that. We need to end the false religion that American is the Messianic state that has been ordained to save the world.

Talking about talking about race | James Poulos | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk


Talking about talking about race | James Poulos | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk.This article is well worth reading and I especially recommend  it to the presbyters of the Western Carolina Presbytery PCA who will soon be considering another fatuous resolution on the designer sin du jour called “Racism”. I wish that they would focus their attention on some of the garden variety sins that are actually in the Bible like pride, tale-bearing and lying and which are rampant in society and even the presbytery. If they insist on dealing with something more exotic, they might even go so far as to look into the sin of “offering strange incense” that goes on in some of the worship services of the PCA and elsewhere, but no, they would much rather waste the time of the court on codifying a Marxist sin that appears nowhere per se in the Bible

Every so often, it seems that some in the Evangelical churches feel compelled to propagate another spasm of kritika i samokritika or criticism and  self-criticism with regard to racism, vid. the NAPARC statement, the recent, much-contested PCA Pastoral Letter on Racism and no doubt there are others by the Quakers, Unitarians, etc. This process of self-unmasking is not part of Christianity but is the Marxist religion’s version of confession, repentance and absolution.  It is a psychological ploy to enforce alignment with the Party values.

This review is illustrative of the problem

Igal Halfin’s book ,Terror in My Soul: Communist Autobiographies on Trial, examines the language and ritual of Russia’s Communist Party in the 1920s and 1930s. In particular, the author looks at party discourse and autobiography in order to shed light on the brutal dynamics of Joseph Stalin’s Great Purge. He emphasizes the power of Bolshevik language and claims that the potential for violence was inherent in Communist discourse itself. According to Halfin, “a Manichean view of the universe penetrated the Communist discourse” (p. 13), and this discourse, which divided society into the good and the evil, “had unintended consequences” (p. 5). The book effectively broadens our understanding not only of the Communist Party but of revolutionary violence in Soviet Russia. 1
In his examination of Communist discourse, Halfin focuses on party members rather than the Soviet population at large, and seeks to explain how Russia’s ruling elite could turn against itself in the 1930s. For example, he states that the indiscriminate persecution of the opposition after the Kirov murder in 1934 “had its roots in the official political discourse” (p. 230). Halfin argues that party members whose thoughts were structured by the language of Bolshevism embraced the violence inherent in this language.

Racism, to those pushing this current paroxysm of self-criticism, is the new Original Sin. This is the Evil that is preventing the triumph of Christ’s-kingdom-here-on-Earth-and-right-now.  They have unfortunately embraced the Manichean or Gnostic dualistic view that racism and even race itself are the final evils to be overcome by we the good people. They are Yankee Utopians in their outlook. Christ is not establishing his kingdom. They are. If they could just kill racism (whatever that is) Progress would uh, well progress.

With these people sin, real sin, is what those other people are doing and thinking (especially thinking).  The locus of evil is always outside of themselves. It is in someone else and we need to get rid of their wrong, bad thoughts or we must get rid of them. Violence is inherent in their Marxist categories and Communist discourse.  So they will purge the ranks, burn the witches, drown the racists, hang the Old Earthers and the New Jerusalem will descend from the clouds.

Is there such a thing as racism? Not based on the current definitions and how the concept works out in reality. The term itself is indefinite and amorphous. An undefined word is practically useless. In practice the word is a shape-shifter. As a term “racism” has come to define things that have nothing to do with race. Watch the “A Conversation about Race” to see this in action.

As best “racism” is not a certain kind of thought pattern or action. It is a club. It means shut-up. In practice it is an insult or term of opprobrium that only works against non-whites. It means the same thing as nigger, but for white people. Non-whites who practice or say things that others may consider to be racist are never labeled as racists. Witness Rev. Jessie Jackson. Is he called as racist because he referred to New York City as Hymie-town due to its large Jewish population? No. But if he were Rush Limbaugh he would be called racist until he died. That is because in reality the word only applies to whites who deviate from the party-line of Cultural Marxism (i.e. Political Correctness).

So, when an almost purely white denomination tries to issue its own definition of the word they stray into the fever swamps of anti-racism. That attempt in itself can be seen as a “racist” act. They may think that they are doing something good but they fail to realize that they are not in charge of the definition of racism. They are oppressors and non-whites are the oppressed. Therefore anything they say on the subject is an attempt to wrest power from the powerless.

Don’t ask me. I know that this verbiage makes no sense to sane people but it has its own internal logic if one understands the Marxist/Hegelian construct that underlies the concept of “racism.” The non-whites are the proletariat who are oppressed and the whites are the oppressors.

When one begins to look at the video  the history of political correctness you will understand how the West is being demolished by its own convenient idiots. People who promote P.C. concepts like racism are actually helping to destroy the Western civilization’s bulwark protecting Christianity. Promoting the idea that “racism” is a sin is helping to destroy the existence of Christianity.

I would counsel those in the Church who are worried about race relations to focus on Biblical categories rather than Marxist ones. Talk about pride even race-based pride, talk about arrogance or race-based hatred or sloth. Talk about the things that are in Scripture and stop falling into the hands of the anti-Christs by talking like them and stop promoting their agenda.

Noam Chomsky’s Fateful Triangle

I just began reading Noam Chomsky’s Fateful Triangle, the United States, Israel & The Palestinians. The book was published in 1999. On page x of the preface he writes,

“A “worst case” prediction for the crisis a few years ahead would be a war between the U.S. and Iran: unlikely, but not impossible. Israel is pressing very hard for such a confrontation, recognizing  Iran to be the most serious military threat that it faces.”

I found it very interesting that Israel has been pushing such a nefarious war for so long, hoping to make us shed our boys’ blood to prop up her interests. They still want that war and fortunately we are too tied up in two other stupid wars to be able to sell that particular bit of adventurism to the folks at home yet.

He continues on page xi:

“The propaganda campaign about “Islamic fundamentalism” has it farcical elements—even putting aside the fact that U.S. culture compares with Iran in its religious fundamentalism. The most extreme Islamic fundamentalist state in teh world is the loyal U.S.  ally Saudi Arabia —or, to be more precise, the family dictatorship that serves as the “Arab facade” behind which the U.S. effectively controls the Arabian peninsula, to borrow the terms of British colonial rule. The West has no problems with Islamic fundamentalism there. Probably one of the most fanatic Islamic fundamentalist groups in the world is recent years was led by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the terrorist extremist who had been a CIA favorite and prime recipient of the $3.3 billion in (official) U.S. aid given to the Afghan rebels (with roughly the same amount reported form Saudi Arabia), the man who shelled Kabul with thousands killed, driving hundreds of thousands of people out of the city (including all Western embassies), in and effort to shoot his way into power . . .

Similarly, it is not at all concealed in Israel that its invasion of Lebanon in 1982 was undertaken in part to destroy the secular nationalism of the PLO, becoming a real nuisance with its persistent call for a peaceful diplomatic settlement, which was undermining the U.S. -Israeli strategy of gradual integration of the occupied territories within Israel. One result was the creation of Hizbolla, an Iranian-backed fundamentalist group that drove Israel out of most of Lebanon.”

That paragraph then reminded me of this classic interview about the 2006 invasion of Lebanon given by George Galloway. This is a case study in how to handle these silly, empty talking-heads that are simply propaganda posters and disinformation agents. Study his techniques in handling a hostile interviewer.

An oath without God is not an oath at all | citizen-times.com | Asheville Citizen-Times

An oath without God is not an oath at all | citizen-times.com | Asheville Citizen-Times.

I just found out that the Asheville Citizen-Times published my letter to the editor about oaths to God. I am sorry that I missed the chance to interact with the people who left comments.