There are many reasons why Winston Churchill is considered a genius among men but one reason, often overlooked, was his prescient assessment of Islam written in his book, “The River War” published in 1899 when Churchill was but twenty five years of age. It may also account for why Barack Obama had Churchill’s bust removed from its honored place in the oval office:

” How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.

The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.

No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.”

By sole virtue of its doctrinal exhortations to conquest by unrelenting violence Islam has always been in the unenviable position of trying to make the irrational rational, the indefensible defensible, and the reprehensible acceptable. For Muslims this necessarily induces the sort of mental gymnastics capable of transforming Mohammed, known to history as a vicious homicidal maniac, serial pedophile, and fantast extraordinaire, into an object of veneration while repeating their constant and hollow mantra that Islam is a “religion of peace.” This simple but tragic flaw has not yet dawned on most Muslims.

Below I have posted an excellent article by Janet Levy which appeared recently in the “American Thinker”. She encapsulates, in a clear and insightful way, not only the true nature and mission of Islam but also shows how our leaders, still drunk on political correctness and one-way multiculturalism, seek to anesthetize us against all of its destructive and murderous intentions which are a logical extension of the poison laced and enshrined throughout the Muslim title deed, namely the Koran itself.

************************************************************************************

THE NARRATIVE OF DEFEAT by Janet Levy:

It is now life-threatening to criticize or mock Islam in the United States of America. The creators of South Park, Viacom, and anyone associated with the production of a recent episode portraying Mohammed in a bear suit would have potentially risked life and limb if they had broadcast the original cartoon sketch. In a manner eerily reminiscent of the Danish cartoon jihad, a Brooklyn-based Muslim group called Revolution Muslim posted a threat to South Park creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker for their “outright insult” to the prophet. “We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid, and they will probably end up like Theo van Gogh for airing this show,” read the post.

Theo Van Gogh was the Dutch filmmaker who was murdered by a Dutch-Moroccan Muslim for producing the film Submission, critical of the treatment of women in Islam. Like Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Geert Wilders, and targeted infidels before them, life would have been reduced to an unending fielding of threats and the heavily guarded jockeying between safe houses for those associated with South Park if the episode had aired unaltered. The incident underscores the unceasing efforts by Islam to silence opposition and criticism in order to advance the establishment of a worldwide caliphate under Shari’ah law.

Despite incidents like these, we in the West continue to react to Islam as if it were merely another variety of religious faith. Descriptions of Islam as a “religion of peace” and as “one of the three Abrahamic faiths” proliferate, obfuscating the need for further study and shielding the immutable, intolerant, militant, murderous doctrine from discovery.

Although it’s been almost nine years since 9/11, the level of knowledge and understanding of Islam is staggeringly low among the general population, let alone those sworn to protect us — our military and intelligence services. At a time when the Western world should be intimately familiar with the concepts of jihad and dhimmitude, as well as the provisos of Shari’ah law, we are lulled back to sleep with platitudes of peaceful coexistence and shamed with charges of “Islamophobia” if we question the motives, demands, or practices of adherents to the Muslim faith. Quite illogically — given the sequence of events from 9/11 forward — the very act of exhibiting fear or suspicion of Muslims is dubbed a “phobia” — an irrational fear. This, after nineteen Muslims hijacked planes and flew them into buildings, exacting massive carnage in the name of their god, and afterward, their coreligionists feted the deed.

The carnage has continued nonstop since then in other countries. In 2002, Muslim jihadists set off three bombs in Bali, killing over 200 people and wounding 240. In 2004, Islamic practitioners orchestrated a series of coordinated attacks against Madrid’s commuter train system, claiming 200 lives and injuring 1,800. The following year, suicide attacks in London’s public transportation system during the morning rush hour resulted in 52 deaths and 700 wounded. In 2008, Muslim terrorists held India’s most populous city hostage for three days with a string of more than ten shootings and bombings at a hospital, cinema, college, and Jewish center that left 175 dead and over 300 injured. These are just a few examples among hundreds of recent attacks by Muslims worldwide.

Yet we in America shrink from charges of Islamophobia and fail to acknowledge our righteous apprehension of unthinkable acts of evil in the name of a vengeful and certainly not peaceful god. We allow ourselves to be censured and plead guilty as charged of Islamophobia for scrutinizing the activities of Muslims and placing blame on the canons of Islam. The joy and celebration from Muslims across the world following the mass slaughter and destruction of 9/11 should have put us over the edge and strengthened our resolve to eradicate followers of this deadly belief system. Instead, we exhibit suicidal insanity in our failure and unwillingness to connect the dots of Islam, jihad, and Shari’ah. We dither, apologize to the enemy, and shrink from rightful condemnations of their holy books, their religious practices, and their legal code. No other religion on earth exists with a holy book dominated by hatred toward non-believers. The Islamic trilogy — the Koran, the Sira (or biography of Mohammed), and the Hadith (the words and deeds of Mohammed) — requires jihad, the killing of infidels, as the highest form of devotion to Allah.

Islam is a theo-political-legal doctrine whose primary focus is not on the “goodness” of Muslims, but on others — evildoers who do not share the Islamic belief system. Certainly the Old and New Testaments offer their fair share of brutal passages, but the practices described within those passages haven’t been in evidence for centuries. The brutal practices contained within Shari’ah law are practiced today throughout the Muslim and non-Muslim worlds, even in the United States. Christians suffer through confession and acts of repentance for untoward acts that hurt others. Christians aspire to exemplary kindness and service to their fellow man for the privilege of escaping a hellfire-filled afterlife. Jihadists are awarded a guaranteed place in heaven and the promise of great reward for the holy act of murdering those who don’t believe. While Jews practice “tikkun olam” — repairing the world — and perform “mitzvoth,” or good deeds, devout Muslims pray to Allah for inanimate objects like rocks and trees to alert them to the presence of dastardly Jews. They pray, “O Muslim there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.” Muslim world leaders and clerics routinely call for the death of non-Muslims. Has anyone ever heard a Western prime minister, president, rabbi, or priest call for the annihilation of a country or for the destruction of practitioners of other religions?

The Koran contains over four thousand verses of enmity toward non-believers. Over 63% of the Koran instructs Muslims to hate and avoid any association with non-Muslims. It teaches that non-Muslims should be held in contempt, killed, beheaded, humiliated, raped, enslaved, converted, or forced to pay the jizya or dhimmi tax. Eighty-five percent of the Sira — the biography of Mohammed, the ideal man or moral icon for Muslims — has to do with his battles against kuffars, or non-believers. This is a far cry from “Jesus died for your sins.” Islamic teachings laud and require lying and deception, “taquiya,” to advance the “ummah,” or Islamic community. While Jews and Christians honor the Golden Rule, turn the other cheek and practice tolerance and inclusiveness, Muslims learn how to fight the Dar al-Harb, the infidel world of war, and practice the artistry of duplicity not only with impunity, but also with the highest praises from their god.

Let’s not lull ourselves into complacency by citing that out of 1.57 billion Muslims worldwide, many are secular or have little knowledge of Islam. Although this may be true, that still leaves, conservatively, 10% to 15% (upwards of 235 million) of devout Muslims or jihadists who fit the description of submissive and intimidated, witting or unwitting enablers. As Mark Steyn astutely observed in America Alone, a “dominant minority” is the sole requirement for global jihad to take hold. In Mumbai, the carnage wreaked was caused by just ten people over three days. Nineteen hijackers were able to commandeer four passenger planes and murder three thousand Americans on 9/11. It doesn’t take huge numbers to institute evil. In Nazi Germany, Hitler didn’t win popular support in the country, but he pushed through his genocidal agenda as a passive, fearful populace looked on.

In our free society with a tradition of openly criticizing everything, even the sacred, it has now somehow become unacceptable to criticize Islam and the heinous actions of many of its practitioners. Yet it is perfectly acceptable to criticize Christianity, Judaism, or any other religion, for that matter. In 1989, “Piss Christ,” an offensive photograph of a plastic crucifix submerged in a container of urine, was prominently displayed at a museum and won a U.S. government-funded award. While members of Congress and clerics condemned the sculpture in the media, the most egregious responses were from a museum patron who attempted to dislodge the photograph from the museum wall and a pair of teenagers who attacked it with a hammer.

By comparison, in 2005, when editorial cartoons depicting Mohammed were published in a Danish newspaper, the Muslim world erupted into violence that claimed over one hundred lives and destroyed property worldwide, including four Danish embassies. Instead of reinforcing the Western value of free expression and severely punishing the actions of destructive Muslims, Westerners apologized for giving offense, censored the display of the cartoons, and cautiously monitored any future examination or critique of Islam. Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna said, “It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated; to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet.” The work of the Muslim Brotherhood in America is “a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

It is now five minutes to midnight in the global jihad that endeavors to destroy us and establish a worldwide caliphate under Shari’ah law. Instead of standing our ground and asserting the supremacy of our values, our fear and submissiveness have taken root to hasten our defeat. Will we wake up and face the enemy head-on before it is too late and all is lost?

*****************************************************************************************

PAUL SCHNEE lives and works in West Hollywood, California. He is a self-confessed skeptic with more gray hair than anyone really needs or wants. He does not have a degree or any other paper manifestations of his ability. Therefore, by the public standard he is unqualified to pass his opinions. Nevertheless, he does it because he thinks he is right and because his career does not depend on him being so! Blog: paulschnee.com.

Over four decades ago I had a dream vision of many of the details of the second coming of Christ. It sent me on a lifetime quest to find out all I could about this great coming event. Today I am far from alone as more people than ever are having visions, dreams and revelations about this wonderful change coming to the world.

One of the side benefits of the call to the prophetic ministry is the ability to discern the dreams, visions and revelations of others. Sometimes it may just be a Freudian thing or that someone ate a sour pickle before retiring for the night that brought on an apparition. At other times God has clearly spoken and even when the recipient of the vision is not sure God has spoken, I am.

I have always treaded cautiously when I hear someone has had a revelation for obvious reasons. Some revelation is false and very misleading. I don’t haphazardly accept everything I hear but I am also reticent to dismiss a matter too quickly. I have often been guided by what the Pharisees concluded when listening to the Apostle Paul’s rendering of the gospel and the vision of Jesus Christ he had as he traveled on the road to the city of Damascus.

The Pharisees decided not to look too harshly at Paul because they could be seriously mistaken and thus be bucking the very God they were supposed to represent. They concluded by saying “We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God.” (Acts 23:9b)

One of the most powerful and inspiring visions I have ever encountered came to a Louisiana based preacher and evangelist, Jesse Duplantis. Jesse is a Cajun born Louisiana native who had in his former life run the gamut of drugs, booze and rock and roll. He is now at the center of one of the most dynamic Spirit lead ministries in the nation.

In a CD available through his ministry based in Destrehan Louisiana entitled “Close Encounters of the God Kind,” Jesse tells of the five and a quarter hour experience he had being escorted around heaven by various angelic and patriarchal figures.

He has traveled the nation and the globe telling people about his heavenly encounter while preaching the gospel to thousands. It would be nearly impossible to cover all that he saw and heard in one article but one single part of the vision that is most startling cannot be overlooked in the ongoing moral and legal battle against the scourge of abortion in America.

It should be noted that Duplantis has not used the particular aspects of his heavenly visitation to hone in on abortion proponents in particular. It is my special interest in that part of his visit that is the impetus for these observations and the fact that this is the only generation in world history that seems so perfectly comfortable with 150 million abortions worldwide with 50 million of those here in the United States.

In fact according to Jesse the single command Jesus was said to have given him was simply to tell his people that he was going to return very soon. Duplantis argued with Christ about that saying “Lord your people already know that.”  That’s when Jesus gently rebuked him with the retort “no they don’t Jesse.”

While face down before God the Father Jesse found he could not rise and stand because of the sheer power emanating from God’s throne. What he was able to see was tiny spirits emerging from God’s throne perhaps generated by his thoughts alone that came forth eager to go to earth and become living spirits. They would actually ask God if they could go and become part of his plan.

As I listened to the Evangelists narrative of his visit I envisioned the thousands of little spirits being transferred to the earth where they would take up residence in the tiny little human beings being formed in the wombs of women around the globe. In my mind’s eye I could also see the thousands of them were being rejected and sent back to where they came from without a chance to begin life here with the rest of humanity.

My thoughts were not a heavenly vision from God; rather they were simply an earthly vision based on the hard cold and selfish social climate of the day. No one can claim that the Evangelists vision was any less true than mine and if we all thought about it, than yours.

I have spent the last forty and more years telling people about my own visions of the second coming of Christ and although I have had no visions having to do with little spirits and subsequent abortions I can say I have followed the abortion question every step of the way since the inception of Roe V. Wade in 1973.

I can say that I have never heard an argument for abortion that could hold a single drop of water. To the abortionist it is a choice but to the little spirits who so willingly come to face the existence here it is the rejection of their choice. Long before I heard of Jesse’s vision I wondered what the little unborn child would say if it could answer for itself? I have never doubted that it would say; I want to live.

Even the idea that it is a woman’s right to decide about her own body leaves the mind and spirit void of satisfaction. If a woman wanted to rip up part of her body and throw it away and we knew of it we would have her committed to some facility for her own protection and given treatment until she finally gave up the notion of self mutilation. Why is an unborn child any different? If it is only an extension of the woman’s body shouldn’t that be protected even from her?

No argument for abortion can sooth the conscience of man because there is a thirst for life in all of us that we know exists in all of humanity at any stage not just when we emerge and begin to grow up. These matters are on a much higher level than mere acquired intelligence or even common sense; they are a product of a far more primal and universal human quality known as instinct.

After viewing the vision of Jesse Duplantis I will forever believe that it is even above mere instinct. I believe it is a spiritual quest to live that is supernaturally or divinely implanted in every human spirit that wants to live for the glory of God.

One thing is certain. In heaven Duplantis saw nothing destroyed or harmed. Even as he walked on beds of gorgeous flowers his feet did not harm them. No life is destroyed, harmed or threatened in the presence of God. Perhaps we should learn this great lesson and remind ourselves of it again and again each time we say these famous words.

“…Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.” Matthew 6:10

http://www.americanprophet.org has since 2005 featured the articles of Rev Michael Bresciani along with news and reviews that have earned this site the title of The Website for Insight Millions have read his timely reports and articles in online journals and print publications across the nation and the globe.

News shows across America showed clips of American Idol star Adam Lambert’s overt sexual behavior at the recent American Music Awards. Almost all the clips were preceded with advisories and warnings. When discussed it was a single comment made on the Fox News outlet that beat all.

When questioned by news commentator Bill O’Reilly on the Factor Nov 24, 2009 about the propriety of the act, Lis Wiehl said that she thought it was all OK as long as it was done between the hours of 10:pm and 6:am. She explained that this was the time for anything that was indecent or profane on public television. She made the distinction that it should not be allowed during that time if it was deemed “obscene.”

If you are convinced that no underage children are awake and watching TV after 10:pm and that the rest of America has the savvy to weigh the semantic differences between “indecent” and “obscene” then all that’s left is to ask is, does it have any morally redemptive quality for the rest of us?

Even the meek and lowly Jesus was not naïve about the fact that evil would have its day. Christ said, “…it must needs be that offences come” and then he appendaged this overtly negative proclamation with the following “but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!” (Mt 18:7)

A day of “evil” is prophesied to sweep the entire world before Christ sets his feet on this old terrestrial ball again but that in no way indicates that it is either welcome or necessary. The inevitability of offences was covered by the Ancient Son of King David in the book of Ecclesiastes where Solomon said, “To every thing there is a season.” (Ec 3:1)

There is also a time and a season for the faithful to stand and be counted, to act on their faith and to proclaim the everlasting gospel in spite of resistance, ridicule or rejection. Perhaps among the news coming out of Christendom of late the Manhattan Declaration can be added to the war cry of the faithful even as other ministries around the world are taken on new initiatives to resist the spread of spiritual anarchy and wickedness in high places.

The document is the result of major Catholic and Evangelical leaders getting together to reaffirm what is considered to be just and Godly in America. It speaks for the sanctity of human life, the dignity of marriage in a union of one man and one woman and the right to have and retain one of America’s most fundamental liberties, the right to religious freedom.

About 40 of the most well known religious figures in the country have signed the document and others have begun to join suit with 126,863 signatures to date. A notable dissenter is John MacArthur of Grace to You ministries who explains his reason for not signing the declaration.

What MacArthur said in Shepherds’ Fellowship posted Nov 24, 2009 was “Although I obviously agree with the document’s opposition to same-sex marriage, abortion, and other key moral problems threatening our culture, the document falls far short of identifying the one true and ultimate remedy for all of humanity’s moral ills: the gospel. The gospel is barely mentioned in the Declaration. At one point the statement rightly acknowledges, “It is our duty to proclaim the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in its fullness, both in season and out of season”- and then adds an encouraging wish: “May God help us not to fail in that duty.”  Yet the gospel itself is nowhere presented (much less explained) in the document or any of the accompanying literature. Indeed, that would be a practical impossibility because of the contradictory views held by the broad range of signatories regarding what the gospel teaches and what it means to be a Christian.”

I can offer no argument for MacArthur’s dissent and in fact I agree with him. Perhaps I along with others think the declaration was not meant to be an instrument of evangelism but only a declaration of the position of those already evangelized. Although it is not irrefutable proof when the positions the declaration proclaims are examined in the light of Christ’s warning that Christians will be known by the fruit they produce (Mt 7:16) it becomes difficult to think of anyone standing up for what is outlined in the document if they were not “born again.” In fact only a bit of polling is needed to see that just about the only people left in America who are holding to these beliefs are people who have understood and responded to the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The Manhattan Declaration is in some ways a declaration of war. It may be a peaceable war fought by peace loving people but it is war nevertheless.

Many young Bible Students and seminarians have wrestled with the question put forth by their professors’, “If you are supposed to turn the other cheek as Christ said, then, what should you do if they slap the other cheek?” Do you recoil, run away or stand up and proclaim your rights? In this nation we still have rights, and religious freedom is one of them. The indiscriminate Christian bashing and attacks, the flagrant disregard for human life and immorality unleashed like a torrent of filthy waste water must be answered and those who do answer and condemn it are well within their rights.

We must never forget that one day the gospel and the Bible in its entirety will no longer be proclaimed at all. After that there is only one thing left and that is called judgment. It too has a time and a season and it is nearer than you think.

Solomon who so poetically described the endless ebb and flow of all things in their respective time and place also warned, “He, that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy. When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn. Proverbs 29:1, 2

http://www.americanprophet.org is the place for news, articles, movie and book reviews and other insights for life. Rev Bresciani is a columnist for online and print publications and has over three million readers and counting. For more information on the Manhattan Declaration visit http://manhattandeclaration.org/

Nidal Hasan

By Rev. MICHAEL BRESCIANI

Nidal Malik Hasan is charged with shooting and killing 13 people and wounding 29 more on U.S. Army base Ft. Hood in Texas this week. Everyone is scrambling for answers, and the first experts consulted have been psychiatrists.

It might seem a bit like asking a fox why another fox attacked the hen house and to others the question of why the physician could not heal himself is not likely to be answered by his equally bewildered colleagues.

Hasan who immigrated to America from an Arab village in Samaria is a Muslim and according to the UK Telegraph November 8, 2009 “used to attend the same mosque as two of the terrorists who carried out the 9/11 attacks on the U.S.” FBI agents are working to ascertain what connections if any that Hasan had to terrorist groups.

Here is a counselor who needed counseling himself according to reports from Walter Reed Army Medical Center where he was formerly assigned. Apparently he had trouble dealing with some of his patients according to a former boss. The nature of his difficulty has yet to be revealed, but the flags that went up did not result in a less strenuous assignment or a completely new task that would not include having to deal with soldiers returning from service in theatre.

While experts try to get to Hasan’s motive very few are viewing the problem as an entire background and theological issue. As thirteen flag draped coffins leave Ft. Hood the question of motive is paramount but it is not likely that anyone will blame the tenants of the “peaceful religion” for much of anything.

It is and has always been a concern for the Pentagon because there are some 3,000 Muslims in military service in America. Their cultural knowledge and expertise in the Arab language has been one of the basic reasons that the military was willing to risk their service but other fears may also be prevalent although not as apparent.

Even when Hasan’s motives are clearly known; it is the question of what means he chose to deal with his problems that will remain as the much larger question. Trying to skirt around the seething allusions to death that are so prevalent in the Muslim religion is what worries even those who are only vaguely familiar with the so called “religion of peace.”

Another fear is that the defense of ‘temporary insanity’ might come into the picture in the future if Mr. Hasan recovers completely. Naturally, if the insanity defense should be considered then perhaps anyone who was ever charged as a terrorist may take the cue and use the defense to wrangle free of culpability.

Both the Quranic and Imamic instruction for dealing with most of the problems confronting the Muslims has to do with fatwas, jihad, suicide bombings, beheading, and death to Israel, death to America and death to all infidels. The religion of peace it seems, knows no peace.

Could basic theology offer the answer everyone is scrambling for in the reasons for the massacre? Without sidestepping political correctness doesn’t the question beg to be asked, what if he were a Christian? What theology would have guided him; what tenant of Biblical doctrine might have caused him to consider a completely different path?

If he saw every other soldier on the base as his enemy wouldn’t he be compelled to consider the admonition of the Lord to forgive even his enemies?

Perhaps he may have chosen one of the only scripture passages that President Obama has ever alluded to favorably taken from the Sermon on the Mount. “But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;” (Mt 5:44)

If Mr. Hasan was beleaguered with worry about being shipped off to Afghanistan he may have found repose in Christ’s words also taken from the Sermon on the Mount. “Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.” (Mt 6:34)

Finally, regardless of the reasons for his outburst wouldn’t he have been better advised and wouldn’t the lives of others been kept safe if he knew and believed in the following proclamation made by Jesus Christ? It may be the single most important thing the ‘religion of peace’ could learn from the ‘religion of life.’ “I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.” (John 10:10)

http://americanprophet.org is the place for news, articles, movie and book reviews and other insights for life. Rev Bresciani is a columnist for online and print publications and has over three million readers and counting.

Pilate and Jesus

By Rev. MICHAEL BRESCIANI

Due to the emphasis on the R sound (phoneme) in reading, writing and arithmetic, early American pioneers and settlers coined the phrase “reading, riting and ritmetic.” It was repeated often in regards to getting a good education. Although spelled incorrectly, the point was always transparent.

In the issuance of prophetic utterance there is also a three R’s. Spelled correctly they are redemption, renewal and rebuke. It serves well to consider another phrase often used in America usually as a means of expressing some disdain. The phrase ‘organized religion’ is often used to describe something that should be shunned or critically re-examined in a post modern world.

It seems almost comical to hear someone express their disdain for organized religion when the alternative is considered. Perhaps we have reason to mistrust organized religion, but who is going to put much stock in disorganized religion?

As it relates to tenants and practices of religions where the only goal is to perpetuate itself perhaps the arguments may be valid. When religion serves to express the true nature of God and the real purpose of man the expression has less weight.

In common discourse or in heated debate the person without a basic definition of their subject matter is at a complete disadvantage. Simply put, most people who disdain ‘organized religion’ usually have no idea what it is. Catholics rarely know the history of the Papacy and indeed would be saddened by some of its elements if they did. Protestants would be un-nerved to see how far askew some of the once solid historical churches have gone in the modern era. What’s missing in either case is a simple definition. It follows that if the religious lack a definition then the completely non-religious person hasn’t a clue what he or she is talking about.

The Apostle James offers what is perhaps the most important definition of religion known to man. It doesn’t allude to church attendance, gifts and offerings or any ceremonial observances. John said, “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.” (James 1:27)

When Christ rebuked the overly religious Pharisees of his day for attending to every little observance and ceremony but ignoring the matter of merciful behavior, kindness and love he didn’t give them a ticket to quit going to church (temple) but said “these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.” (Mt 23:23b) No mystery here, Christ was simply saying that church attendance is great but not if the love and kindness of God doesn’t show up in the rest of your life.

It is here that we see that most people who have a disdain for the proverbial ‘organized religion’ may actually have a morally, ethically and spiritually disorganized life that would not fit well into anything organized be it church or the PTA.

Not everyone without morality, ethics and spirituality stays clear of organization but very often become community organizers. They often think their involvement is on a parallel track with organized religion but without the dreaded allusions to something ‘faith based’ or Biblically based. They seem to be aloof to the fact that even secularist social organizations have their own brand of Pharisees. They start with the assumption that they are above the dreaded sway of religion but can and do often become self righteous in their pursuit to change society to their own view.

Our President with his odd admixture of Muslim background, Christian profession of faith and almost totally secularist left wing socialist views was once a community organizer. Barack Obama is more than a mere example, but in every way he serves to refine the definition of the community organizer and is proof that even in this modern phenomena there are Pharisees. He would change not just his church but an entire country with his views.

Some American Presidents stayed close to their childhood religious upbringing and others not so much. It is known that even Richard Nixon’s close friendship with evangelist Billy Graham never resulted in any noticeable change in his church attendance or his attitudes about God. By contrast Abraham Lincoln rarely attended church but was the only President to be labeled the ‘Prophet President.’ Lincoln was also the only President to use the name Jesus Christ in addresses and letters instead of just using the term ‘God’ in the more general sense.

But what has all this to do with the three R’s of prophetic warning? By definition all Biblical prophecy is pre-written history. While we can’t use this definition to play one-upsmenship with politics it means, that in the contest between politics and prophecy only prophecy is the sure bet.

Those who have read the so called ‘final chapter’ don’t cringe or start biting their fingernails when they watch the History Channel’s presentation of what would happen if giant meteorites and asteroids struck the planet or if a worldwide plague began to sweep across the globe. They know exactly how things are going to develop and the final outcome.

It is the purpose of prophecy that is overlooked in the excitement and anticipation of the events that will inevitably take place in the history of men. Knowing the purpose of prophecy is what makes the difference. It is similar to the difference between strict adherence to organized religion and the practice of being Christlike on a daily basis. It is the difference between being just a community organizer and being a cohesive and integral part of the community while living in it.

Prophecy is laid on men for three basic purposes. The first is to ‘redeem.’ Leading someone to the foot of the cross where they see that Christ is not a Pharisee but he is a substitute is step one. He came into the world not to deal with its economy, ideologies, politics or social shifts. The problem Christ came to deal with was as close to man as the heart. He came to deal with sin and in no uncertain terms confessed that until moments before he was crucified. His last word to Pilate was “To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world” (Jn 18:37)

The second purpose of prophetic warning is ‘renewal.’ The Biblical idea of renewal is not reformation but a complete regeneration of heart, mind and soul. Jesus never asked any person to go and ‘reform’ but he told them all to go and sin no more; more succinctly they had to start new rather than clean up their act. When someone begins to see what is actually going to happen in our world according to prophecy it almost always results in their starting out in an entirely new path. Not only do they see that it is advisable, but in fact it is required.

Paul said, “Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold all things are become new.” (2 Cor 5: 17) When some were debating about which religion was better, the Judaic system or the Christian religion Paul put them both away with this, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.” (Gal 6:15)

The third R that defines the purpose of prophecy is ‘rebuke.’ In the common vernacular it would be God’s way of saying ‘cut the bull’ as it has to do with your personal morality and all the up to you’re tinkering with socialism which you have seen has already failed wherever it has been tried.

Prophecy says man will not pull himself up by his own bootstraps but will dissimulate to the depths of depravity before the end comes. So what’s the point? Why look for the good if it’s all going to go bad. Oddly the scriptures are very clear about the fact that the whole world can be on a fast train to hell and any single individual can choose a completely different path all at the same time.

Prophecy is meant to wise up the wise and get them to respond on a personal level. At the beginning of the most important book of future prophecies in the Bible Christ says “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten.” (Rev 3:19a) The entire message of Revelation is a woeful compendium of the result of mans blatant disregard of the commandments of God.

Does he actually have the right to rebuke us? How dare he expect that we should listen and understand and then change our behavior accordingly? After all, isn’t man smarter than the dumb elements all around him? Man can predict the weather but can he change it. The one who rebuked and changed the weather is the only one who has any right to rebuke man, and he does.

And when he was entered into a ship, his disciples followed him. And, behold, there arose a great tempest in the sea, insomuch that the ship was covered with the waves: but he was asleep. And his disciples came to him, and awoke him, saying, Lord, save us: we perish. And he saith unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith? Then he arose, and rebuked the winds and the sea; and there was a great calm. But the men marvelled, saying, what manner of man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey him! (Mt 8:23-27)

Redemption is for the lost, renewal is for the believer and rebuke is for all! In America many know this, but as these days progress many are willing to let these truths slide, here is my rebuke; don’t change America for one man, but change one man at a time for America.

http://americanprophet.org is the place for news, articles, movie and book reviews and other insights for life. Rev. Bresciani is a columnist for online and print publications and has over three million readers and counting.

By Rev. MICHAEL BRESCIANI

When it comes to Rep. Joe Wilson’s outburst during Obama’s address to the congress it may have finally happened that the immoveable object has met the unstoppable object.

Rep. Joe Wilson’s outburst at the President’s joint address to Congress was followed by an apology. Millions of Americans are now more amazed that both the President and the Democrats seem so thin-skinned. What seems so inappropriate may be after all just what the doctor ordered. Why doesn’t the President see this?

Even as Wilson was blurting out his remark, illegal aliens were receiving health care on a regular basis. If the Obama proposals went out as first written they would have been assured of further coverage, so what’s the problem? Apparently we are more concerned with the President’s dignity be it feigned or real than we are with the truth. When did protocol overtake veracity in America?

Is the floor of the Congress the new stage for ersatz and tinsel or can we dredge up the old eighties adage ‘get a life’ and put it back to work in Washington? At the very least lets use this one, also from the eighties, ‘get over it.’

Life is full of risks and often compromise must be made but it is the immutability of the ancient law of reciprocation that is in play here. Millions of Americans feel that Obama has lied to them on many levels, now one single representative of the people has spoken it in a place where it could not be drowned out by pundits, experts and biased news people. We can all agree that it may not have been the best time and place, but we can still appreciate the honesty in the charge of dishonesty.

The law of reciprocation will provide two things, one for Joe Wilson and the other for Barack Obama. Wilson will see a sweep of voters in his district that will drop anything they may be doing like a hot potato and run out to vote for him at election time. Some Americans would probably like to relocate to Wilson’s district just for the opportunity to cast their votes for him.

The other result that the law of reciprocation guarantees is that if the health care bill actually disallows illegal aliens any further or future coverage there will be about 12 million votes missing from the Obama tally in 2012. We will see both what will be compromised and what the truth of the entire matter is much more clearly as 2012 approaches. Why doesn’t the President see this?

Along with Wilson’s remarks at the joint address some have complained that questioning Barack Obama’s place of birth is also an undignified insult to the his Presidency. This also is answered by the ancient and venerable laws of reciprocation.

It is accepted that public figures must be open to public scrutiny, it is more than just tradition; it is the law. In the case of eligibility for the Presidency it is Constitutional law.

The President may feel he needs to apologize for America’s behavior while abroad but the time has not come when American’s are ready to apologize for the Constitution right here at home. Why doesn’t the President see this?

He and the entire Democratic Party are mistaken when they conclude that Americans want to be disrespectful of their President. We want to be proud and entirely respectful of all of our Presidents.

It is the American people who feel insulted by the Presidents willingness to engage a law firm to keep his birth certificate, records of public service and school records secreted away from those he wants to govern. Let’s go to the eighties yet once again; you remember ‘where’s the beef’ and that’s not too hard to understand. All we are saying is ‘where’s the papers.’ Why doesn’t the President see this?

To millions of Americans Joe Wilson’s emotional outburst was far more honest than the calculated and ongoing resistance to the exposure of the President’s records. Here the law of reciprocation is taking its toll on the Obama Presidency. The effect of sowing secrecy is obviously; reaping doubt. Why doesn’t the President see this?

We may need to set aside politics for a moment to understand why Wilson’s remarks have upset so many people and why the laws of reciprocation don’t seem to care that it does. Science never reverts to the vituperative to answer a matter so let’s look there for the resolve.

Albert Einstein is often criticized for not paying more attention to the newly discovered findings of the science of quantum mechanics. On one level we might want to thank our lucky stars that he didn’t. His theory of relativity was quickly engaged to produce atomic weapons that could end civilization as we know it. God alone knows what might have come of his delving into quantum theory. We might not have a split second of time to hear him say ‘whoops’ as the planet disappeared in a puff of smoke.

Although very little has been nailed down in the science of quantum physics, the essence of it is that possibly two subatomic particles can exist in two places at the same time. Gee, do you think! You mean all those saying there is an invisible God who exists in both the spiritual and physical realm at the same time (omnipresence) and knows everything past, present and future (omniscience) that created all things and is the judge of mankind (omnipotence) may actually have a chance of being justified by quantum physics? But let’s not get side tracked into theology; instead let’s apply a little quantum mechanics to the Joe Wilson outburst.

Is it possible to have one irate Congressmen who thinks the President is a fibber and an undetermined number of Bush, Palin, McCain, O’Reilly, Rush and Beck mockers in the same country at the same time?

Is it possible that Bush-booing crowds, late night McCain-bashing comedians and relentless Palin-pounding main stream media journalists can exist at the same time in the same place as a name calling Congressmen?

Is it possible that one emotionally charged Republican Rep who hit the nail on the head can exist at the same time and in the same nation as those who think more abortion is fine, the gay agenda is really important and we should cram government run healthcare down the throats of an unwilling citizenry. This is easier to answer than the proverbial ‘is the Pope Catholic’ question.

Here is an adage from eternity, you know, the quantum physics verified eternity. Christ said “…For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.” (Luke 6:38) Why doesn’t the President see this?

http://www.americanprophet.org is the place for news, articles, movie and book reviews and other insights for life. Rev. Bresciani is a columnist for online and print publications and has over three million readers and counting.

By Rev. MICHAEL BRESCIANI

The promise of a great new “Change we can believe in” is daily becoming the great “Division we can barely live with.” Why has the President allowed the question of his birth place to be added to the burgeoning list of doubts America is already facing.

The President’s stand on abortion and the newly discovered provisions found in the Health Care Bill for assisted suicide for the elderly indicate that the ‘one’ who promised to heal the divisions in the nation has not only ignored that campaign promise, but has sailed his ship way outside of that empty promise to create a class of entirely disposable citizens. Can we now add the group often being referred to as the ‘birthers’ to the ever growing list of disposable citizens? No healing here.

The question raised by the title of this article can be answered with a simple yes, but to be fair we should examine the plight of the birthers. (Those who are demanding to see the long form of President Obama’s birth certificate) More importantly, why hasn’t the President put a stop to it with a simple showing of the document?

Anyone who surfs the web has by now become at least nominally aware that a rapidly growing segment of America is quite dissatisfied with the vetting of the President. The question is largely centered on Barack Obama’s refusal to release what is known as the long form of his Hawaiian birth certificate.

The birth record is only one of many documents that have raised suspicion about the President’s past. It is ridiculously un-complicated because the commonality of every document in question is the same; they are still missing, or at least unseen by anyone except those who are reported to be holding them.

Perhaps there is nothing at all to the entire matter but until the documents can be seen no one will believe that. In a nation founded on laws, evidentiary procedure and documentation for almost all grievances and complaints, applications or identification, missing documents just won’t do it.

I will not enter the fine details of all that has been done to procure the records, but rather I will try to keep this perusal of the matter on a strictly philosophical basis. I know it is impossible to have a Will Rogers kind of trust in people, a Glenn Beck style of appeal to common sense, all at the same time we are saying that the laws of the Constitution may have been breached by the person who holds the highest office in the land. This is a tightrope for anybody to walk.

Hawaii has just hit the news and said that they have not destroyed any paper documents just because they have gone into electronic record keeping. It would seem safe to say that the document still exists. What does not seem as safe is that anyone should ask to see it. Newsman Lou Dobbs recently underwent a scolding according to sources for his mention of the missing documents and others have had to endure ridicule and outright scorn for the mention of it.

Every day thousands more Americans are joining those who are now calling for the proof, but the White House has danced around the issue, the President remains mysteriously silent and the birthers have had to endure the scoffing, belittlement and pooh-poohing of their efforts by everyone in the Obama sphere and some outside it.

Equally disconcerting is the fact that some high profile conservatives like Bill O’Reilly and Governor Mike Huckabee think Obama is perfectly OK with the COLB  he displayed on Snopes.com We have to wonder why they are so sure about something they have never seen either.

We are all quick to point out that Obama supporters hang on his every word like they were hypnotized but are reticent to openly disagree with conservative big boys like O’Reilly who has often said Obama, is very smart. What is smart about creating doubt in the hearts and minds of several million Americans?

Concealing the facts about a simple document comes under the heading of ‘pinhead’ not ‘patriot.’ Shouldn’t someone be willing to tell Mr. O’Reilly that? We can all appreciate the stand O’Reilly has taken on many issues but even his word can’t substitute for the constitution and its obvious requirements for the vetting of a Presidential candidate.

Thanks for the stand and the tee shirts but the matter of vetting cannot be dismissed by the waving of your hand at the end of a ninety second segment. Grassroots movements require years to gain adherents and strength and no one can wave them off in a second. I am no more of an expert than O’Reilly on the ‘birthers’ but I would bet the farm that they are in this for the long haul and will not be easily dismissed.

Struggling to find the truth must never be confused with mere partisanship or labeled as a conservative or liberal cause. It is several levels above simple politics and can never be settled in the endless debates of pundits and news figures. If we could refer the question to the founding fathers I’m sure they would concur that this is the reason they gave us the constitution to begin with. Calling the birthers some less than flattering names shows that we have missed the point entirely. It is the constitution that is primarily calling for the truth not the birthers.

Here is the rub. Those who say the document has been seen are wholly unwilling to admit that it not only has been alleged to be a fraud but it is by any standard, totally unusable as an instrument of identification and or verification. The reason it has been rendered useless has more to do with the means by which it was presented rather than the assertion that it is fraudulent.

It could not be used to get a passport, a job, a security clearance, a travel visa, a credit card, a bank account, or a tryout for the little league. What it can be used for is to get a direct and unhindered passage to the White House. Should we really be surprised by the doubt it has raised in the minds of millions of Americans? Please don’t insult your own intelligence with a glib answer of yes.

The more important question is why is the birth certificate posted on the internet useless? Here is where vetting 101 helps us along with the basics. No document posted online can be used to vet anything or anyone; think about it!

When you go to help your child get their first drivers license or when you go to the interview for the much coveted job you trained for all too many years, or when you make your next application at the bank for a loan try this. Just tell them they can look up all the pertinent information on you on your website, on your Facebook or Twitter page or wherever it is posted on the World Wide Web. If you are not laughed at you will at least be shown the door.

The internet is still the one media that gets laughed at as it pertains to accuracy and reliability. Here is the media that is home to a billion pages of filth, porn and general gobbledygook. The web is a long way from fully establishing its credulity as a news source but there is where our President chose to show the nation his papers. Yes, most reasonable people would tend to doubt this, how dare we label them ‘birthers’ and assign them to the fringe. Going from Snopes to a posted COLB and directly to the White House without passing go; that is what’s fringy.

Most of us won’t order a twenty dollar music CD from an internet website unless it has a major outlet like Amazon or EBay behind it with some kind of triple strength encryption on the check out page. But hey, want to be the President of the United States just post your birth certificate online and start spending the $600,000,000 in your campaign coffers to gain the White House. I am not trying to make it sound absurd, it doesn’t need my help to sound that way.

The Presidents silence continues to drive a wedge between the rapidly growing number of Americans who want to see the certificate and those who just don’t give a hoot. His credulity is suffering but no one seems to be advising him that if he continues to lose their trust it will undoubtedly show up hard against him in the 2012 election results. The million or two votes and growing cast against him for his indifference will be well earned and could be the difference between a second term and early retirement.

So what is the bottom line? Is it a court order to produce the document; is it a Senate or Congressional hearing to demand the papers? Can you snuff your nose at millions of Americans for four years and think it will all just go away like the fading of the morning glory at the rising of the sun? No one can say what series of complicated legal maneuvers will actually work to produce the big secret document but one thing is a foregone.

Before they were called ‘birthers’ they were called citizens. Until the constitution is completely discarded it is the citizens who have to choose and work with their President and it is the President who has to deal with the citizens. So deal with them Mr. Transparency!

President Obama has shown us that he has never met a minority that he doesn’t like. He comes from the black minority and has shown special care to Latinos, immigrants and gays. Are the ‘birthers’ the one exception to the rule. Oddly they are the one with the simplest problem and it can be solved in a New York minute. What part of the simple request to see the document does the President not understand?

If he wants the whole matter to just go away he could obtain the document submit it to a few reliable news sources and put the entire matter to bed. Adding to his promise to become Mr. Transparency, Barack Obama has also earned the title of Mr. News Conference.

Why not shut the mouths of the naysayers with a single stroke, a single news conference and thereby perhaps pick up a few votes in the process. Holding up the highly disputed document for all to see and perhaps with a smile and a ‘hey boys, look at this’ would nip the entire matter in the bud. Birthers would go home silenced but happy and the confidence of several million Americans would be restored. All that remains after that is to see if the President invites people like Philip Berg, Mario Puzzo and Orly Taitz along with some of the most vociferous birthers to the White House for a beer.

But even if it takes until someone finally locates the documents for the inauguration of the new Obama Library the truth will one day be known. What will that legacy be?

I said that I will keep the approach here on a purely philosophical level but I cannot leave the room without at least one small item lifted up from the theological level. If nothing should happen on the Obama birth certificate question until the very end of time there is one who will demand a look see; and he will get it.

Christ said, “For there is nothing hid, which shall not be manifested; neither was any thing kept secret, but that it should come abroad.” (Mt 4:22)

http://www.americanprophet.org is the place for news, articles, movie and book reviews and other insights for life. Rev Bresciani is a columnist for online and print publications and has over two million readers and counting.

By Rev. MICHAEL BRESCIANI

Reminiscent of the fall of Rome, Congressional seats may soon be harder to give away rather than raising a fortune to gain. In fairness it would be hard to prove the Congress has a clue, but the real question is what are they going to do now that the rest of America is starting to get a clue?

The clues are starting to come in at an alarming rate because many Americans are sitting down and actually reading the bills the congress doesn’t seem to have time to study. The stimulus, healthcare, and hate crimes read like a cross between a child’s fairy tale and the dark musings of Jean Paul Sartre. Proposals that bounce between the silly and the frightening may hold our interest but what do they do to preserve the American way of life, our founding principles or the Constitution itself?

It is more for relief than revenge that many voters are looking forward to the 2010 congressional elections. We have begun to read the script for this all new socialistically leaning production of the “Bright New America,” and it looks like its time to hire new writers.

Gallup polls are not something every American finds good reading, but it is impossible not to take note of their latest findings. In June the approval rating for the Congress was at 19% but in July it dipped to 14% which is the lowest rating in the 34 year history of Gallup polls. These raw facts are obviously due to some raw legislative acts recently passed (stimulus) and those subsequently proposed. Let’s take a look see.

Many loyal and honorable conservatives, largely Republican have been joined by the emerging so called ‘Blue Dog Democrats’ to resist the latest insanity in the Congress, but perhaps it will only be resolved by the changing of the guard in the elections of 2010 and 2012 respectively.

The stimulus bill not being read by anyone in Congress is now the behemoth that we are saddled with and our grandchildren will not thank us for, but now that it is coming under greater scrutiny it takes only a cursory examination to see it is the most wasteful surge of spending in our history. It holds only the promise of future debt and all discussion of future legislative acts to improve the fiscal finery of the nation may well be moot because of it. America may be groveling in survival mode rather than reveling in prosperity in the years ahead.

Having expended more effort to get our children to read The Cat in the Hat than to get our representatives to slow down and read the stimulus bill has resulted in our un-willingness to allow any more stimulus spending proposals and a tabling of the health care bill until it too is more carefully scrutinized. Here at least is a sign that good old American common sense is beginning to re-emerge.

It seems more like a non-sequitur to say that the Democrats are in control of the House and the Senate with new proposals coming to the floor that decry the assertion that anyone is in control at all. For example The Matthew Shepard ‘Hate Crimes’ Amendment, now known better as the ‘Pedophile Protection Act’ proposed by Senators Leahy and Levin gives protection to over 500 sexually oriented deviant behaviors and reads like the directory page of an internet porn site. How does anyone come to the knowledge of these behaviors? Deviant behaviors may be studied as part of psychology, but it will not be found in the curriculum of any school offering a major in political science.

So the question remains, how did our honorable representatives come by this detailed list? An even greater question is; are they aware that most Americans have never so much as heard of many of them. The only honest question left is; are they protecting us or are they promoting something we need protection from?

It is with great disdain that I must list any of them here, but I must so no one will think it is an exaggeration. Some of the behaviors the Senators think we must protect are urophilia – arousal from urine, coprophilia – arousal from feces, necrophilia – relations with a corpse and pedophilia – sex with an underage child. This short list alone should be enough to make us cringe if not hang our heads in shame. Is this lawmaking at its best? Has this anything at all to do with the American way of life? Can we show this to our children or the rest of the world and be proud?

Is it unreasonable to say that after a century of Hollywood assurances that it’s ok for the nation to get drunk with sexual obsession that Congress has decided to go into the business of stills and breweries? Should lawmakers be thankful that the same first amendment right that even allows them to suggest that such behaviors be protected is what keeps anyone from viewing the inner hidden details on their personal computers?

Since such information can only be found in either psychiatric journals or textbooks or on the Internet the question is why they are looking in either to make civil laws. Just how many deviants are there in the U.S. that have contacted their reps and demanded protection via the law?

To be fair since legislators are now ignoring the tens of thousands of letters, emails and faxes asking them not to pass bills like Matthew Shepard would the handful of people who have asked for help be willing to concede that they are out voiced? Would the Congress and Senate be willing to admit they are on the pathway to absurdity and America is beginning to notice that?

Then along comes the Congressional Health Care Reform Bill replete with provisions for tax payer funding of abortions and a chance to start euthanizing our elderly if they are willing. No you have not read wrong.

The healthcare fiasco contains a section called the tri-committee health care bill and in section 1233 ‘Advance Care Planning Consultation’ is a call for the creation of a group of professionals who can counsel the aged on how to end their lives sooner by assisted suicide. Who would have thought we could go from the green planet movement to the beginnings of an assisted suicide bent ‘Soylent Green’ world almost as fast as you can say Al Gore.

Over three decades past I began to warn that as the “love of many waxed cold” (Mt 24:12) America would begin considering euthanasia to add to the scourge of abortion. This is not “I told you so” but it is a call to resist the inclination to hold the lives of any class of citizens as disposable. I can safely say from a theological and Biblical perspective that the future of all our lives will depend on it.

Christ said that if we met the needs or ignored the needs of even the lowest citizens we were doing so or conversely not doing so to him. Is it unreasonable to think that to disregard the lives of the unborn or the aged would not also be covered in the admonition given in Matthew 25:35f?

The Congress and the Senate need only ask one question concerning any of their decisions. What choices and what legacy are they leaving the next generation. If they continue on the present course the choice to live without debt has already been lifted from the next generation as they will be asked to pay for the spending we are doing today. The freedom to choose our own doctors and health care providers will also dissolve if the Obama reforms are put into law.

Should we be thankful that at the least they have left a legacy of about 500 choices of sexual orientations that our children can choose from and live in without fear from others. Will any one in the next generation, if there is one, stop to thank the Senators or Congressmen who leave only these choices behind. It doesn’t take a prophet to know the answer to this question.

Beyond that in another day and time will they be able to look into the eyes of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Roosevelt or Eisenhower and confess that they had done well in their service to the American people and her constitution. This is a question only they can answer but for millions of Americans viewing the latest legislation out of Washington the answer would not be flattering.

I believe that if Lincoln or any of the founding fathers could be heard today the simple admonition they would give would be simply, don’t leave the Constitution behind, don’t leave good judgment behind and most of all don’t leave the American people behind.

We all know that at the heart of politics there must be compromise but we ask you to consider that if you choose the friendship of only your colleagues and fellows and not that of the American people you will leave public office friendless.

“I desire to conduct the affairs of this administration that if at the end… I have lost every other friend on earth, I shall at least have one friend left, and that friend shall be down inside of me. Abraham Lincoln

http://www.americanprophet.org is the place for news, articles, movie and book reviews and other insights for life. Rev Bresciani is a columnist for online and print publications and has over two million readers and counting.

By Rev. MICHAEL BRESCIANI

A Jew hating, down with America, Muslim group is openly looking for recruits, no not in Iraq, Yemen or Afghanistan but right here in America.

Formed and committed to the establishment of international Islamic empire the group linked to Hamas known as Hizb ut-Tahrir is holding its first public meeting for recruitment in the windy city of Chicago. The group which functioned clandestinely for years are now out in the open some are saying it is due to the ultra relaxed and highly touted PC tolerance of the Obama administration.

Hizb ut-Tahrir is not on the State Department’s terror list allegedly, but you have to wonder if it is on anybody’s watch list and if not, why not.

On July 19, 2009 the group to graced the Grand Ballroom of the proud Hilton in a suburb of Chicago with a conference whose theme and title is “The Fall of Capitalism and the Rise of Islam.” IPT news July 17, 2009 said, “According to the conference website, the program includes a question-and-answer session and two panels; one entitled “Capitalism is Doomed to Fail,” the other “The Suffering under Capitalism.”

The group is said to have only a few hundred adherents in America but as high as 100,000 in Indonesia and many thousands more in other Muslim countries. The real question is not how many adherents they now have but how many recruits will they gain if allowed to conduct meetings like this one.

Naturally they insist that they are meeting under the auspices of first amendment rights and the freedoms afforded to all Americans in a richly pluralistic society.

No one doubts that during the Bush years enough pressure would have been applied to such groups to make such a meeting impossible. But under the ‘tip toe through the tulips’ PC rhetoric of the Obama administration and now with the new call to change the word ‘terrorism’ with the phrase ‘man made disasters’ all bets are off.

Combing through the news out of Indonesia, where only a few days past both Marriott and Ritz Carlton Hotels were ripped with terrorist bombs resulting in eight deaths and over fifty injured, the term ‘man made disasters’ appeared nowhere in the news casts. It is a phrase that is not taking well here in America either.

Many Americans labor under the false notion that Christianity is opposed to the Muslim religion because it wants to be the preeminent religion of the world. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is the foundational principles of true Biblical based Christianity that shows what the all important difference is.

Christianity with all of its faltering steps and human errors is after all a religion of life. It is against abortion because it stands for life. It is against abuse of women and children because it regards their lives as precious in the sight of the Lord. Most of all it is firmly against both the harming and the hatred for other human beings.

Jesus Christ labored successfully to keep an adulterous woman from being stoned to death. (John 8:1f) He healed the sick, raised the dead and preached a gospel of hope and love to the rest. No death here, no hatred here.

True Christianity does not call for the downfall of capitalism, democracy or any other established system or ideology. It calls for the establishment of a kingdom that starts within an individual and exists to show love and brotherhood to a troubled and dying world.

The very tenants of Bible based Christianity are in conflict with both the Koran and any religion that believes it can be brought into acceptance through hatred and death. Nothing says it better than the following verse of scripture taken from the epistles of the Apostle John.

If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? (1Jn 4:20)

http://www.americanprophet.org is the place for news, articles, movie and book reviews and other insights for life. Rev Bresciani is a columnist for online and print publications and has over two million readers and counting. Download your copy of Rev Bresciani’s eBook ‘An American Prophet and His Message’ absolutely free at Sword of the Spirit Publishing

By Rev. MICHAEL BRESCIANI

According to Boston.com July 23, 2009, the President is ‘surprised’ by the controversy surrounding his remark that the Cambridge police acted ‘stupidly’ in the arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. No one could be more surprised at the president’s choice of words than the rest of us.

The President is among other things the chief law enforcement official in the land. It is un-nerving if not completely mind boggling to hear him refer to the actions of a police department as ‘stupid.’ Even if their actions were completely asinine couldn’t we expect a little more self control and reserve from the top law enforcement official in the nation?

While news sources are getting to the facts of the matter as time goes on, no one has yet remarked on the general demeanor of the President as he addressed the incident at his press conference. There was clearly an angry tone and angry rhetoric in use at the press meet, but it is far from the first time.

Obama has previously displayed this kind of open disdain. The last time he admitted that he was good and angry with AIG, and within days officials at that corporation had to stay home or seek personal protection in order to work.

Obama modified his statements later and said that things would have gone better if everyone in Cambridge that night had kept a cool head. Is this the place where we ask the President if he wants us to do as he says but not as he does?

The President said many things about the incident, but when he summarized it succinctly with a one, two, and three that’s when it hit the fan for the media. The President said “Now, I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that. But I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately. That’s just a fact.”

Let’s peruse each aspect of the one, two, and three, and keep in mind that the President preceded the statement with the words “Now, I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts” and that was followed by “But I think it’s fair to say…”

Hasn’t this non-sequitur cancelled any statement that follows it? If you don’t have all the facts then it is not ‘fair’ to say anything about the matter except that you don’t have all the facts. You remember, it was covered in diplomacy 101!

The most basic definition of prejudice is 1. opinion formed beforehand, 2. holding of ill-formed opinions and 3. irrational dislike of someone. In fact, the North American Dictionary of English says prejudice is “A pre-formed opinion, usually an unfavorable one, based on insufficient knowledge, irrational feelings, or inaccurate stereotypes.” Didn’t we hound and lambaste President Bush for not getting all the facts on WMDs before entering into a war with Iraq? Is it time for Barack Obama to also take a little dose of this medicine?

For his number two, the President concluded that the Cambridge police acted ‘stupidly.’ To avoid repeating the same mistake Mr. Obama made let’s not make a judgment call at all until all the facts are in, instead let’s just focus in on his use of the colorful and highly descriptive adverb ‘stupidly.’

President Obama waited a week to condemn the brutal slaughter of Iranian protestors after the recent elections in that country and all but ignored the missile lobbing Kim Jong-Il of North Korea but didn’t waste a minute to slam an entire domestic police department with a single word.

There is more excoriation in this single word than in an entire volume of angry dissertations. The reason is blatantly obvious. It’s not the word but the source; it is the President of the United States putting down the cops, not a late night comedian or political pundit. Whatever happened to Presidential protocol?

For his number three the President said “what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.” Not many Americans would dispute this statement but to load the weight, the culpability by association or the raw guilt on Police Sgt James Crowley at a moment when heads were hot and facts were not, is indeed anything but Presidential.

After all the facts are in it will be easier to determine if Sgt Crowley followed police procedure than it will be to determine if President Obama followed Presidential protocol. What is certain is that Obama’s admission of bias because of his friendship with Gates will automatically serve as a negative bias against the Cambridge Police if a law suit is sought against them. This is an unfair disadvantage by any measure.

Gates has called for an apology and Crowley has emphatically stated it won’t happen. In fairness if Crowley is being asked to apologize to Gates should Obama be asked to apologize to Crowley? Is there a protocol for this? Perhaps Obama will create one when he gets a little ‘cooler head?’

The President did say he may have been a bit biased about the whole matter because Professor Gates was a personal friend of his. But in fact Mr. Gates, friend or not, will never be asked to do what Sgt. Crowley or any officer of the Cambridge police force could be asked to do. At any given time night or day they may be asked to stand between a citizen and the criminal intent of another person and give their lives to protect.

One can only imagine a moment of fear that ran through Sgt. Crowley’s mind just approaching the front door of the Gates residence. If there was indeed a burglar or thief in the residence, the knowledge that the person inside might simply kill Sgt. Crowley in order to avoid capture was clearly a possibility. This knowledge did not keep officer Crowley from doing his duty. Use the adverb ‘bravely’ here as it concerns the actions of this police officer.

Such an analogy would not be complete without referencing the fact that Sgt Crowley, the entire Cambridge police department and any other cop in America may be asked to give their lives in a heartbeat to protect the President. Doesn’t that make Sgt. Crowley one of the President’s friends as well? To be ‘fair’ as the President says, the following verse spoken by Christ in John 15:13 clearly says Sgt. Crowley may be one of the best friends a President could have.

“Greater love hath no man than this that a man lay down his life for his friends.”

http://www.americanprophet.org is the place for news, articles, movie and book reviews and other insights for life. Rev Bresciani is a columnist for online and print publications and has over two million readers and counting. Download your copy of Rev Bresciani’s eBook ‘An American Prophet and His Message’ absolutely free at http://donaldjamesparker.com/sosFreebies.aspx