Archive for February 2nd, 2007

“Chavez and the ‘Ezekiel Option'” by Hal Lindsey

Friday, February 2nd, 2007

This week, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez was handed unrestricted authority to rule his nation by decree. Venezuela’s new parliament passed, and Chavez signed, the “Enabling Act” and put an end to any hopes of a democratic end to his rule.

Chavez is expected to exercise the absolute power granted him to nationalize all private oil and gas operations now operating in his territory.

Chavez also has plans to take state control of Venezuela’s biggest telecommunications company and electricity providers, to revamp banking and zap the rich with new taxes with a goal of ensuring ”the equal distribution of wealth.”

In short, Chavez is assuming the role of America’s new Castro, but Venezuela is no Cuba. Cuba cost America some banana and sugar plantations and the very rich had to find someplace else to gamble, but by and large, Castro hurt Cuba a lot more than he hurt the United States.

Chavez is what Castro would have been if he had been sitting on one of the richest oil fields in the world: an enemy too dangerous to live with, and too expensive for us to live without.

Venezuela is America’s fifth largest supplier of oil. And Chavez owns (or will soon own) all the oil companies.

Making the situation even more dangerous is Chavez’s close alliance with Iran. Iran has sworn to wipe Israel from the map publicly, and on more than one occasion. Ahmadinejad recently sponsored a conference entitled, “A World Without Zionism” and subtitled, “A World Without America.”

Iran is protected by its chief nuclear suppliers in Russia, complicating the situation even more. Moscow has hundreds of billions of dollars invested in Iran’s nuclear programs. Iran’s nuclear facilities are crawling with Russian scientists, advisers, technicians, security personnel – and their families.

The U.S. can’t afford to move against Chavez without risking conflict with Iran – which ultimately risks dragging in the Russians. Chavez, on the other hand, can easily afford to wreak havoc on America’s oil supply – and its economy – without fear of economic repercussion.

The prophet Ezekiel predicted the development of a vast alliance that would include Russia, Persia (Iran) “and many people with thee” in the last days that would launch a surprise invasion of Israel.

So how does Israel fit into all this? A Texas oil company, Genco, recently announced the discovery of a large oil field near the Dead Sea. Israeli Infrastructure Minister Binyamin Ben Eliezer called the strike “just the beginning.”

British Natural Gas announced the discovery of a vast natural gas deposit 20 miles offshore of Tel Aviv. Initial estimates suggest some 3.5 trillion cubic feet in proved reserves.

Zion Oil has sunk eight exploratory wells, all of which have shown signs of oil and gas. Zion founder John Brown believes the amount of oil reserves hidden beneath Israel could rival that of Saudi Arabia.

A massive oil strike in Israel would completely change the balance of power in the Middle East. Such an oil- strike could potentially break the back of OPEC. It is unlikely OPEC would admit Israel as a member, regardless of how much oil she had.

That would seem to leave but one option, best expressed by my friend Joel Rosenberg’s novel of the same name.

The Ezekiel Option.

Original Link.

Jail Time for Spanking Toddlers Put on Hold

Friday, February 2nd, 2007

I am all for jailing people who ‘beat’ their children, but a swat on the backside is not grounds for imprisonment. Unless there is evidence of child abuse (ie. bruises, broken bones, mental distress, etc), the state has no right to interfere with parental discipline. We are getting ready to produce another generation of kids who have the upper hand against their parents. When disobedience is met with painful consequence, children learn that they reap what they sew. Children who grow up learning that they can do whatever they want and there are no consequences turn into adults who refuse to take responsibility for their own actions. Side Note: Anyone who believes that the Dems are in favor of less government intrusion is completely misguided.

A lawmaker’s proposal that would have put parents who would place a careful swat on the bottom of their little one enthralled in pursuit of pleasure during the “Terrible Twos” behind bars has been delayed – several times – and opponents say they have reason to hope it will ultimately fail.

“This home-invasion bill has been stopped cold by parents and grandparents who know that to love children is to discipline them and show them the way to live,” said Randy Thomasson, president of the Campaign for Children and Families, a non-profit, non-partisan pro-family group in California.

“Because so many people have spoken out, the Democrats in Sacramento realize that their liberal agenda is offending a whole lot of people.”

Original Link

Prosecutor (of Border Agents) Had Evidence Against Drug Smuggler

Friday, February 2nd, 2007

Here we go with yet more information concerning the case and the prosecutor of two border agents.

A Department of Homeland Security memo obtained by WND indicates fingerprints were found on the vehicle abandoned by a Mexican drug smuggler who was given immunity to testify against border agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, apparently contradicting the U.S. attorney’s claim that he had no evidence to prosecute the smuggler.

U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton repeatedly has said there was no evidence at the scene on the Texas border near El Paso that would have permitted his office to investigate, find and prosecute Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, whose testimony against the officers led to prison terms of more than 10 years.

The DHS memo also documents that no fingerprint search was conducted on the vehicle until a full month after the Feb. 17, 2005, incident.

Despite repeated attempts, Sutton’s office did not return WND phone calls to comment on this story.

Andy Ramirez, who has closely followed the case as chairman of Friends of the Border Patrol, said he was disturbed that evidence in the van was handled by a combination of local, sheriff and federal law enforcement officers.

“From the scene, the vehicle is towed to the El Paso sheriff’s office,” Ramirez noted. “Then, the Border Patrol turns over the fingerprints to the El Paso Police Department for processing. DHS is involved, but only to receive a copy of the videotape made of the fingerprint processing. These law enforcement procedures are highly irregular, especially in the emotionally charged areas of border security and drug enforcement.”

From the beginning, Ramirez, insisted, “Johnny Sutton’s only interest in this case was to prosecute Ramos and Compean.”

“If Sutton wanted to capture the drug dealer, the van would have been secured, the van and its contents would have been dusted immediately for fingerprints and the chain of evidence would have been established,” he said. “Instead, the van sat there in the El Paso sheriff’s office for nearly a month before any law enforcement looks for evidence of the drug crime.”

Ramirez wondered why the FBI or the Drug Enforcement Administration was not called in immediately on the case.

“Instead, when the prosecutors finally get around to looking for fingerprint evidence, who knows how corrupted the fingerprint evidence is going to be after a month?”

A frustrated Ramirez contended Sutton was not interested in evidence from the van, because he was never out to get the drug smuggler.

“Since the fingerprint evidence would not implicate the agents, Sutton couldn’t have cared less if there was any fingerprint evidence or not,” Ramirez said. “If the fingerprint evidence could have implicated Ramos and Compean, Sutton would have been after the fingerprints with a vengeance.”


John Godinez, assistant to Mary Stillinger, the defense counsel for Ignacio Ramos, told WND his office was aware there were some fingerprints found on the van, but the defense had not pursued the issue. Mr. Godinez affirmed that during the Ramos-Compean trial, the prosecution did not introduce into evidence the fingerprints or any of the documentary evidence regarding the fingerprints. Proving that the van was driven by Aldrete-Davila was never in contention in the trial after the prosecution gave the drug smuggler immunity to testify.

In his Jan. 19 exclusive interview with WND, prosecutor Sutton strongly maintained there was nothing at the crime scene that would have permitted him to identify and pursue the fleeing Mexican drug smuggler.

WND: So, Aldrete-Davila ran away, and as you say, at the time you didn’t have any basis to know who he was and there were no fingerprints. But yet, you found the guy. If you found the guy to give him immunity, why couldn’t you have found the guy to punish him?

Sutton: The way we found him is that he came forward and was in Mexico with a lawyer. So, the only way to get him to testify was to give him immunity from being prosecuted. He wasn’t going to agree to come to the United States, he wasn’t going to agree to talk, unless he had some kind of immunity from being prosecuted for that load. So, that puts the prosecutor in the terrible choice of everyone goes free, we got no case against the dope dealer, we cannot make a case against the dope dealer because there’s no evidence thanks to agents and other factors. (so in other words, Sutton lied. -ed.)

As we WND previously reported, Sutton stated a Mexican lawyer brought Aldrete-Davila forward, without revealing the drug smuggler’s identity, until immunity had been granted. However, WND can find no documentation any such Mexican lawyer was involved.

DHS investigative memos make clear that Border Patrol agent Rene Sanchez in Wilcox, Ariz., identified Aldrete-Davila only days after the Feb. 17, 2005 incident, obtaining his information through family connections. Sanchez grew up with Aldrete-Davila in Mexico.

The information about Aldrete-Davila’s identity was then passed on by Sanchez to DHS special agent Christopher Sanchez, who went to Mexico and found Aldrete-Davila.

This Christopher Sanchez is the same DHS special agent the DHS memo on the fingerprints says received the videotape of the El Paso Police Department fingerprint search on the drug smuggler’s abandoned vehicle.

Original Link.

South Dakota Lawmakers Promote Revised Abortion Ban

Friday, February 2nd, 2007

The fight against the murdering abortionist continues. Please pray that the people of South Dakota will do the right thing and see to it that this becomes the law.
I want to say this too. If the Founding Fathers had been able to imagine that we would ever become evil enough to legalize abortion, they would have written the Constitution so specific that there would have been no way that activist judges could have “interpreted” it mean that abortions should be legal.

( – Less than three months after South Dakota voters rejected a ban on abortions that contained an exception only to save the life of the mother, state lawmakers introduced a measure on Wednesday that would create a revised ban with more exceptions but stiffer penalties for violators.

“We have heard what the voters of South Dakota said” in the defeat of a measure outlawing abortion during the election on Nov. 7, 2006, said GOP Rep. Gordon Howie from Rapid City. “They want to support a ban with exceptions for rape, incest and the health and life of the mother.”

One of the 25 sponsors of H.B. 1293, Howie noted that polls have shown most South Dakotans oppose abortion, and the bill’s rape and incest provisions are strict to ensure that women don’t simply claim they have been victims in order to have abortions.

The “Women’s Health and Human Life Protection Act” would allow rape victims to have abortions if they report the crime to police within 50 days. Doctors would be required to confirm the report with authorities.

In cases of incest, a doctor would need to obtain the woman’s consent to report the crime – along with the identity of the alleged perpetrator – before an abortion could be performed. The physician would also have to inform the mother that counseling is available and give her the address of the nearest Social Services office.

The measure would also stipulate that abortions could be done only until the 17th week of pregnancy, and blood samples from aborted babies would be sent to the police for DNA testing.

Also, a doctor could perform an abortion if the pregnancy would “cause a very significant impairment of the functioning of a major bodily organ or system,” but before that could take place, the mother would have to get a second opinion from another doctor.

The bill would require the doctor to send a written statement to the department of health explaining why the operation was performed and providing all the circumstances surrounding the abortion.

Finally, the legislation would impose tougher penalties than contained in last year’s measure. Under this bill, doctors who perform abortions would be charged with a felony and face up to 10 years in prison.

Another sponsor of the new measure is Democratic Rep. Mary Glenski of Sioux Falls, who stated that if passed, the law “will definitely reduce the number of abortions in South Dakota” from its annual average of more than 800.

As Cybercast News Service previously reported, the Women’s Health and Human Life Protection Act last February passed the 70-member state House of Representatives by a vote of 50-18 and the 35-member state Senate by a vote of 23-12. It was signed into law by Republican Gov. Mike Rounds in March and was slated to take effect the following July.

However, in May, a group called the South Dakota Campaign for Health Families submitted a petition containing 16,700 certified signatures to place the issue on the Nov. 7 ballot, where it was defeated by a margin of 56 to 44 percent.

After introducing the new measure in the state House on Wednesday, Howie defended the legislation’s stricter provisions, saying they give the bill a better chance of being accepted by voters – if a petition campaign again forces the issue onto the ballot.

“Frankly, Planned Parenthood would drive a semi truck through an exception that wasn’t clearly defined,” he added.

Howie made the reference to the state’s only abortion provider, because the organization not only took part in the campaign against last year’s law, it also threatened to go to court to block the measure even if voters had approved it.

Kate Looby, director of Planned Parenthood in South Dakota, told the Associated Press that lawmakers behind the latest effort were doing a disservice to the voters who rejected last year’s abortion ban.

“The people of this state told the government that they shouldn’t be involved in these intensely personal and very difficult private family issues,” Looby said, adding that if the legislators really wanted to reduce the number of abortions in the state, they should instead support programs that help prevent unintended pregnancies.

Still, Cheryl Sullenger, spokesperson for the pro-life group Operation Rescue, responded positively to Wednesday’s developments.

“We know that some in the pro-life movement will be opposed this legislation because of the rape and incest exceptions, but we believe that position is irresponsible,” she said in a statement.

“A statistical analysis of abortions done in South Dakota indicates that if the current bill passes into law – even with the rape and incest exceptions – numerically, it would allow only one abortion every four years,” she noted. “This means that over a four-year period, this legislation would save the lives of almost 3,500 children.

“To oppose this legislation would have to be considered ‘pro-abortion,'” Sullenger added.

But Democratic Rep. Burt Elliott from Aberdeen had a different perspective on the matter.

“It’s unfortunate that we have to face this issue again,” he said, noting that pro-lifers “had their chance; it was last year. It’s time to put this issue to rest.”

Original Link.

Jackson Welcomes Slavery Apology, But Sees ‘Obligation to Repair Damage’

Friday, February 2nd, 2007

I think that everyone who owned slaves should pay reparations. Oh wait a minute…everyone who did own slaves is dead now. Guess there’s no one left to pay reparations. Hummmm…well, then everyone who was an actual slave should be paid reparations. OK, wait a minute…they’re all dead too. So in addition to there being no actual slave holders alive today, there are no actual former slaves either. Sounds like this issue is as dead as the participants themselves.
I also seem to recall that approximately 250,000 Union soldiers, back in the 1860’s, died to make slaves free.
Boy, there sure are a lot of dead people associated with this issue.
So what is the Rev. Jackson actually trying to say?
“There may be a reluctance to apologize for the heinous crime of slavery,” Jackson said, “because with apology goes the obligation to repair the damage.”
Ahhhh…I think I understand now.
The words “handout” and “entitlement” just floated across my mind looking for something to connect to. They latched right on to the Rev. Jackson’s statement.
So, according to the Rev. Jackson, my family and I, just because we are white, should have to make a payment to a bunch of people, who have never been slaves, who’s parents weren’t slaves and who, most likely, who’s grandparents weren’t slaves, even though we have never owned slaves during any time in our family history.
As a matter of fact, my ancestors wore Blue, and some of them paid the ultimate sacrifice to fee the slaves.
So let me say this just as clearly as I possibly can:
I will NEVER pay reparations for the act of slavery. I will not be punished for something that I didn’t do. I will not be discriminated against just because I am white.
Folks, the American Civil War ended in April of 1865. That’s almost 142 years ago. Isn’t it time for people to get over it?

( – Rev. Jesse Jackson Thursday welcomed a decision by Virginia legislators to express “profound regret” for slavery, saying an apology was “owed” to the descendents of slaves. (why? -ed.)

But Jackson told the Associated Press that despite a motion before the state Legislature to apologize, he thought lawmakers did not want to acknowledge the “true reach” of slavery.

“There may be a reluctance to apologize for the heinous crime of slavery,” Jackson said, “because with apology goes the obligation to repair the damage.”

Initially, Virginia lawmakers considered a bill proposed by Del. Donald McEachin (D), which included the word “atonement.” Critics worried that this implied that reparations or cash payments may be paid to descendents of slaves, and the word was changed to “contrition.”

On Wednesday, the Legislature’s House Rules Committee accepted and passed by a unanimous vote a substitution to that bill. Introduced by Del. John M. O’Bannon III (R), it further broadened the wording of the proposal to cover racial inequities beyond slavery, including those against Native Americans.

The substitution said Virginia expressed “its profound regret for the commonwealth’s role in sanctioning the immoral institution of human slavery, in the historic wrongs visited upon native peoples, and in all other forms of discrimination and injustice that have been rooted in racial and cultural bias and misunderstanding.”

O’Bannon was quoted as saying his proposal was “a little bit more comprehensive in some ways. It’s a little bit less negative up front. It does not sugarcoat the issue.”

This substitution to McEachin’s bill won the support of even Del. Frank Hargrove, who earlier stirred up controversy with a suggestion that blacks should “just get over slavery.”

Hargrove credited his change of heart to the revised wording, saying that he thought this way Virginia could express regret “without apologizing for anything.”

This year marks the 400th anniversary of the colony in Jamestown, Va., which was the first American city to import slaves.

Original Link.

‘Wave of Hatred’ Warning as Attacks on Jews Hits Record High in UK

Friday, February 2nd, 2007

It appears the Brits are becoming very anti-semitic. This isn’t a big surprise really. If one reads the history of the formation of Israel back in 1948, it doesn’t take long to see that the U.K. was not in favor of the nation of Israel even being formed. They went as far as to back the Arabs with left over military equipment, military advisers and even refused to protect the Jews from Arab attacks while the Jews were still officially under British protection.
So it really isn’t much of a stretch to understand why this problem is increasing.

Attacks on Britain’s Jews have risen to the highest level since records began.

A study published today shows the number of reported anti-Semitic incidents has almost tripled in 10 years, with more than half the attacks last year taking place in London.

The findings prompted the report’s authors to warn of a “wave of hatred” against Jews.

The number of incidents increased to 594 last year, up by 31 per cent on the previous year.

Violent assaults soared to 112, up by more than a third on 2005.

Incidents ranged from the unprovoked stabbing of a Jewish man in north London to the sending of hate mail and the vandalism of Jewish cemeteries and synagogues.

The Anti-Semitic Incidents Report 2006, compiled by the Community Security Trust (CST), responsible for combating anti-Semitism in the UK, blames the huge rise on a number of factors ranging from Israel’s invasion of Lebanon last summer to the jailing of the historian David Irving in Austria for denying the Holocaust.

The threatened suspension of Ken Livingstone as Mayor for comments made to a Jewish Evening Standard reporter triggered 11 anti-Semitic incidents, according to the report.

When the figures were first compiled in 1984, there were just 154 reported incidents, about a quarter of the total for last year.

Mark Gardner, CST spokesman said of the level of hate crimes: “This is unacceptable racism, that many Jews had hoped and believed was a thing of the past.

“Today’s anti-Semitism is a wave of hatred, intimidation and abuse against British Jews, who are stupidly blamed and randomly attacked over international tensions for which they bear no responsibility.”

Incidents last year include:

• An Orthodox Jew punched in the face and almost pushed off a Tube platform by an Arab man who screamed: “Get back to Stamford Hill, I want to kill you all”

• A Jewish man walking to synagogue with his two young sons suffered a broken leg after being punched and kicked by a white man shouting “f***ing Jew”

• Seventy incidents of desecration and damage to synagogues, cemeteries, Jewish schools and private homes with attacks including swastikas daubed on walls

• Savage assault of a 12-year-old Jewish girl Jasmine Kranat, who was beaten unconscious on a north London bus by two teenage girls who asked her first if she was Jewish.

The physical descriptions of perpetrators in 205 of the incidents show 96 were by white people, 28 by black people, 60 by Asians and 16 by Arabs. The report has been passed to ministers.

Original Link.