Monthly Archives: May 2011

“We have done this to avenge…”Ahsanullah Ahsan, a spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban

A soldier of Pakistani para military force collects ...

Soldier of Pakistani para military force

A soldier of Pakistani para military force collects the belongings of his colleagues after a bombing in Shabqadar near Peshawar, Pakistan on Friday, May 13, 2011. A police officer says the death toll in a pair of explosions outside a security force training center in northwest Pakistan has risen to 80. Liaqat Ali Khan says 66 victims in the attack Friday were recruits for the Frontier Corps. The attack is the bloodiest in Pakistan since the U.S. raid that killed the al-Qaida chief on May 2. Ahsanullah Ahsan, a spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban, has said the attack was in retaliation for bin Laden’s death.

Ishtiaz Mahsud of the the Associated Press reported this morning:

Pakistani intelligence officials say a U.S. missile strike killed three people near the Afghan border.

The four missiles struck a vehicle Friday in the Doga Madakhel village of North Waziristan tribal region. North Waziristan is home to many militant groups dedicated to attacking Western troops in Afghanistan.

The two officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to media. They did not know the identities of the dead.

The strike occurred amid tensions between the U.S. and Pakistan over the May 2 American raid that killed al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil. The U.S. relies heavily on the covert, CIA-run missile program to kill Taliban and al-Qaida militants in Pakistan’s tribal areas.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.

SHABQADAR, Pakistan (AP) — A pair of suicide bombers attacked recruits leaving a paramilitary training center in Pakistan on Friday, killing 80 people in the first retaliation for the killing of Osama bin Laden by American commandos last week.

The blasts in the northwest were a reminder of the savagery of al-Qaida-linked militants in Pakistan. They occurred even as the country faces international suspicion that elements within its security forces may have been harboring bin Laden, who was killed in a raid in Abbottabad, about a three hours’ drive from the scene of the bombing.

We have done this to avenge the Abbottabad incident,” Ahsanullah Ahsan, a spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban, told The Associated Press in a phone call. He warned that the group was also planning attacks on Americans living inside Pakistan.

The bombers blew themselves up in Shabqadar at the main gate of the facility for the Frontier Constabulary, a poorly equipped but front-line force in the battle against al-Qaida and allied Islamist groups like the Pakistani Taliban close to the Afghan border. Like other branches of Pakistan’s security forces, it has received U.S. funding to try to sharpen its skills.

At least 80 people were killed, including 66 recruits, and around 120 people were wounded, said police officer Liaqat Ali Khan.

Around 900 young men were leaving the center after spending six months of training there. They were in high spirits and looking forward to seeing their families, for which some had brought gifts, a survivor said.

Some people were sitting inside public minivans and others were loading luggage atop the vehicles when the bombers struck, witnesses said.

“We were heading toward a van when the first blast took place and we fell on the ground and then there was another blast,” said 21-year-old Rehmanullah Khan. “We enjoyed our time together, all the good and bad weather and I cannot forget the cries of my friends before they died.”

The scene was littered with shards of glass mixed with blood and flesh. The explosions destroyed at least 10 vans.

It was the first major militant attack in Pakistan since bin Laden’s death on May 2, and the deadliest this year.

Militants had pledged to avenge the killing and launch reprisal strikes in Pakistan.

The Taliban spokesman also suggested the attack was aimed as punishment against Pakistani authorities for failing to stop the unilateral U.S. raid that killed bin Laden, something that has sparked popular nationalist and Islamist anger.

“The Pakistani army has failed to protect its land,” Ahsan said.

In its communications, the Taliban often tries to tap into popular sentiments in the country, where anti-Americanism is often stronger than feelings against Islamist militants. This is despite militant attacks over the last four years claiming the lives of many hundreds, if not thousands, of civilians.

Some 350 lawyers sympathetic with Islamists attended special prayers for bin Laden on the premises of the provincial high court in the eastern city of Lahore on Friday. The lawyers cursed the May 2 raid, chanting “Down with America.”

The explosive vests used in Friday’s attacks were packed with ball bearings and nails, police said.

Police official Nisar Khan said a suicide bomber in his late teens or early 20s set off one of the blasts.

The first blast occurred in the middle of the road, and after that there was a huge blast that was more powerful than the first,” said Abdul Wahid, a 25-year-old recruit whose legs were wounded in the blasts.

He said he was knocked to the ground by the force of the explosions.

“After falling, I just started crawling and dragging myself to a safer place … along the wall of a roadside shop,” he said.

The Sept. 11 mastermind and at least four others were killed by U.S. Navy SEALs who raided bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, a garrison city not far from the capital. Bin Laden is believed to have lived in the large house for up to six years.

Pakistani officials have denied knowing he was there but have criticized the American raid ordered by President Barack Obama as a violation of their country’s sovereignty. To counter allegations that Pakistan had harbored bin Laden, the officials have pointed out that many thousands of Pakistani citizens, and up to 3,000 of its security forces, have died in suicide bombings and other attacks since Sept. 11, 2001, when Islamabad became an ally of the U.S. in taking on Islamist extremists.

Many of the attacks in Pakistan have targeted security forces, but government buildings, religious minorities, public places and Western targets have also been hit.

___

Associated Press writers Ashraf Khan and Deb Riechmann in Islamabad, Babar Dogar in Lahore and Ishtiaq Mahsud in Dera Ismail Khan contributed to this report.

Family members accompany a man, who was injured ...

Family members accompany man, who was injured

Family members accompany a man, who was injured by a suicide bomb blast in Charsadda, as he is treated at Lady Reading hospital in Peshawar May 13, 2011. Suicide bombers attacked a Pakistani paramilitary academy on Friday killing 80 people in revenge for the death of Osama bin Laden as Pakistani anger over the U.S. raid to get the al Qaeda leader showed no sign of cooling.

Senator Pryor asks for Spending Cut Suggestions! Here are a few!(Part 48)

Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below:

Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Yesterday I emailed to this above address and I got this email back from Senator Pryor’s office:

Please note, this is not a monitored email account. Due to the sheer volume of correspondence I receive, I ask that constituents please contact me via my website with any responses or additional concerns. If you would like a specific reply to your message, please visit http://pryor.senate.gov/contact. This system ensures that I will continue to keep Arkansas First by allowing me to better organize the thousands of emails I get from Arkansans each week and ensuring that I have all the information I need to respond to your particular communication in timely manner.  I appreciate you writing. I always welcome your input and suggestions. Please do not hesitate to contact me on any issue of concern to you in the future.

Therefore, I went to the website and sent this email below at 7:10 am:

Here are a few more I just emailed to him myself.

Senator Rand Paul on Feb 7, 2011 wrote the article “A Modest $500 Billion Proposal: My spending cuts would keep 85% of government funding and not touch Social Security,” Wall Street Journal and he observed:

Here are some of his specific suggestions:

State
Agency/Program Funding Level Savings % Decrease
State $8.424 B $20.321 B 71%
Despite billions of dollars spent in attempts to prop up economically weak countries, U.S. foreign aid has had almost an opposite effect. In the 1990s, a Clinton administration task force found that despite decades of foreign assistance, most of Africa and parts of Latin America, Asia, and the Middle East are economically worse off today than they were 20 years ago. In 2000, the Meltzer Commission found that the World Bank and organizations like it spent record levels backing projects in developing nations, only to have 55 to 60 percent of them fail because the money went to poorly managed economies where the money was either squandered by corrupt officials or imprudently spent.
Instead of reaching the people who need it, foreign aid has increased the size of the state rather than the welfare of the people. After reviewing aid flowing to 95 countries, researchers at the London School of Economics found that
virtually all the aid went toward consumption. It did not increase investment in growth, nor benefit the poor. But it did increase the size of government. Historical examples tell us the same: From 1961 to 1989, the U.S. sent well over $2 billion in aid to India, almost all of which went to the Indian state. Similarly, in the 1980s and 90s, African economists frequently complained that 90 percent of U.S. aid to sub-Saharan Africa went directly to governments.
Finally, there is no evidence that aiding developing nations produces rapid and widespread economic reforms.
Though many list South Korea and Taiwan as success stories of U.S. economic assistance, those counties began to take off economically only after massive U.S. aid was cut off. Similarly, numerous studies have disputed the link
between aid money and economic reforms. In fact, A 2002 World Bank study admitted that they had been “overly optimistic about the prospects for reform, thereby contributing to the misallocation of aid.”

Kate Middleton and Prince William: Marriage made in Heaven? (Part 22)

Prince William and Kate moved in together about a year ago. In this clip above the commentator suggested that maybe Prince Charles and Princess Diana would not have divorced if they had lived together before marriage. Actually Diana was a virgin, and it was Charles’ uncle (Louis Mountbatten) that gave him the advice that he should seek to marry a virgin.

I really do wish Kate and William success in their marriage.  Nevertheless, I do not think it is best to live together before marriage like they did, and I am writing this series to help couples see how best to prepare for marriage.

Albert Mohler wrote an excellent article, ” ‘The Cohabitation Trap’–Why Marriage Matters,” August 16, 2005 and I  wanted to post a portion of it everyday and here is part 1:  

Does living together before marriage lead to successful marriages? The very fact that Psychology Today takes up this question in its August 2005 cover story is significant. In essence, the article “The Cohabitation Trap: When ‘Just Living Together’ Sabotages Love,” provides a fascinating look into how secular social science evaluates the question. Written by Nancy Wartik, the article is advertised with the following blurb: “Living together before marriage seems like a smart way to road test the relationship. But cohabitation may lead you to wed for all the wrong reasons–or turn into a one-way trip to splitsville.” Wartik’s article deserves attention, and Christians should be interested to overhear this secular consideration of marriage and its meaning.

Wartik begins the article by describing her own situation–currently married to the man she lived with prior to matrimony. Looking back, she explains her situation: “By then, we were 99 percent sure we’d marry someday–just not without living together first. I couldn’t imagine getting hitched to anyone I hadn’t taken on a test-spin as a roommate. Conjoin with someone before sharing a bathroom? Not likely!”

The logic Wartik describes is shared by millions of Americans. According to her research, nearly five million opposite-sex couples in the United States currently live together without marriage, and millions more have done so at some time in the past. Within just a few years of deciding to live together, most couples either get married or dissolve the relationship.

An amazingly large number of Americans see cohabitation as something of a laboratory for future marriage. Individuals agree to cohabitate, enjoying personal and sexual intimacy, without making the final commitment of marriage. The period of cohabitation amounts to a test-run for marriage. The logic is simple–couples believe that living together will allow them to make an informed and reasonable decision about marriage. 

Nevertheless, the research is now clear. Cohabitation prior to marriage serves to undermine, rather than to strengthen the marital bond. Here’s how Wartik summarizes the research: “Couples who move in together before marriage have up to two times the odds of divorce, as compared with couples who marry before living together. Moreover, married couples who have lived together before exchanging vows tend to have poorer-quality marriages than couples who moved in after the wedding. Those who cohabited first report less satisfaction, more arguing, poorer communication and lower levels of commitment.”

Social scientists are alarmed at these findings. Some now believe that cohabitation before marriage undermines the very notion of commitment. As Wartik explains, “The precautions we take to ensure marriage is right for us may wind up working against us.”

__________________________

Tim Hawkins Things you don’t say to your wife

 

Official royal wedding photos: Prince William, Kate Middleton are all smiles [Poll]

 .

The portraits, taken by their official photographer Hugo Burnand in the Buckingham Palace throne room, include three poses: A romantic image of the couple alone, a cheery ensemble picture of the pair with the children,  

Official royal wedding photo of Prince William, Kate Middleton and one for the family album, featuring the bride and groom with the wedding party, their parents, siblings and of course William’s grandparents, Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip.

 Of course the monarchy in England no longer has the power that it used to. Now the power is with the house of commons. Likewise, in the USA President Obama and the Congress have all the power.

Monarchy The Royal Family at Work Part 4 of 7
  

Adrian Rogers – Simplicity of Salvation (1 4)

Weekend to Remember Story – Dennis Rainey

NYC Terror Plot Arrest May 12, 2011

NYC terror plot arrests

The Associated Press reported today:

Two U.S. residents, including one who complained that the world was treating Muslims “like dogs,” bought guns and a grenade and wanted to carry out a terror plot against a New York synagogue, officials said Thursday.

One of the alleged homegrown terrorists also expressed interest in bombing the Empire State Building, police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said.

But there was no indication that the plot orchestrated as part of a sting operation ever put New Yorkers in danger and no evidence that the men were affiliated with any terrorist organization.

Ahmed Ferhani, a 26-year-old of Algerian descent, and Mohamed Mamdouh, a 20-year-old of Moroccan descent, plotted to bomb a “major synagogue” in Manhattan and bought several weapons and an inert hand grenade from an undercover officer, city officials said in announcing the arrests.

Ferhani and Mamdouh were arraigned in Manhattan court late Thursday afternoon. Ferhani wore a pin-striped suit and carried a Yankees cap, Mamdouh was wearing jeans. They were being held without bail and face life in prison if convicted.

Their attorneys said the two denied the charges

“Mr. Ferhani tells me he hasn’t committed any crime at all,” said lawyer Stephen Pokart.

Mamdouh’s attorney, Steven Fusfeld, noted that even under the prosecutor’s version of the events, which he doesn’t think was true, Mamdouh’s alleged involvement is less than Ferhani’s and it wasn’t right to treat them both the same.

“My client says he is not guilty of these crimes,” he said. “He’s upset because he maintains he committed no crime.”

Officials said investigators had been using an undercover detective wearing a wire to track Ferhani for several months. They said the detective heard Ferhani say he hated Jews and was fed up with the way Muslims — especially Palestinians — were treated around the world.

“They’re treating us like dogs,” Ferhani said once, according to Kelly.

Ferhani is also the one who expressed interest in the Empire State Building attack, Kelly said.

According to a criminal complaint drafted under state terror laws, Ferhani told the detective about “his intent to participate in jihad,” meaning holy war, and that “he would become a martyr.”

Over time, Ferhani “showed a pattern of growing anger, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance said.

“His plans became bigger and more violent with every passing week,” Vance said.

The undercover detective had several meetings with the men during which Ferhani discussed the idea of attacking a synagogue, the complaint said. Mamdouh emphasized the need for proper training, the complaint said, so they would not get caught like “the one that put the car in Times Square” — a reference to the failed bombing last year by Faisal Shahzad.

Ferhani suggested disguising himself as a worshipping Jew so he could infiltrate a synagogue and leave a bomb inside, the complaint said. He also discussed using grenades, “and described pulling the pins and throwing them into the synagogue,” it added.

On May 5, the undercover detective introduced the men to another officer pretending to be an illegal gun dealer at a meeting where Ferhani stated he needed the weapons “for the cause,” the complaint said.

“We gonna be victorious,” it quoted Ferhani as saying.

At a roadside meeting Wednesday on Manhattan’s West Side, one of the undercover officers handed Ferhani a bag holding three handguns, three boxes of ammo and the inert grenade. As soon as Ferhani put the bag into the trunk of a car, he was arrested, the complaint said. Mamdouh was picked up nearby.

New York City police have been on high alert for potential threats to the city since the U.S. raid that killed al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden over a week ago, though Kelly said the men had no apparent link to al-Qaida.

“We are concerned about lone wolves acting against New York city in the wake of the killing of bin Laden,” Bloomberg said. “Those perhaps are the toughest to stop.”

Officials refused to give details on how the first undercover officer met Ferhani, who later introduced the officer to Mamdouh.

Ferhani, who had been arrested for a robbery in Manhattan last October, was known to the department through intelligence before the arrest. Police said they shared the information with the Joint Terrorism Task Force, which declined to pursue the case federally.

New York passed its own anti-terrorism law within six days of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, but this case is the first time it has been used to prosecute suspected terrorism.

“New York City is an international symbol of freedom and liberty, and for that reason we will always be a target,” Bloomberg said. “And we will always be on guard to protect the people of this city.”

Authorities said Ferhani, who is unemployed, moved to the U.S. in August 1995 from Algeria with two siblings and his parents, who claimed asylum. He has been living in Queens and had been granted permanent resident status by authorities, but he is facing deportation.

Mamdouh, a tall lanky man who is a native of Casablanca, is a taxi service dispatcher. He came to the United States with his parents in August 1999 and is now a U.S. citizen, officials said. His attorney said he lives in Queens with his brother and sister, and his parents are local business owners.

The case recalled another NYPD investigation that resulted in the conviction of a Pakistani immigrant on charges he plotted to bomb the subway station in Herald Square to avenge the wartime abuses of Iraqis.

The suspect, Shahawar Matin Siraj, had caught the attention of a police informant and an undercover officer — both assigned to track Islamic extremists following the Sept. 11 attacks — with his anti-American rants.

After plotting with the informant, Siraj and another man who later became a cooperator against him were arrested on the eve of the 2004 Republican National Convention carrying crude diagrams of the subway station situated below a dense shopping district that includes Macy’s flagship department store.

Siraj was sentenced in 2007 to 30 years in prison.

___

Associated Press writers Jim Fitzgerald, Chris Hawley and Tom Hays contributed to this report.

Osama bin Laden
 

Broadcast
As the U.S. fought wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, bin Laden periodically released audio and video recordings (like this one, from 2007) calling for the destruction of America and its allies.

Mike Huckabee to Osama bin Laden: “Welcome to Hell” (Part 8)Woody Allen’s movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors” is a perfect example of why hell the only “enforcement factor”

Crimes & Misdemeanors (pictured is Judah and his criminal brother, ultimately his brother hires a hitman to take out Judah’s girlfriend who threatens to turn Judah over to the cops)

Crimes & Misdemeanors

Crimes And Misdemeanors 1989 9/13

Adrian Rogers – Crossing God’s Deadline Part 4

crimes & misdemeanors

Best scene of the movie!!!!

_________________________________

John Brummett in his article “Huckabee speaks for bad guy below,” Arkansas News Bureau, May 5, 2011 had to say:

Are we supposed to understand and accept that Mike Huckabee is in hell where he has official duties as a greeter,welcoming Osama bin-Laden?

We all suspect strongly, of course, that bin-Laden will spend eternity in hell, whatever his form and whatever hell’s. But we should not embrace a politician’s seeking electoral gain by dictating and announcing after-life dispositions. Those we should defer to a higher power, whose divine authority no mortal man should dare usurp, even for TV ratings or votes, or both.

I really am uncomfortable with all this kind of lighthearted talk about hell. The traditional Christian view of hell is a very serious doctrine. It is a necessary doctrine and today I want to show why.

I recently read a great article  “Hell:The Horrible Choice,” by Patrick Zukeran of Probe Ministries. Here is a portion:

 Why Hell Is Necessary and Just

Is hell necessary? How is this doctrine consistent with a God of love? These are questions I face when I speak on the fate of unbelievers. The necessity and justice of hell can be recognized when we understand the nature of God and the nature of man.

Hell is necessary because God’s justice requires it. Our culture focuses mostly on God’s nature of love, mercy, and grace. However, God is also just and holy, and this must be kept in balance. Justice demands retribution, the distribution of rewards and punishments in a fair way. God’s holiness demands that He separate himself entirely from sin and evil (Habakkuk 1:13). The author of Psalm 73 struggles with the dilemma of the suffering of the righteous and the prosperity of the wicked. Joseph Stalin was responsible for the death of millions in the Soviet Union, but he died peacefully in his sleep without being punished for his deeds. Since evil often goes unpunished in this lifetime, it must be dealt with at a future time to fulfill God’s justice and holiness.

.
Below you will find a discussion by Anton Scamvougeras on the Movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors.” I think he does a good job of describing everyone’s position in the plot and their worldviews. There are two main problems with his comments. First, in part one he calls Judah a “lazy theist.” Actually he was raised a theist and left his theism behind in college when he became an agnostic or atheist.

Later after having his former girlfriend killed he is convicted by his God-given conscience that he will pay for his sin. His theological views change for a couple of weeks and then when he is not caught his atheism returns for good.

Why did Judah feel guilt? In the Bible Romans chapter one clearly points out that God has revealed Himself through both the created world around us  and also in a God-given conscience that testifies to each person that God exists.
These are the exact two places mentioned by the scripture   Romans 1:18-20 (Amplified version)  

18For God’s [holy] wrath and indignation are revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who in their wickedness repress and hinder the truth and make it inoperative.

    19For that which is known about God is evident to them and made plain in their inner consciousness, because God [Himself] has shown it to them.

    20For ever since the creation of the world His invisible nature and attributes, that is, His eternal power and divinity, have been made intelligible and clearly discernible in and through the things that have been made (His handiworks). So [men] are without excuse [altogether without any defense or justification].  

What Judah does is reject his conscience and the result was that he embraced his selfish desires. That is also described in this same passage in Romans in the two following verses: 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools.  

There is a second problem with the commentary by Anton Scamvougeras. He describes the Godless universe that Allen has pictured as excruciating or exhilarating. The problem I have is the excuse by some people that they do not see the full ramifications of embracing a “Godless universe.” The word “excruciating” is the proper description of that reality. How can the word “exhilarating” be used? Solomon showed us in the first 11 chapters of Ecclesiastes what the world “under the sun” without God in the picture looks like and it forces one to embrace nihilism. (See previous post on this about Solomon’s search.) However, the atheist has to live in the world that God made with the conscience that God gave him. This creates a tension. The agnostic Carl Sagan felt the tension too.

 What does Dr. Sagan have Dr. Arroway say at the end of the movie Contact when she is testifying before Congress about the alien that  communicated with her? See if you can pick out the one illogical word in her statement: “I was given a vision how tiny, insignificant, rare and precious we all are. We belong to something that is greater than ourselves and none of us are alone.”  

Dr Sagan deep down knew that we are special so he could not avoid putting the word “precious” in there. Francis Schaeffer said unbelievers are put in a place of tension when they have to live in the world that God has made because deep down they know they are special because God has put that knowledge in their hearts.We are not the result of survival of the fittest and headed back to the dirt forevermore.

I would love to hear from any atheist that would present a case for lasting meaning in life apart from God. It seems to me that H. J. Blackham was right in his accessment of the predictament that atheists face:

On humanist assumptions [the assumption that there is no God and life has evolved by time and chance alone], life leads to nothing, and every pretense that it does not is a deceit. If there is a bridge over a gorge which spans only half the distance and ends in mid-air, and if the bridge is crowded with human beings pressing on, one after another they fall into the abyss. The bridge leads to nowhere, and those who are pressing forward to cross it are going nowhere. . . It does not matter where they think they are going, what preparations for the journey they may have made, how much they may be enjoying it all . . . such a situation is a model of futility (H. J. Blackham et al., Objections to Humanism (Riverside, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1967).)

Woody Allen’s film does a great job of showing the need for the “enforcement factor.” One reviewer made it sound like the movie was unrealistic and Judah could have smoothtalked his way out of this. However, Woody Allen anticipated this objection and that is why he threw in the illegal financial dealings of Judah that his former girlfriend knew about. Now instead of just losing his marriage he may have to go to jail.

Enjoy the clips below and let me know what you think.

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 2

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 3

Part 3 of 3: ‘Is Woody Allen A Romantic Or A Realist?’

A discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie, Crimes and Misdemeanors

Balanced Budget Amendment the answer? Boozman says yes, Pryor no, Part 24 (Milton Friedman tells us how to stay free Part 3)

Photo detail

Steve Brawner in his article “Safer roads and balanced budgets,” Arkansas News Bureau, April 13, 2011, noted:

The disagreement is over the solutions — on what spending to cut; what taxes to raise (basically none ever, according to Boozman); whether or not to enact a balanced budget amendment (Boozman says yes; Pryor no); and on what policies would promote the kind of economic growth that would make this a little easier.

I am going to continue this series and mainly include the opinions of Milton Friedman concerning these matters. Today I have included some comments from Milton Friedman from his Film Series “Free to Choose: Episode 10 How to Stay Free,” which addresses several issues concerning how to control our spending.  This is part 3 of this series concerning Milton Friedman’s thoughts from this video clip. 

Milton Friedman:What we need is widespread public recognition that the central government should be limited to its basic functions. Defending the nation against foreign enemies. Preserving order at home. Mediating our dispute. We must come to recognize that voluntary cooperation through the market and in other ways is a far better way to solve our problem than turning them over to the government.

__________________________

If we had the federal government spending money on these basic functions that the founders envisioned then we would have no problem at all. 


Mike Huckabee to Osama bin Laden: “Welcome to Hell” (Part 7)Woody Allen’s movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors” is a perfect example of why hell the only “enforcement factor”

Crimes And Misdemeanors 1989 7/13

Adrian Rogers – Crossing God’s Deadline Part 3

Crimes And Misdemeanors 1989 8/13

John Brummett in his article “Huckabee speaks for bad guy below,” Arkansas News Bureau, May 5, 2011 had to say:

Are we supposed to understand and accept that Mike Huckabee is in hell where he has official duties as a greeter,welcoming Osama bin-Laden?

We all suspect strongly, of course, that bin-Laden will spend eternity in hell, whatever his form and whatever hell’s. But we should not embrace a politician’s seeking electoral gain by dictating and announcing after-life dispositions. Those we should defer to a higher power, whose divine authority no mortal man should dare usurp, even for TV ratings or votes, or both.

I really am uncomfortable with all this kind of lighthearted talk about hell. The traditional Christian view of hell is a very serious doctrine. It is a necessary doctrine and today I want to show why.

Three thousand years ago, Solomon took a look at life “under the sun” in his book of Ecclesiastes. Christian scholar Ravi Zacharias has noted, “The key to understanding the Book of Ecclesiastes is the term ‘under the sun.’ What that literally means is you lock God out of a closed system, and you are left with only this world of time plus chance plus matter.”

This is the exact thing that Woody Allen does in the movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors.” He envisions a world without God.

Let me show you some inescapable conclusions if you choose to live without God in the picture. Solomon came to these same conclusions when he looked at life “under the sun.”

  1. Death is the great equalizer (Eccl 3:20, “All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return.”)
  2. Chance and time have determined the past, and they will determine the future.  (Ecclesiastes 9:11-13 “I have seen something else under the sun:  The race is not to the swift
       or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise
       or wealth to the brilliant  or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all.  Moreover, no one knows when their hour will come: As fish are caught in a cruel net,
       or birds are taken in a snare, so people are trapped by evil times  that fall unexpectedly upon them.”)
  3. Power reigns in this life, and the scales are not balanced(Eccl 4:1; “Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun: I saw the tears of the oppressed—
       and they have no comforter; power was on the side of their oppressors—  and they have no comforter.” 7:15 “In this meaningless life of mine I have seen both of these: the righteous perishing in their righteousness,  and the wicked living long in their wickedness. ).
  4. Nothing in life gives true satisfaction without God including knowledge (1:16-18), ladies and liquor (2:1-3, 8, 10, 11), and great building projects (2:4-6, 18-20).

_______________________

Power reigns in this life and the scales are not balanced.

Solomon comes to the realization that powers reigns in this life and the scales are not balanced. Solomon notes, “Again, I observed all the oppression that takes place under the sun. I saw the tears of the oppressed, with no one to comfort them. The oppressors have great power, and their victims are helpless. (Ecclesiastes 4:1).  

People that believe there is no afterlife must concede that Hitler will never face the due punishment for his acts. I am a big Woody Allen movie fan and no other movie better demonstrates Ecclesiastes 4:1 better than the movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS because the character Judah was able to get away with murder and in the end of the movie does not fear that God will punish him. 

If you do not have God in the picture then you must come to the same conclusions that Solomon came to and Woody Allen shows that very clearly in his film.

By the way, the final chapter of Ecclesiastes finishes with Solomon emphasizing that serving God is the only proper response of man. Solomon looks above the sun and brings God back into the picture.  I am hoping that Woody Allen will also come to that same conclusion that Solomon came to concerning the meaning of life and man’s proper place in the universe in Ecclesiastes 12:13-14:
13 Now all has been heard;
       here is the conclusion of the matter:
       Fear God and keep his commandments,
       for this is the whole duty of man.

 14 For God will bring every deed into judgment,
       including every hidden thing,
       whether it is good or evil

This is the same conclusion that the article  “Hell:The Horrible Choice,” by Patrick Zukeran of Probe Ministries comes to. Here is a portion:

 Why Hell Is Necessary and Just

Is hell necessary? How is this doctrine consistent with a God of love? These are questions I face when I speak on the fate of unbelievers. The necessity and justice of hell can be recognized when we understand the nature of God and the nature of man.

Hell is necessary because God’s justice requires it. Our culture focuses mostly on God’s nature of love, mercy, and grace. However, God is also just and holy, and this must be kept in balance. Justice demands retribution, the distribution of rewards and punishments in a fair way. God’s holiness demands that He separate himself entirely from sin and evil (Habakkuk 1:13). The author of Psalm 73 struggles with the dilemma of the suffering of the righteous and the prosperity of the wicked. Joseph Stalin was responsible for the death of millions in the Soviet Union, but he died peacefully in his sleep without being punished for his deeds. Since evil often goes unpunished in this lifetime, it must be dealt with at a future time to fulfill God’s justice and holiness.

Notes1. Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Handbook of Christian Apologetics (Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 282.
2. Bertrand Russell, Why I Am Not a Christian (New York: Touchstone Books, 1957), 17 – 18.
3. Charles Darwin, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, ed. Nora Darwin Barlow, with original omissions restored (N.Y.: W. W. Norton, 1993), 87.
4. C. S. Lewis, Screwtape Letters (New York: Macmillan), 69.

 

Another Myth about Social Security (Part 4) (Dick Armey comments on Social Security)

Author Biography

Eric Schurenberg is Editor-in-Chief of BNET.com and Editorial Director of CBS MoneyWatch.com. Previously, Eric was managing editor of MONEY. As managing editor, he expanded the editorial focus to new interests including real estate, family finance, health, retirement, and the workplace. Prior to MONEY, Eric was deputy editor of Business 2.0. He was also the managing editor of goldman.com, a Web site for Goldman Sachs Group’s personal wealth management business, and an assistant managing editor at Fortune magazine. Schurenberg has won a Gerald Loeb Award for distinguished business journalism, a National Magazine Award, and a Page One Award.

In his article “5 Social Security Myths That Have to Go, ” Schurenberg notes:

Social Security isn’t the only cause of America’s fiscal problems, but it is Exhibit A in why it is so hard to fix them. No serious solution to our debt can ignore a program that will tax and spend about 4.8% of GDP this year and account for about 20% of all federal spending-and that within a few decades will count almost a third of the population as beneficiaries. But whenever I write about Social Security here at CBS MoneyWatch, I’m always struck by how much disagreement there is about how the system really works.

A handful of misconceptions tend to crop up repeatedly-often having to do with that fiscal fun-house mirror, the Social Security trust fund. And despite the efforts of writers like Allan Sloan and experts like the Urban Institute’s Eugene Steuerle, the myths won’t die. This column won’t kill them either, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t take a whack. Here goes:

Myth: The trust fund is invested in Treasury bonds, the most secure investments in the world. To suggest that the trust fund wouldn’t pay is blatant fear mongering.

 

The trust fund’s IOUs are entered on the Treasuries books as non-trading “special issue” bonds, paying interest at a rate equal to an average of outstanding Treasuries. And yes, the Treasury will undoubtedly pay if Social Security asks.

But that’s not the issue. The issue is whether taxpayers think it’s so important to maintain Social Security benefits that they will gladly absorb the burden of paying off those bonds on the current schedule. Remember, Congress (that is, you know, taxpayers) can cut benefits-and thus postpone the need for Social Security to redeem any bonds–just by passing a law.

In other words, the myth misses the point. Whether Social Security continues to pay benefits at today’s rates isn’t a question of credit quality. It’s a question of politics and priorities.

_____________________________________

Social Security Ponzi Scheme

By DICK ARMEY
Commentary
Wednesday, Jul. 25, 2007

REFORMING retirement security in America is the greatest political opportunity — and responsibility — of our generation. Yet the topic of Social Security and Medicare is shockingly absent from Presidential hustings.

Simply ignoring the problem does not mean it is going away. Thomas Saving, a trustee of the Social Security and Medicare programs, estimates a breathtaking $83.6 trillion unfunded liability in the two entitlements, which is a tremendous gap between promised obligations and what the government will actually collect in payroll taxes.

Serious reforms of these broken government programs based on personal ownership have fallen victim to Republicans who don’t dare and Democrats who don’t care. Washington simply will not take the issue of retirement security seriously, until the American people force them to do so.

After all of the political demagoguery and tactical missteps of last year’s failed debate, what do the American people actually think about their retirement security under Social Security and Medicare? New survey data released by McLaughlin and Associates found that nearly nine in 10 likely voters are concerned about “catastrophic problems with Social Security and Medicare in the future that could directly affect the quality of [their] retirement.” These findings transcended party lines.

The core problem is not merely one of solvency. We could balance the books tomorrow by drastically slashing benefits and raising taxes. Paying more and getting less is considered a “bipartisan fix,” but such painful solutions only temporarily solve the government’s problem and do nothing to improve the retirement security of Americans. Such a fix will force younger workers to pay a double penalty of higher taxes during their working life, only to receive less of a benefit in retirement.

The McLaughlin survey makes it clear that voters want entitlement reform to be a major part of the national conversation during the 2008 presidential campaign. Ninety-six percent of voters said it is important that “a candidate for President in 2008 concentrates on the present and future problems with Social Security and Medicare by discussing and demonstrating a realistic plan to provide retirement security for current and future retirees.”

Voters also want elected officials to take a broad look at the problem, with a strong super-majority of 84 percent of voters agreeing that a national retirement security program should include provisions for health care, as well as income.
Voters are not afraid of change, with seven in 10 approving of “changing our current retirement system so that their payroll taxes are placed in a secure account that they own and control and are allowed to grow until they retire when they can withdraw the funds as they need for income and health care expenses.”It is time to give American workers the chance to create and fund protected retirement accounts that they can own, control and pass on to their children. The government would provide the structure and appropriate safeguards, but the individuals would have control over their own retirement destiny.

Outside of government, there is an ownership revolution, with bankrupt defined-benefit pension plans being replaced with individually owned defined-contribution retirement plans, which are portable, interest-earning and secure. Let us also be clear that leaving federally sponsored entitlement plans should be optional; individuals would simply be given the choice between federal or personal control.

This is where the voters of New Hampshire have a special responsibility. If primary voters demand action on entitlements, politicians will respond. On June 6, when asked by activists from Students for Saving Social Security whether he would support giving people more control over their retirement accounts, Mayor Rudy Giuliani responded, “I’m going to tell you my overall philosophy that applies to Social Security, health care, jobs, school choice: It’s your money. You should have as much control over it as I can give you. You can do a better job with your money than the mess in Washington. When we give you more control over Social Security, we move forward.”

Sen. John McCain and Gov. Mitt Romney have made similar public statements in support of personal accounts, but the issue is unfortunately not mentioned on the issue pages of their respective campaign Web sites. Social Security is also conspicuously absent from the issue pages of the leading Democratic candidates.

I believe that pocketbook voters in New Hampshire — Democrats, Republicans and independents — are looking for a political entrepreneur willing to break convention by offering a serious, adult policy solution to the federal government’s failing retirement programs. If voters build the political stage for real change, will the next President have the wisdom to step up?

Dick Armey, U.S. House majority leader from 1995 to 2002, is chairman of FreedomWorks Foundation.

Mike Huckabee to Osama bin Laden: “Welcome to Hell” (Part 6)Woody Allen’s movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors” is a perfect example of why hell the only “enforcement factor”

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1

Adrian Rogers – Crossing God’s Deadline Part 2

Mike-huckabee-091710jpg-717e34428c62cd01

Jason Tolbert provided this recent video from Mike Huckabee:

John Brummett in his article “Huckabee speaks for bad guy below,” Arkansas News Bureau, May 5, 2011 had to say:

Are we supposed to understand and accept that Mike Huckabee is in hell where he has official duties as a greeter,welcoming Osama bin-Laden?

We all suspect strongly, of course, that bin-Laden will spend eternity in hell, whatever his form and whatever hell’s. But we should not embrace a politician’s seeking electoral gain by dictating and announcing after-life dispositions. Those we should defer to a higher power, whose divine authority no mortal man should dare usurp, even for TV ratings or votes, or both.

I really am uncomfortable with all this kind of lighthearted talk about hell. The traditional Christian view of hell is a very serious doctrine. It is a necessary doctrine and today I want to show why.

The next few days I will be posting portions of the article “Hell:The Horrible Choice,” by Patrick Zukeran of Probe Ministries. Here is the fifth installment:

 Why Hell Is Necessary and Just

Is hell necessary? How is this doctrine consistent with a God of love? These are questions I face when I speak on the fate of unbelievers. The necessity and justice of hell can be recognized when we understand the nature of God and the nature of man.

Hell is necessary because God’s justice requires it. Our culture focuses mostly on God’s nature of love, mercy, and grace. However, God is also just and holy, and this must be kept in balance. Justice demands retribution, the distribution of rewards and punishments in a fair way. God’s holiness demands that He separate himself entirely from sin and evil (Habakkuk 1:13). The author of Psalm 73 struggles with the dilemma of the suffering of the righteous and the prosperity of the wicked. Joseph Stalin was responsible for the death of millions in the Soviet Union, but he died peacefully in his sleep without being punished for his deeds. Since evil often goes unpunished in this lifetime, it must be dealt with at a future time to fulfill God’s justice and holiness.

Notes1. Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Handbook of Christian Apologetics (Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 282.
2. Bertrand Russell, Why I Am Not a Christian (New York: Touchstone Books, 1957), 17 – 18.
3. Charles Darwin, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, ed. Nora Darwin Barlow, with original omissions restored (N.Y.: W. W. Norton, 1993), 87.
4. C. S. Lewis, Screwtape Letters (New York: Macmillan), 69.Woody Allen’s movie Crimes and Misdemeanors does a great job of showing that if God does not exist then people like Stalin and Hitler were “home free” in that they were never going to be punished for what they did. “Existential subjects to me are still the only subjects worth dealing with. I don’t think that one can aim more deeply than at the so-called existential themes, the spiritual themes.” WOODY ALLEN

Woody Allen’s 1989 movie, CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS , is an excellent icebreaker concerning the need of God while making decisions in the area of personal morality. In this film, Allen attacks his own atheistic view of morality. Martin Landau plays a Jewish eye doctor named Judah Rosenthal raised by a religious father who always told him, “The eyes of God are always upon you.” However, Judah later concludes that God doesn’t exist. He has his mistress (played in the film by Anjelica Huston) murdered because she continually threatened to blow the whistle on his past questionable, probably illegal, business activities. She also attempted to break up Judah ‘s respectable marriage by going public with their two-year affair. Judah struggles with his conscience throughout the remainder of the movie. He continues to be haunted by his father’s words: “The eyes of God are always upon you.” This is a very scary phrase to a young boy, Judah observes. He often wondered how penetrating God’s eyes are.

Later in the film, Judah reflects on the conversation his religious father had with Judah ‘s unbelieving Aunt May at the dinner table many years ago:

“Come on Sol, open your eyes. Six million Jews burned to death by the Nazis, and they got away with it because might makes right,” says aunt May

Sol replies, “May, how did they get away with it?”

Judah asks, “If a man kills, then what?”

Sol responds to his son, “Then in one way or another he will be punished.”

Aunt May comments, “I say if he can do it and get away with it and he chooses not to be bothered by the ethics, then he is home free.”

Judah ‘s final conclusion was that might did make right. He observed that one day, because of this conclusion, he woke up and the cloud of guilt was gone. He was, as his aunt said, “home free.”

Woody Allen has exposed a weakness in his own humanistic view that God is not necessary as a basis for good ethics. There must be an enforcement factor in order to convince Judah not to resort to murder. Otherwise, it is fully to Judah ‘s advantage to remove this troublesome woman from his life.

The Bible tells us, “{God} has also set eternity in the hearts of men…” (Ecclesiastes 3:11 NIV). The secularist calls this an illusion, but the Bible tells us that the idea that we will survive the grave was planted in everyone’s heart by God Himself. Romans 1:19-21 tells us that God has instilled a conscience in everyone that points each of them to Him and tells them what is right and wrong (also Romans 2:14 -15).

It’s no wonder, then, that one of Allen’s fellow humanists would comment, “Certain moral truths — such as do not kill, do not steal, and do not lie — do have a special status of being not just ‘mere opinion’ but bulwarks of humanitarian action. I have no intention of saying, ‘I think Hitler was wrong.’ Hitler WAS wrong.” (Gloria Leitner, “A Perspective on Belief,” THE HUMANIST, May/June 1997, pp. 38-39)

Here Leitner is reasoning from her God-given conscience and not from humanist philosophy. It wasn’t long before she received criticism. Humanist Abigail Ann Martin responded, “Neither am I an advocate of Hitler; however, by whose criteria is he evil?” (THE HUMANIST, September/October 1997, p. 2)

The secularist can only give incomplete answers to these questions: How could you have convinced Judah not to kill? On what basis could you convince Judah it was wrong for him to murder?

As Christians, we would agree with Judah ‘s father that “The eyes of God are always upon us.” Proverbs 5:21 asserts, “For the ways of man are before the eyes of the Lord, and He ponders all his paths.” Revelation 20:12 states, “…And the dead were judged (sentenced) by what they had done (their whole way of feeling and acting, their aims and endeavors) in accordance with what was recorded in the books” (Amplified Version). The Bible is revealed truth from God. It is the basis for our morality. Judah inherited the Jewish ethical values of the Ten Commandments from his father, but, through years of life as a skeptic, his standards had been lowered. Finally, we discover that Judah ‘s secular version of morality does not resemble his father’s biblically-based morality.

Woody Allen’s CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS forces unbelievers to grapple with the logical conclusions of a purely secular morality. It opens a door for Christians to find common ground with those whom they attempt to share Christ; we all have to deal with personal morality issues. However, the secularist has no basis for asserting that Judah is wrong.

Larry King actually mentioned on his show, LARRY KING LIVE, that Chuck Colson had discussed the movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS with him. Colson asked King if life was just a Darwinian struggle where the ruthless come out on top. Colson continued, “When we do wrong, is that our only choice? Either live tormented by guilt, or else kill our conscience and live like beasts?” (BREAKPOINT COMMENTARY, “Finding Common Ground,” September 14, 1993)

Later, Colson noted that discussing the movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS with King presented the perfect opportunity to tell him about Christ’s atoning work on the cross. Colson believes the Lord is working on Larry King.

(Caution: CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS is rated PG-13. It does include some adult themes.)

Kate Middleton and Prince William: Marriage made in Heaven? (Part 21)

The Royal Wedding Ceremony of William and Kate Live part 4/4

ImagePrevious

Posted May 1, 2011 7:28 am by Lauren Turner