Archive for December 13th, 2007

Denzel Washington and Brooks Army Medical Center

Thursday, December 13th, 2007

I received this email this morning and wanted to share it with all of you.

Denzel Washington, and Brooks Army Medical Center

Don’t know whether you heard about this but Denzel Washington and his family visited the troops at Brook Army Medical Center in San Antonio , Texas (BAMC) the other day. This is where soldiers who have been evacuated from Germany come to be hospitalized in the United States , especially burn victims. There are some buildings there called Fisher Houses .
The Fisher House is a Hotel where soldiers’ families can stay, for little or no charge, while their soldier is staying in the Hospital. BAMC has quite a few of these houses on base, but as you can imagine, they are almost filled most of the time.

While Denzel Washington was visiting BAMC, they gave him a tour of one of the Fisher Houses. He asked how much one of them would cost to build. He took his check book out and wrote a check for the full amount right there on the spot. The soldiers overseas were amazed to hear this story and want to get the word out to the American public, because it warmed their hearts to hear it.

The question I have is why do:
Alec Baldwin, Madonna, Sean Penn and other Hollywood types make front page news with their anti-everything America trash and Denzel Washington’s Patriotism doesn’t even make page 3 in the Metro section of any newspaper except the Local newspaper in San Antonio.

The email has photos of the event. Email me at if you want me to forward the original email to you.

“Politics: The Movie.” by Dr. Phyllis Chesler

Thursday, December 13th, 2007

I protest. Everything is too loud, too fast, too vulgar, too aggressive. POW! BAM! Only celebrities matter. Even our so-called thinkers write the same book over and over again (everything is reduced to branding) and are expected to behave like attack dogs on a short leash.

Welcome to our Comic Book Culture.

I can’t keep up with who is running for the American Presidency. Who can? Today, the campaign for President constitutes a permanent spectacle, a veritable Roman circus. Are ambitious parents already grooming their unborn children in utero with tapes to encourage a future Presidential run? Will children be signed up at birth as future contenders?

Although I understand that this is the way things are, it still seems “over the top” to have Oprah take to the campaign trail for Obama. Stadiums filled with frenzied folk remind me a wee bit of Nazis cheering.

Call me sensitive.

Once, Oprah conducted a love-fest in Madison Square Garden. She (safely) and symbolically removed a woman’s burqa while 18,000 fans cheered. But the girls and women of Afghanistan still live under the Islamist boot.

Are Hollywood stars and television hosts our only and most reliable source of truth? Don’t people understand that these talking heads rely upon writers, that they mainly read someone else’s lines? And that Hollywood is still a suburb of Moscow-on-the-Pacific?

Once, when I was a much younger professor, I happened to mention to my class that my appearance on either Donohue, Oprah, or the Today show (I can no longer remember which program it was) would be broadcast while we would remain together in the classroom. Many of my students wanted to go home in order to “see me.”

“But I’m right here. You can see me and we can also talk to each other.”

Some left anyway. Televised reality was so much larger to them than in-person and interactive reality.

Thus, celebrities are powerful and dangerous influences. They are like dream-figures or Gods. We watch them at home, in bed; they are our Harry Potter magical hearth-figures dancing in our tribal campfire.

And both television and Hollywood have been flirting—they are obsessed with—the American Presidency. Michael Belson in Wag the Dog, Martin Sheen in West Wing, Dennis Haysbert in 24, Michael Douglas in The American President, John Travolta in Primary Colors are as real to most people as are our real got-the-finger-on-the-nuclear-button Presidents.

As to the really real Presidency: The contenders are hardly impressive. Yes, it would be momentarily thrilling to elect the first woman or the first African-American as President but honestly, at the end of the day, I care more about a president’s agenda than about his or her gender. A president’s skin-color (or sexual preference) should only matter in a Hollywood movie, not in reality.

What a pity. These lines are blurred and people increasingly prefer escape entertainment to reality. Presidential contenders and their campaigns are judged as if they were contestants on American Idol.

May God bless America and our precious, shrinking planet.


Dr. Phyllis Chesler is the well known author of classic works, including the bestseller Women and Madness (1972) and The New Anti-Semitism (2003). She has just published The Death of Feminism: What’s Next in the Struggle for Women’s Freedom (Palgrave Macmillan), as well as an updated and revised edition of Women and Madness. She is an Emerita Professor of psychology and women’s studies, the co-founder of the Association for Women in Psychology (1969) and the National Women’s Health Network (1974). She is currently on the Board of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East and lives in New York City. Her website is
We are delighted to have Dr. Chesler as a contributor to the Jesus is Lord, A Worshipping Christian’s Blog.

Original Link.

New Hampshire Homosexuals Applying for Faux Marriage Licenses

Thursday, December 13th, 2007

The Boston Globe reports that 27 same-sex couples from 19 New Hampshire communities picked up applications for civil union licenses on the first day the licenses were available. The Granite State will begin recognizing the quasi-marriage licenses January 1. One of the homosexuals who intends to take advantage of the new law is New Hampshire Episcopal Bishop Vicki Gene Robinson, who says he plans to enter into a civil union with his longtime male partner.

“One of the major concerns we have is that this will translate in the court, because there will be a court challenge immediately, [arguing that since people are] already getting all of the rights and privileges of marriage, why can’t we call it marriage — which will then dilute the total meaning of marriage,” [Karen Testerman, executive director of Cornerstone Policy Research in Concord] asserts.

Homosexual activists, Testerman contends, will not be satisfied until their civil unions are deemed “marriages” by a court. “That means that these people — who are in a special-interest group — are going to dictate to our families, in many ways that are fall-out type situations, what the meaning of a marriage is,” she explains, “and also what’s the best atmosphere [in which] to bring our children into this world.”

Original Link.

Israel Urges Emigrants to Return Home

Thursday, December 13th, 2007

The Bible tells us that in the last days, the Jews will return to their homeland.

In honor of the State of Israel’s upcoming 60th anniversary, the Ministry of Absorption has announced a campaign to encourage and help yordim [Israelis who emigrated] return home.

The campaign, entitled, “Returning Home for Israel’s 60th,” begins with a “personal call” to each and every emigrant: “Come home! The State of Israel is your home.”

The government’s call continues, “We have prepared, especially for you, an unprecedented array of benefits and incentives to ease your return home. Counselors and advisors are already waiting for you at a special 24-hour-a-day information center, at tel. +972-3-973-3333.”

The announcement ends, “The decision is yours. The commitment is ours.”

A recent study conducted by the The Rappaport Center for Assimilation Research and Strengthening Jewish Vitality in Bar Ilan University has found that assimilation among the children of Israeli yordim is comparatively high. The second-generation, as opposed to their parents, tends not to form connections with the Jewish community in their new country. Sixty percent of the children polled are not affiliated with their local Jewish community, while a quarter of them marry non-Jews, the study found.

Absorption Minister Yaakov Edry writes, “Israel is the place to educate and raise your children, to strike roots, to be built and to build the continued future of the State of Israel. Israeli society, on all its levels, needs you to help shore up the ranks, strengthen the economy, deepen the culture, nourish the leadership of the next generation, and to take an active and creative role in all that goes on here…”

Original Link

“Whitewashing the murder of Aqsa Parvez” by Michelle Malkin

Thursday, December 13th, 2007

Earlier we posted about a Muslim teen, in Canada, who was murdered by her father over her refusal to wear the hijab, the Islamic headscarf.
The press has acted deplorable in this situation with a constant attempt to “whitewash” this terrible crime.
Michelle Malkin has this to say:

What is it with our craven mainstream media? They simply cannot give you the news straight when it comes to bloody sharia and bloody jihad. A Muslim girl was murdered over her refusal to wear a hijab, for crying out loud, and this is how it’s headlined:

Canadian Teen Dies; Father Charged

Meantime, the Canadian press is pulling out its “Broad Strata” card again.

Five Feet of Fury and Halls of Macadamia spotlight the press quoting spin doctor Mohamed Elmasry, President of the Canadian Islamic Congress, claiming it was a “teenager issue.”

“I don’t want the public to think that this is really an Islamic issue or an immigrant issue,” said Mohamed Elmasry of the Canadian Islamic Congress. “It is a teenager issue.”

Blood pressure rising yet?

Keep reading.

Jihad Watch catches the National Post in the act with this quote:

“The strangulation death of Ms. Parvez was the result of domestic violence, a problem that cuts across Canadian society and is blind to colour or creed.”

The only ones blinded here are the dhimmi journalists wielding the whitewash brush over Aqsa Parvez’s dead body.

Meanwhile TheStar uses this whitewash:

Hijab can divide families
But tension can also be caused by girls who chose to adopt headscarf against parents’ wish, say some

The suggestion of violent disputes between a 16-year-old girl in Mississauga and her father over her desire to show her hair and live a “normal” lifestyle raises questions about tensions between parents and children in the Muslim community.

But members of the community – particularly young Muslim women – say the tension can exist both ways.

Ausma Khan, the editor-in-chief of Toronto-based Muslim Girl magazine, said research into the readership of her publication shows that the decision to wear the hijab – the traditional Muslim headscarf – is almost always a choice the girl makes on her own.

“We have also heard from other girls saying that they don’t know if they want to wear it and that they’re unsure and that there is community or family pressure to wear it,” she said, but stressed that type of response was in the minority.

Dems: Amen to Ramadan, but forget about Christmas

Thursday, December 13th, 2007

True to form, the Dems show us their unfailing need to slam Christians at every opportunity while standing up for the so-called “religion of peace” (aka Islam). A good example of typical Dem duplicity.

Only weeks after voting for a resolution that “recognizes the Islamic faith as one of the great religions of the world,” nine Democrats in the U.S. House refused to vote for a Christmas resolution that condemns the worldwide persecution of Christians.

U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., was on the list of those who endorsed the statement recognizing Islam, but refused to support the Christmas resolution that noted the holiday “is celebrated annually by Christians throughout the United States and around the world.”

The Christmas resolution, like the Ramadan resolution, decried the violence that targets religion around the world.

A spokesman for DeGette told WND her vote was because the Ramadan resolution, which she endorsed, was about “rejecting religious extremism and promoting of religious tolerance.”

The spokesman, Chris Aaron, however, said DeGette is a “strong supporter of separation of church and state and her view was that Congress should not favor one religion over another.

“She felt this resolution (recognizing Christmas and condemning persecution of Christians) promoted Christianity over other religions,” he told WND.

Other Democrats who supported the acknowledgment of Islam’s Ramadan but refused a similar recognition for Christianity’s Christmas included Gary Ackerman and Yvette Clarke of N.Y., Alcee Hastings, Fla., Barbara Lee, Fortney Stark and Lynn Woolsey, Calif., Jim McDermott, Wash., and Robert Scott, Va.

Both resolutions, carrying similar wording, ultimately were approved. But the American Family Association of Pennsylvania also raised the issue of representatives supporting Ramadan, but refusing to offer the same support for Christmas.

“We are very pleased that 17 of our 19 congressmen voted to recognize the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith. Congressman John Murtha was one of 40 who did not vote and unfortunately Congresswoman Allyson Schwartz decided to simply vote ‘present’ rather than take a stand on such a controversial issue as Christmas,” said Diane Gramley, president.

She noted on Oct. 2, Schwartz “did not hesitate” to vote for a resolution support the religion “of the 19 hijackers of 9/11 who brought down the World Trade Center, flew their airliner/missile into the Pentagon, and caused the death of the crew and passengers of Flight 93 as it crashed into a field outside Shanksville, Pa.”

“I believe there are more Christians in her district than Muslims and they deserve an explanation for her vote last night,” Gramley said.

According to Liberty Counsel, the Christmas resolution was approved with nine “no” votes. Ten others voted “present” and 40 refused to vote at all.

“Amazingly, all but two of the representatives who answered “present” or voted against the Christmas resolution voted in favor of a resolution recognizing Ramadan, even though much of the language was similar,” the group said.

The Ramadan resolution began:

Whereas Ramadan is the holy month of fasting and spiritual renewal for Muslims worldwide, and is the 9th month of the Muslim calendar year; and Whereas the observance of the Islamic holy month of Ramandan commenced at dusk on September 13, 2007, and continues for one lunar month: …”

The Christmas resolution started:

Whereas Christmas, a holiday of great significance to Americans and many other cultures and nationalities, is celebrated annually by Christians throughout the United States and the world… Whereas on December 25 of each calendar year, American Christians observe Christmas, the holiday celebrating the birth of their savior, Jesus Christ…Whereas many Christians and non-Christians throughout the United States and the rest of the world, celebrate Christmas as a time to serve others:”

The Ramadan resolution then acknowledged “the Islamic faith as one of the great religions of the world,” expressed “friendship and support for Muslims,” noted “the onset of Ramadan,” and rejected “hatred, bigotry, and violence directed against Muslims.” It also “commends Muslims … who have privately and publicly rejected interpretations and movements of Islam that justify and encourage hatred.”

The Christmas resolution continued to acknowledge “the Christian faith as one of the great religions of the world,” expressed “continued support for Christians,” noted the historical importance of Christmas, the role “played by Christians and Christianity in the founding of the United States,” and rejected “bigotry and persecution directed against Christians, both in the United States and worldwide.”

“Notice that the Christmas resolution uses similar language. It is astonishing that those who supported the Ramadan Resolution would vote against the Christmas Resolution,” Liberty Counsel said.

The group suggested voters check the lists for votes by their representatives. “If they voted against Christmas and in favor of Ramadan, respectfully point out their hypocrisy,” the group said.

Concerned Women for America said the true message of Christmas is under assault in the U.S. Shari Rendall, director of the group’s legislation and public policy divisions, noted Congress earlier approved not only the endorsement of Ramadan but also another resolution concern the Hindu religion.

“It astounds me that any member of Congress would oppose legislation that recognizes the important of Christmas in our country, particularly in light of the fact that earlier this year Congress passed two separate resolutions honoring the Hindu and Islamic religions…”

Original Link.