How Will The American Economy Die?

February 2, 2012

by Russell D. Longcore

I have been writing about secession now since May of 2009. One of the constant themes of my writings is that secession is not going to happen in America until and unless the economy collapses. AFTER it collapses. A lot of what I’ve written has been perception, conjecture and prediction based in reason. But much of that conjecture and many of those predictions are now coming true. Tick. Tock. It’s not a case of “If,” like there was a possibility that America could avoid collapse. Now, it’s simply a countdown to inevitability.

The following is a plausible and likely scenario of the death of the American economy.

First, the money goes.

The world economic system is built upon two things: (1) fractional reserve banking and (2) fiat money. There is not one nation on earth that has a commodity-based money and currency. Keynesian economics, taught in nearly every college Econ curriculum, is so ubiquitous…so ingrained…that it is like the dye colors in your shirt. No amount of washing gets the dye out.

Is there a banker on earth that does not use fractional reserve banking? Money is created out of thin air and pumped into the world economy. It would be impossible without fiat currency…the currency considered to be money because some government says that it is. When your currency is backed by “the full faith and credit of” your government, and nothing else, and your government goes broke…your currency is not far behind. In the regular world, issuing paper money with nothing behind it is called “Counterfeiting.”

The power in Washington is built on those two things above and add a third: the US Dollar is the world reserve currency. Being the world reserve currency was brought about back in the early 1970s when Nixon negotiated a deal with the House of Saud, in which Nixon guaranteed the Saudis that he would protect their kingdom from their neighbors if they agreed to (a) use only the US Dollar to settle oil payments, and (b) use their surpluses to buy US Treasury debt instruments. Over time, the Dollar became the currency all nations used to settle all kinds of commercial transactions. This reserve status gave the USA a tremendous advantage over all other nations. The blowback of unintended consequences is that many foreign nations own trillions of US Debt, and that gives those nations leverage over Washington. For a good look at who owns US Debt, CLICK HERE.

Right now, in real time, Washington is making plans to make war upon the nation of Iran. They are using the excuse that they must keep Iran from possessing nuclear weapons. The reality behind the scenes is that Iran started an oil bourse (a commodity exchange) on Kish Island in 2008, specifically to begin trading their own oil in currencies other than the US Dollar. That is a grave threat to the reserve currency status of the Dollar. Previously, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein announced that Iraq was going to begin accepting payments for oil in Euros, not Dollars. What happened to him? Muamar Gaddafi of Libya was buying enormous quantities of gold bullion with the intention of creating an African dinar, a gold-backed money for all of the African nations to use. Where is Gaddafi now?

“But so what?” you may ask.

The only thing that maintains the purchasing power of the Dollar is its world reserve status. You already know that the Dollar has no precious metals backing it. The Dollar only has the “full faith and credit of the United States” behind it. But Washington is many dozens of trillion dollars in debt. Some estimate that the US has over $100 Trillion of debt. Just a week ago, the United States current Federal budget debt limit reached $15 Trillion, and that is equal to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the entire nation. So we owe more now than we take in annually.

Any action by any other nation that threatens the world reserve currency status of the US Dollar panics Washington. They must snuff it out by whatever means necessary. Even war.

But they cannot.

Iran has powerful friends around the globe. Just last week, Iran inked a deal with India to sell them oil for gold. Iran will do the same with China. Russia will pay with gold and rubles. And, because Iran sits on an ocean of oil, and many nations rely upon its oil for survival, Iran will defeat Washington and its allies who have set up embargoes against Iran.

The whole world does not have to forsake the Dollar all at once to send shock waves through Washington. But more and more nations are rejecting the terms of the DC/European embargo against Iran. On Thursday, Turkey announced that they would not participate in the embargo. Turkey is a very crucial ally to DC. One at a time, nations will find that they can do business around the world in their own currencies or in gold.

But here’s another unintended consequence, and a potential trigger for the collapse of the Dollar. As nation after nation decide they do not need the Dollar, they will do what they can to rid themselves of American currency and American debt. Nations around the globe have purchased US Treasuries. Now they will have no need for the bonds, and will want to sell them. Questions come up: Who will buy them? And what are they worth?

What happens when you offer bonds for sale and no one buys them? You have very expensive wallpaper or toilet paper. What happens when you CAN sell them, but at pennies on the Dollar? You take staggering losses.

One other problem is timing. In order to reclaim some value for US Treasuries, your nation’s bond traders must have perfect timing to offer enough bonds for sale but not so many that it triggers a bond market collapse. Then to find buyers at acceptable prices? It is not reasonable to believe that every nation will find buyers at all, at good prices and not create a bond market crash.

So, built into the global process of forsaking the US Dollar as the world reserve currency are the seeds of the Dollar’s collapse. Either the bond market collapses as nations get out of the Dollar, or getting out of the Dollar causes the value of the Dollar to collapse. Keep in mind that if the Dollar were as “good as gold,” no nation would want to jettison the Dollar.

Dear Readers, there is no third choice that prevents the collapse of the Dollar.

What Does Collapse Mean?

There can only be one meaning for the word “collapse.” Hyperinflation is that collapse. Think about it. Inflation is the loss of purchasing power. Inflation that occurs over decades is like death by a thousand cuts. Americans for the last 80-plus years are used to inflation and the loss of their purchasing power. In hyperinflation, what took perhaps 40 years to lose a certain amount of purchasing power can easily happen in 40 days…or even 40 hours. There will come a day soon here in America when the Dollar will not be accepted between buyers and sellers for even the simplest transactions. It happened in Zimbabwe. I presently own 160 Trillion in Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe currency, and I paid six dollars for it.

The American Dollar has purchasing power…value…now because the world uses it. And the nation with world reserve currency status that is inflating its money will continue to pay its debts with fiat currency, which is losing more and more value. Once an unknown number of nations stop…or even just slow down…using the Dollar for international trade, the value of the Dollar will evaporate. I say “unknown” because it’s not just the number of nations that is important. It is the economic might of the nations that stop using the Dollar. If the BRIC nations…Brazil, Russia, India and China…arguably the four strongest non-USA world economies…continue the process of weaning themselves off the Dollar, it will have drastic and sudden repercussions for the Dollar.

Also remember how this world turns. The business day in Berlin, Rome or Athens is six hours ahead of the American East Coast. A bond market collapse could start in a European bond market at 9:00 am in Berlin while it’s 3:00 am in New York. The Dollar could get hammered on foreign markets for six hours before the banks open in New York, or the New York Stock Exchange opens for business at 9:30 am. Americans will be completely defenseless against the collapse.

Washington’s Response

The politicians in DC will be powerless to stop the financial carnage because they cannot control the value of a currency that others refuse to use. The Federal Reserve may pump additional trillions of greenbacks into the American economy, but at some point, wheelbarrow loads of paper money won’t buy you a loaf of bread. This will cause the Federal bureaucracy to grind to a halt as Federal union employees refuse to work for worthless money. And how will Washington pay its military personnel? How will state governments pay their law enforcement officers and prison guards? Society will collapse at that time. It will be The End Of The World As We Know It.

You see, when the VALUE of the American Dollar ceases to exist, our bubble society will also cease to exist. This is why I hold the position that once the economic system in America fails, Washington will be entirely unable to stop secession. And that only the collapse of the Dollar will trigger the desire for secession.

Here is the mental picture I want you to form when thinking about the world economic system. Blowing soap bubbles. You dip a drinking straw into the bubble liquid and begin blowing on the dry end of the straw. Hundreds of bubbles of many sizes will form, expand and then pop. For a hundred years the world has experienced economic bubble after bubble…boom, bust, recession, depression, real estate, housing, tech stocks, mortgages but to name a few. But don’t miss this! When fractional reserve banking and fiat money run the world, ALL ECONOMIC ACTIVITY IS A BUBBLE that must eventually burst.

This has been a hard article to write. The subject is one of life or death for billions around the world, and millions on our own continent. I take no joy or satisfaction in this article, save the satisfaction of knowing that some of you will read this and act to save yourself and your family.

Think. Use your brain. Do not let anyone tell you how to think or do your thinking for you. Question ALL authority. Free Your Mind.

Secession is the only hope for humanity. Who will be first?

DumpDC. Six Letters That Can Change History.

© Copyright 2011, Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Advertisements

The Persian Gulf Is Boiling

January 16, 2012

By Russell D. Longcore

Here are the facts as I see them:

• Iran has had a nuclear energy program for nearly 40 years. They use nuclear reactors to produce electricity.
• Iran is being accused by Western nations of enriching radioactive materials with the intent of producing nuclear weapons.
• The International Atomic Energy Commission has not been able to produce any evidence that Iran is enriching uranium for weapons.
• 20% of the world’s oil production is shipped down the Persian Gulf and through the narrows of the Straits of Hormuz.
• The West, led by Washington, who is being led by a nose ring by Israel, are escalating economic sanctions against Iran.
• Recently, the US and Israel performed war games just outside the Persian Gulf as a threat to Iran.
• Iran has done its own war games in the Persian Gulf and recommended that American carrier task forces not return to the Gulf.
• Washington is threatening to destroy the Iranian Central Bank.
• Washington pulled this same shyt in Iraq. Remember?
• Things are fixin’ to get real ugly in the Persian Gulf.

Think about Iran’s situation some more. Iran is one of the major oil producers of the Middle East. Dozens of nations buy their oil from Iran. Iran would be punishing themselves if they blocked the Strait of Hormuz. But the West has shown themselves willing to commit a false-flag operation and hang it around an enemy’s neck. Saddam Hussein’s name might come to mind. The nation of Afghanistan might come to mind. Yet, Washington is moving steadily toward war against Iran. The false-flag operation would give Washington and Israel the cover they need to start a shooting war. More on that below.

The reality of the situation is that Iran has a commodity that the world cannot live without. So, which should be in control here…the buyer or the seller? Should the Central Bank of Iran be held hostage by the banks of other nations, or the banking families that control most of the world banking system? I submit to you that the seller…Iran…should exert its sovereignty and its ultimate control.

What should the Iranian response be?

Iran should announce that beginning immediately, all payment for crude oil will be made in gold: no currency, no credit. No gold, no oil.

That single act will solve most of Iran’s problems. Requiring payment in gold would begin to strengthen the Iranian rial (their currency), thereby setting the world’s bankers back on their heels. If you are not using the banker’s credit, you are not subject to their rules or control. In recent months, the rial has lost almost 50% of its value against the US Dollar. Selling oil for gold would quickly make inflation in Iran disappear. The economy would rebound for everybody living in Iran. Another benefit would be a spike in world gold prices as companies and nations make massive purchases of gold so they can buy oil.

Now, what about a shooting war? Look at a map of the Persian Gulf. The entire eastern shore of the Gulf is Iran. The Persian Gulf is not a big body of water and has a choke point at the southeastern end. The incredible hubris of the American Navy, commanded by whichever President is in office (save Ron Paul), would place one or two carrier task forces in the Gulf. Iran possesses the Russian-built Sunburn anti-ship missile. The American navy has no defense for the Sunburn. The missile travels at nearly 1,600 miles per hour (Mach 2.1) at an altitude of about 50 feet above the waves. Iran has mobile launchers all along the mountainous shoreline of the Gulf. In a retaliatory strike, Sunburn missiles launched from the shore would reach the ships of the carrier task forces in a matter of seconds. The ship-board weapons systems like Phalanx will not have enough time to calculate a firing solution. And the Phalanx system has never been tested against the Sunburn. Multiple Sunburn missiles will send the task forces to the bottom of the Gulf, with massive loss of American sailors and airmen. Yet another defeat for the American military.

In my opinion, Iran could take control of their crisis situation and avoid a war simply by going with gold.

DumpDC. Six Letters That Can Change History.

© Copyright 2012, Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.


Gadhafi’s Gold-money Plan Would Have Devastated Dollar

November 14, 2011

by Alex Newman

courtesy The New American

(Editor’s note: Ever wonder why, all of a sudden, Gadhafi became a pariah who needed killing? Here’s the answer. And if Libya had 150 tons of gold, where is it now? If you think that the present banking system will voluntarily re-adopt the gold standard, you’re nuts. This is yet another reason why secession is the ONLY solution for liberty.)

It remains unclear exactly why or how the Gadhafi regime went from “a model” and an “important ally” to the next target for regime change in a period of just a few years. But after claims of “genocide” as the justification for NATO intervention were disputed by experts, several other theories have been floated.

Oil, of course, has been mentioned frequently — Libya is Africa‘s largest oil producer. But one possible reason in particular for Gadhafi’s fall from grace has gained significant traction among analysts and segments of the non-Western media: central banking and the global monetary system.

According to more than a few observers, Gadhafi’s plan to quit selling Libyan oil in U.S. dollars — demanding payment instead in gold-backed “dinars” (a single African currency made from gold) — was the real cause. The regime, sitting on massive amounts of gold, estimated at close to 150 tons, was also pushing other African and Middle Eastern governments to follow suit.

Got Gold?

And it literally had the potential to bring down the dollar and the world monetary system by extension, according to analysts. French President Nicolas Sarkozy reportedly went so far as to call Libya a “threat” to the financial security of the world. The “Insiders” were apparently panicking over Gadhafi’s plan.

“Any move such as that would certainly not be welcomed by the power elite today, who are responsible for controlling the world’s central banks,” noted financial analyst Anthony Wile, editor of the free market-oriented Daily Bell, in an interview with RT. “So yes, that would certainly be something that would cause his immediate dismissal and the need for other reasons to be brought forward [for] removing him from power.”

According to Wile, Gadhafi’s plan would have strengthened the whole continent of Africa in the eyes of economists backing sound money — not to mention investors. But it would have been especially devastating for the U.S. economy, the American dollar, and particularly the elite in charge of the system.

“The central banking Ponzi scheme requires an ever-increasing base of demand and the immediate silencing of those who would threaten its existence,” Wile noted in a piece entitled “Gaddafi Planned Gold Dinar, Now Under Attack” earlier this year. “Perhaps that is what the hurry [was] in removing Gaddafi in particular and those who might have been sympathetic to his monetary idea.”

Investor newsletters and commentaries have been buzzing for months with speculation about the link between Gadhafi’s gold dinar and the NATO-backed overthrow of the Libyan regime. Conservative analysts pounced on the potential relationship, too.

“In 2009 — in his capacity as head of the African Union — Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi had proposed that the economically crippled continent adopt the ‘Gold Dinar,’” noted Ilana Mercer in an August opinion piece for WorldNetDaily. “I do not know if Col. Gadhafi continued to agitate for ditching the dollar and adopting the Gold Dinar — or if the Agitator from Chicago got wind of Gadhafi’s (uncharacteristic) sanity about things monetary.”

But if Arab and African nations had begun adopting a gold-backed currency, it would have had major repercussions for debt-laden Western governments that would be far more significant than the purported “democratic” uprisings sweeping the region this year. And it would have spelled big trouble for the elite who benefit from “freshly counterfeited funny-money,” Mercer pointed out.

“Had Gadhafi sparked a gold-driven monetary revolution, he would have done well for his own people, and for the world at large,” she concluded. “A Gadhafi-driven gold revolution would have, however, imperiled the positions of central bankers and their political and media power-brokers.”

Adding credence to the theory about why Gadhafi had to be overthrown, as The New American reported in March, was the rebels’ odd decision to create a central bank to replace Gadhafi’s state-owned monetary authority. The decision was broadcast to the world in the early weeks of the conflict.

In a statement describing a March 19 meeting, the rebel council announced, among other things, the creation of a new oil company. And more importantly: “Designation of the Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya and appointment of a Governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi.”

The creation of a new central bank, even more so than the new national oil regime, left analysts scratching their heads. “I have never before heard of a central bank being created in just a matter of weeks out of a popular uprising,” noted Robert Wenzel in an analysis for the Economic Policy Journal. “This suggests we have a bit more than a rag tag bunch of rebels running around and that there are some pretty sophisticated influences,” he added. Wenzel also noted that the uprising looked like a “major oil and money play, with the true disaffected rebels being used as puppets and cover” while the transfer of control over money and oil supplies takes place.

Other analysts, even in the mainstream press, were equally shocked. “Is this the first time a revolutionary group has created a central bank while it is still in the midst of fighting the entrenched political power?” wondered CNBC senior editor John Carney. “It certainly seems to indicate how extraordinarily powerful central bankers have become in our era.”

Similar scenarios involving the global monetary system — based on the U.S. dollar as a global reserve currency, backed by the fact that oil is traded in American money — have also been associated with other targets of the U.S. government. Some analysts even say a pattern is developing.

Iran, for example, is one of the few nations left in the world with a state-owned central bank. And Iraqi despot Saddam Hussein, once armed by the U.S. government to make war on Iran, was threatening to start selling oil in currencies other than the dollar just prior to the Bush administration’s “regime change” mission.

While most of the establishment press in America has been silent on the issue of Gadhafi’s gold dinar scheme, in Russia, China, and the global alternative media, the theory has exploded in popularity. Whether salvaging central banking and the corrupt global monetary system were truly among the reasons for Gadhafi’s overthrow, however, may never be known for certain — at least not publicly.

© The New American Magazine. All rights reserved.


The Lost Decade

November 3, 2011

by Angelo M. Codevilla

(Editor’s Note: This article is a brilliant analysis of the last ten years since September 11, 1001. It is long and very detailed. That is why we are providing you with a link to the Claremont Institute’s website, where the article is published. But first, here are some excerpts from the piece:)

“An honest assessment of America’s problem would have led the Bush team to ask: why, given how we have behaved, should any Muslim government take the trouble of restraining anyone inclined to do us harm? The local regimes know far better than we who among their subjects is inclined to do us harm. Their schools and media are anti-American because the regimes make them so. Why not change course and hold them fully responsible for any harm that comes to us from their subjects, no matter how indirectly?”

“Setting objectives other than the ones that rid you of your problems is the biggest mistake anyone can make in war.”

“Why suppose that the armed bands roaming Iraq and Afghanistan are anti-American terrorists who must be fought in their countries lest they come and strike America, when it was perfectly obvious that Iraqis and Afghans were fighting one another for local advantage and fighting Americans insofar as they got in their way? The answer seems to be that recognizing that the regimes and the cultures that spawn terrorists are the problem would force our leaders to acknowledge how mistaken they were in fostering those regimes, and how monumental the task of dealing with them really is.”

Here is the link: The Lost Decade

Angelo M. Codevilla is professor of international relations at Boston University and Vice Chairman of the U.S. Army War College Board of Visitors. His most recent book is Advice for War Presidents, published by Basic Books.


OO Rah

November 2, 2011

War and the Free Will of Pool Balls

by Fred Reed

I read frequently among the lesserly neuronal of the supposed honor of soldiers, of the military virtues of courage, loyalty, and uprightness–that in an age of moral decomposition only the military adhere to principles, and that our troops in places like Afghanistan nobly make sacrifices to preserve our freedoms and democracy. Is not all of this nonsense?

Honor? A soldier is just a nationally certified hit-man, perfectly amoral. When he joins the military he agrees to kill anyone he is told to kill, regardless of whether he has previously heard of the country in which he will kill them or whether the residents pose any threat to him or his. How is this honorable? It is cause for lifelong shame.

It is curious that so many soldiers think that they are Christians. Christianity is incompatible with military service, if any Christianity is meant that Christ would have regarded with other than repugnance.

The explanation of course lies in the soldier’s moral compartmentalization. Within his own tribe or pack, these usually being denominated “countries,” he is the soul of moral propriety—doesn’t knock over convenience stores, kick his dog, or beat his children; speaks courteously, observes personal hygiene, and works tirelessly for the public good in the event of natural disasters. A steely gaze with little behind it and a firm handshake amplify the appearance of probity.

In conflict with foreigners, he will burn, bomb, rape and torture indiscriminately. His is the behavior of feral dogs, which humans closely resemble.

Sacrifice? GIs do not make sacrifices. They are sacrificed, sacrificed for big egos, big contracts, for the shareholders of military industries, for pasty patriots in salons who never wore boots. They fight not for love of country but to stay alive, and from fear of the punishments meted out to deserters. If you doubt this, tell the men in Afghanistan that they may come home on the next plane without penalty, and see how many stay. Troops are as manipulated as roosters in a cock fight, forced to choose between combat and the pot.

Always, to understand the bloody absurdity of the military, bear in mind the primitive, overriding instinct of mankind to form packs and fight other packs. It is the only drive that can at times take precedence over sex.Thus we have tribes, football teams, Crips and Bloods, religious wars, rabid political parties, and patriotism, this latter being far the worst. Men in particular live primed to form martial herds and rush mindlessly upon other herds, waving slogans, arguments, forty-yard passes from scrimmage, swords, naval artillery, or white phosphorous. Dogs. Ants. Soldiers. Humanity.

Nowadays a high moral pretext for war will be contrived, embodying saccharine goodness and nauseous piety. We kill them to make them free, butcher their families because they must be democratic. The race has accumulated just enough fragile decency to want a noble pretext before burning children. Yet the pack’s hostility to outsiders remains the primary drive behind wars, with reasons hung on later like Christmas ornaments.

Most profoundly, wars are not about anything. They are just wars. Aggression trumps substance. Note that in politics, the content of debate often matters less than the visceral pleasure of antipathy as, for example, when greens and capitalists exchange irrational insults like savages working themselves up for battle. The posturing is just foreplay.

Armies, and nations, have to have enemies. Since our instincts seem wired more for single combat, for bar fights more than for sprawling industrial wars, soldiers invariably seek the atavistic adrenal satisfactions of a quick and smashing victory. They are almost always wildly optimistic about the likely outcome. Thus the belief in decisive battles, cakewalks and such, even when experience counsels that there won’t be one. The military wants to fall upon the bastards, any bastards, and give them what for, to settle things once and for all in brutal, exhilarating, simple combat. Agincourt, Picket’s charge, Themistocles in the Saronic Gulf, that sort of thing.

If you don’t think that exhilaration is a factor in military affairs, you have never watched night flight ops with a carrier battle group, Tomcats trapping ker-wham! rising howl of huge engines, thirty-knot wind whipping across the flight deck, smell of burnt kerosene, the focused dance of men cooperating in something complex and dangerous in the wilds of the Pacific. It is a drug. This is much of why we have wars.

And it is why the Pentagon is repeatedly surprised when after the swoosh and scream of the jets over Kabul, or Quang Tri, or Baghdad, angry men with rifles creep from their holes and begin killing and there comes a losing uncomprehended disaster of ten years. Practicality matters less than the spirit of the thing.

Armies of the First World have made this hormonal miscalculation time and again: The French in Vietnam, the Americans in Vietnam, the Russians in Afghanistan, the French in Algeria, the Israelis in Lebanon, the Americans in Iraq, the Americans in Afghanistan. Militaries don’t learn. They can’t.

They can’t learn because soldiering is directed as much at maintaining a desired mental state as at practicality. A thick layer of romance has always lain over matters martial. The rush of a low-level pop-and-drop bombing run in an F16, the legions wintering on the Rhine-Danube line, pennants, charges, the poetry and intensity of it all. “Oo-rah!” “Death from Above!” “The most dangerous thing in the world is a Marine with his rifle.” “Crush their skulls and eat their faces.” Feel-good slogans, suitable for children of eleven..

One thinks of the excitement of a high-school basketball game, bright lights, tense expectancy, cheerleaders twirling and emitting exhortations to invincibility. “Hey, hey, whaddya say, let’s get that ball and go!” “Ricky, Ricky, he’s our man! If he can’t do it, nobody can!” Oo-rah.

Those who train and arm the soldiers are less delusional. Behind the curtains the butcher’s trade is an ugly one. In my days of covering the military, I remember efforts to invent blood-red plastic shrapnel that would not show up on x-rays, to make it difficult for the enemy to save his wounded. A tac-nuke manual spoke of how to keep soldiers fighting after being lethally irradiate by a nuclear explosion. Shortly they will die, puking and stumbling, but how does one get a bit more combat out of them? This manual used the evocative phrase, “terrain alteration.”

While soldiers quickly come to hate their assigned enemies, as do fighting cocks, they also know that what they are doing will not play well back home. The entrail-dripping gut-shot, a woman sobbing over a mound of red mush that is no longer precisely her child—these could interfere with the flow of contracts. Consequently militaries try furiously to suppress photographs of those they torture and mutilate, to package routine atrocities as “isolated incidents,” to keep pictures of garishly altered soldiers off the pages of newspapers. The extreme sensitivity suggests moral uneasiness, oo-rah or not. During Vietnam, the damning photos poured out. The controlled press of today poses no similar problem.

If this is honor, I’ll pass. Oo-rah.

All original material © Violeta de Jesus Gonzalez Munguia
www.FredOnEverthing.net


Are Evangelical Christians Warmongers?

September 18, 2011

By Chuck Baldwin

I’ve been an evangelical Christian since I was a child. I’ve been
in the Gospel ministry all of my adult life. I attended two
evangelical Christian colleges, received honorary degrees from two
others, and taught and preached in several others. I’ve attended
many of the largest evangelical pastors’ gatherings and have been
privileged to speak at Christian gatherings–large and small–all over
America. I have been part of the inner workings of evangelical
ministry for nearly 40 years. I think I learned a thing or two about
evangelical/fundamentalist Christianity in America. And I’m here to
tell you: I don’t like what I see happening these days!

Let’s get this straight right out of the gate: nothing touched by
man can be perfect, because none of us is perfect. There is no perfect
church, perfect school, perfect mission board, perfect Sunday School
class, perfect pastor, perfect deacon, or perfect Christian. Until the
afterlife, we are all yet encased in Adamic flesh, complete with human
weaknesses and imperfections. And only the Pharisaical among us are
too proud to admit it.

That said, I do think it is more than fair to say that, historically,
Christians have always attempted to be–and have always publicly
taught the importance of being–peacemakers. Historically, Christians
have preached–and tried to practice–love and brotherhood. The early
church was born in a baptism of love and unity. Oh sure, there were
always individual misunderstandings and differences, but, on the
whole, the church was a loving, caring, compassionate ecclesia.

Mind you, Christians historically were not afraid or ashamed to
defend themselves, their families, and their country. The Lord Jesus,
Himself (the Prince of Peace), allowed His disciples to carry personal
defense weapons (see Luke 22:36,38). Yes, while some Christian sects
were conscientious pacifists, these were the exception, not the rule.
The vast majority of Christian believers understood the Biblical,
Natural Law principle of self-defense. But believing in the right of
lawful, God-ordained self-defense was never to be confused with
warmongering.

So, what has happened to turn the most peace-loving institution the
world has ever known (the New Testament church) into the biggest
cheerleaders for war? I’m talking about un-provoked, illegal,
unconstitutional, unbiblical–even secret–wars of aggression. The
biggest cheerleaders for the unprovoked, unconstitutional, pre-emptive
attack and invasion of Iraq were evangelical Christians. Ditto for the
war in Afghanistan, the bombing of Libya, the attacks in Yemen, etc.
Who is calling for the bombing of Iran? Evangelical Christians. Who
cheers for sending more and more troops all over the world to maim and
kill more and more people (including innocents)? Evangelical
Christians. Shoot (pun intended)! Most evangelical Christians didn’t
even bat an eye when the federal government sent military and police
personnel to murder American citizens, including old men, women, and
children–Christian old men, women, and children, no less–outside
Waco, Texas.

And where are today’s evangelical Christians giving a second
thought regarding their fellow Christian brothers and sisters in many
of these Middle Eastern countries that are being persecuted,
imprisoned, tortured, and killed by the puppet regimes being put in
power by the US government–at US taxpayer (including Christian
taxpayer) expense? I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but more
Christians have been persecuted under the US-imposed regime in Iraq
than were ever persecuted when Saddam Hussein was in power. Oh! And
don’t forget that it was the US government that was responsible for
putting Saddam Hussein in power to begin with. The US government set
up Osama bin Laden, too. But I digress.

In addition to the “white” wars (the ones everyone knows about),
the US government authorizes some 70 black ops commando raids in some
120 countries EVERY DAY. In fact, the secret, black ops military of
the US is so large today it now totals more personnel than the ENTIRE
MILITARY OF CANADA!

A recent report noted, “In 120 countries across the globe, troops
from Special Operations Command carry out their secret war of
high-profile assassinations, low-level targeted killings,
capture/kidnap operations, kick-down-the-door night raids, joint
operations with foreign forces, and training missions with indigenous
partners as part of a shadowy conflict unknown to most Americans. Once
‘special’ for being small, lean, outsider outfits, today they are
special for their power, access, influence, and aura.”

To see the complete report of America’s secret wars, go to:

http://tinyurl.com/3q7s335

Yet, how much of this knowledge would even faze the average
evangelical Christian today? All we hear from today’s “churches”
is “bomb,” “attack,” “wipe them out,” etc. Then, at the
same time, they get all emotional about sending missionaries to the
same countries that they had just cheered-on the US military in
raining down missiles of death and destruction upon (to bring
salvation to the lucky ones that weren’t killed, I suppose).

And who are the ones that belittle and impugn Ron Paul? Evangelical
Christians. Why? Because he tells the truth about America’s foreign
policy being responsible for much of the hatred and bitterness
erupting in foreign countries against us. I guarantee you that many of
the “conservative” Republicans who booed Dr. Paul’s comments to
this regard at the GOP Presidential debate this week would identify
themselves as evangelical Christians.

See the report at:

http://tinyurl.com/3otfnzr

The disciples of our Lord were called “Christians” first by the
Gentiles of Antioch, because of the manner in which the disciples
reminded them of Christ’s nature and teachings. I never thought I
would hear myself say what I’m about to say, but the truth is, the
term “Christian” today means anything but Christ-like. To many
people today, “Christian” refers to some warmongering,
mean-spirited, throw-anyone-to-the-wolves-who-crosses-them person, who
then has the audacity to look down their nose in contempt against
anyone who disagrees with them for even the smallest reason. And the
word “church” has the stigma of being simply an enclave of
warmongers to many people today. And that, my friends, is one reason
so many people are so turned off with today’s Christianity. And I
can’t say that I blame them. I’m turned off too!

Am I a pacifist? Absolutely not! Do I believe an individual, a
family, a community, or a nation has the right to protect and defend
itself? I absolutely do! And the fellow who breaks into my home or who
attacks my loved ones will personally discover I believe that! But
this blind support for illegal, immoral, unconstitutional war is
anything but Christian. Not only is it turning people against our
country among people abroad, it is turning our own countrymen against
the Christ we Christians claim to love right here at home.

I dare say that the modern Warfare State would grind to a screeching
halt tomorrow if evangelical Christians would simply stop supporting
it! And the thing that most evangelical Christians fail to realize is
that the Warfare State is one of the primary tools that the evil one
is using to usher in his devilish New World Order that even babes in
Christ know to be of Satan. Hence, Christians are helping to promote
the very thing that Satan, himself, is using to enslave them.

Yes, I’ve been an evangelical Christian for most of my life and an
evangelical pastor for all of my adult life. And if we Christians do
not quickly repent of this bloodlust that seems to dominate
evangelical Christianity today (spiritually and militarily), the word
that was first used by un-churched Gentiles to describe Christ’s
followers will be used as a curse-word to describe those who
facilitated the ruination of our country.

Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and
pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America
was founded.He lives in Montana.


Why They Hate Us

September 11, 2011

by Laurence M. Vance

(Editors Note: I was going to forego mentioning the whole tenth anniversary of the September 11th World Trade Center “attack.” But I cannot resist any longer. The media is monolithically telling the government-approved story of the attacks, burning into the American mind a stultifying pack of lies about how the four passenger jets came to their demise, as well as the destruction of the World Trade Center towers (there were THREE) and the Pentagon damage.

I am convinced that the 9-11 event was planned and executed at the highest levels of the Washington government. And Islam is the perfect foil for a rogue government desperate to find a new enemy now that the Soviet Union preceded America to the ashbin of history. Mr. Vance’s article documents the true reasons that Islam despises the United States government, and by extension, all of Christendom. You might consider also giving a look at this article about Islam.

What gift does one give on a 10th anniversary? Ironically, the traditional gift for a 10th anniversary is aluminum…like the exterior skin of a passenger aircraft.

In a departure from our normal way of posting, we provide you with the link and ask you to click below and read.)

Why They Hate Us, by Laurence M. Vance