Saturday, December 6, 2008

Below is a e-mail my friend Eric Moore sent me.

"Back in 1990, the Government seized the Mustang Ranch brothel in Nevada for income tax evasion and, as required by law, the Feds tried to run the brothel for eventual resale in order to compensate the taxpayers for the unpaid tax amounts. The Feds miserably failed and the Mustang Ranch was subsequently closed. So, we are now trusting the economy of our country to a pack of nit-wits who couldn't make money by running a whore house and selling booze? We're in deep trouble .."

How true is this??? Not only that but they had a monopoly on it in sin city and couldn't make money at it..... Ya, I'm a strong advocate of national healthcare :()

Sunday, November 30, 2008

The Second Amendment, By David Barton

I read this excellent and very brief pamphlet about 4 months ago. Since that time I have debated just what style I should use for this review.

David Barton has given us a small course on the right to self protection. After all this is what were really talking about. I could go on at length with all the quotes from our founding fathers he uses to make his point, or laws that were on the books in at least one state that required it's citizens to own a gun. After reading this there should be no doubt in the readers mind that the right to self protection is an inalienable right, and that was the intention of our founders. Don't hesitate to purchase this fine fine little book. Seriously, don't walk, RUN to purchase it now....

I would also like to recommend Boston T. Party's Gun Bible. A truly profound look at guns and an amazing resource for experienced and novice gun owners alike. Plus any man who defines federal reserve notes (commonly called the U.S. dollar) as a zero with a slash through it can't be bad.

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

The election, socialists of Oregon

Well over a week past the election of Karl Marx (Barack Obama to most of you) and I figured I would share some thoughts.

I looked at the Oregonian late last week and the senate race for Oregon went like this. Jeff Merkley (socialist running as a demoncrat) pulled away with over 300,000 votes. Gordon Smith (the fascist running as a repugnican) was just shy of Merkley. Then there was this guy Mr. Brownlow the Constitution Party Candidate. The media didn't want to talk about him, and NO ONE wanted to mention his name from the two major parties. He pulled in over 51,000 votes in the state of Oregon (over six percent). This perplexed me when I saw that Chuck Baldwin (constitution party candidate for President) only pulled in 4,000 votes or so. I mean :() !!!!! Did these people vote for McCain? If so Why????

My point here is a simple one. The State of Oregon has voted for Demacrat Govenors for OVER 30 years straight. Not even the current dead beat Kulungoski (the most worthless D of all of them) could be unseated. As a matter of fact even a local Demacrat supporting pundits talked about how weak of a candidate he was and how his campaign was basicly, "I'm a D vote for me." It has become quite obvious to this Washingtonian that Oregon has drifted from madness to self suicide. Nope it can't be called liberalism anymore, just suicide. Which gets me back to my original point, Brownlow 51,000 votes, balwin 4,000 votes.... Same party, same principles. My point is that some of the people who voted for Brownlow had to vote for McCain. If they believed in the constitutional values of the Constitution party how could you vote for McCain??? Plus Oregon has always gone "D" so McCain isn't going to get the state anyway.... Seriously, you have to go back to the Reagan vs. Mondale election to find the last time Oregon voted anything other than "D." Ya know the election where Mondale got his ass handed to him (even then Mondale almost took Oregon).... I think people were voting McCain as the lesser of two evils.

Let me talk to the people of Oregon for a minute here, "Idiot conservatives of Oregon, you might as well vote your heart because the psychopathic child molesters that run Portland will always vote "D." .......... Seriously, if Portland Oregon got any sicker or more demented we should rename it Sodom and Gomorrah (some of the people are that sick here, i'm not kidding). Yep, we have great stats for being the pervert/child molestation capital of the U.S.

McCain supporters are you that dumb???? I actually think those who voted Obama were more honest. At least they are blatantly voting for a socialist. They not pretending to be conservatives and constitutionalists. After all McCains support for the bail out is fascism, which of course IS SOCIALISM..... Just ask Moussolini.

If this was a state McCain had a chance in (which he didn't) I might cut you a little slack (Actually I wouldn't because Mccain is a socialist and no better or worse than Obama). But the point is that McCain had no chance in Oregon. So why follow the lesser of two evils approach? Why not vote your heart. I'm speaking to the over 40,000 of you who obviously voted for McCain and Brownlow. The two platforms don't match up. Your trying to eat a n apple and a pile of s**t at the same time, it's insane.....

As for my election results. One person voted Baldwin in my pole (that's me), one voted for Ron Paul (my guess Stephen). Therefore, I will act as the government and change the votes through electronic voting to reflect Karl Marx as the winner. Thanks for playing please head to the nearest DMV for your RFID chip.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Posted by: myspace. com/christians4freedom

Where do Barack Obama and John McCain look for guidance? Karl Marx of course. Listen to what economist Thomas DiLorenzo says... ”Americans will decide next week whether the next president will be a socialist or a national socialist. Lest you think I exaggerate, consider McCain’ campaign theme of “country first” before everything else – your private life, your job, your children, your education, your marriage, everything. Ask yourself how this differs from the philosophy of German fascism, which preached “the common good comes before the private good” (see Paul Lensch, Three Years of World Revolution). Or consider the fact that McCain supported the Wall Street Plutocrat Bailout Bill. A defining characteristic of fascism was that all profits were private, but losses were socialized. And oh yes, military imperialism (a.k.a., “national greatness conservatism”) and a dictatorial executive were also key features of European fascism. Recall that McCain promised that if elected (paraphrasing), “I will order the Secretary of the Treasury to buy up all of the foreclosed mortgages.” Is that really a part of the delegated powers in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S.Constitution?

Then there is Comrade Obama, who has announced that he wants to “change the world” by “spreading the wealth.” Didn’t Marx and Engels say the same thing in 1848? As is well known, Obama has long had a close association with ACORN, the far-left political organization that employed him as its legal counsel in Chicago. It is ACORN-style “community organizing” that Obama claims is his political forte and qualification for running for president. He boasts of having worked with ACORN to register tens of thousands of new voters and has defended the organization against all critics. It is safe to assume that there must be a congruence of interests between Obama and ACORN.”Phil Hensley Jr. sums it up best here...“Every four years we hear the same crap from the two major party candidates. But the reality is if McCain wins, government is going to get bigger and more powerful. If Obama wins, government is going to get bigger and more powerful. “Conservative” radio hosts are going crazy over Obama’s “redistribution of wealth” comments, and showing concern for Obama’s supposed disrespect for the Constitution. So what if Obama wants to redistribute wealth. Republicans have been doing it for decades, just to different groups. Republicans aren’t really opposed to redistribution of wealth, they just want it redistributed to people that vote for Republicans. Look at all the wealth that has been redistributed to senior citizens, car manufacturers, and wall street banks over the past eight years, six of which happened under a Republican President that had a Republican-controlled Congress.Where were all the defenders of the Constitution hiding then?”Americans are up in arms fighting amongst themselves. Democrats vs.Republicans - did it ever occur to anyone that Democrats and Republicans are on the same team?

Source: http://www. chuckypita. com/barack-obamas-redistribution-of-wealth-how-is-john-mccain-any-different-socialist-or-national-socialist/Stop supporting evil, unjust war, and socialism!CHUCK BALDWIN FOR PRESIDENT!!!WWW. BALDWIN08. COM

Friday, October 3, 2008

Bail Out letter and response from Senator Murray of Washington.

Senator Murray, I appreciate your response, and while I disagree with you, you are the only politician who bothered to respond to my concerns. I will post responses to your letter below.

Thank you for contacting me about H.R. 1424, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. I appreciate hearing from you about this important issue. The U.S. Senate voted to pass this bill by a margin of 74-25 on Wednesday, October 1, 2008. H.R. 1424 is now being considered by the U.S. House of Representatives.

Thank You for responding to my concerns. Even though we disagree it is nice to know my representative at least listened to my concerns.

People want to know if this crisis is real. I have asked the same question of Treasury Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke. I have spoken with economic experts and Washington state business leaders. Companies like Weyerhaeuser and Microsoft have made it clear that something must be done. Power utilities such as Avista and the farm groups such as the Farm Bureau have told me that the government's proposal to stabilize our financial markets is critically needed. Throughout various sectors of our economy, there is deep and genuine concern about market collapse and the potential impact on jobs, credit and pensions.

Given that that the Private bank supported by government known as the federal reserve is the one that encouraged this mess I feel you have listening to the wrong "experts." Since the Federal Reserve was unconstitutionally created in 1913 it has destroyed the purchasing power of our dollar by over 94%. Not only this, but because it is backed by the government it actually encourages banks to make silly loans because the "Government" is always there to bail it out. Businesses are given a blank check, banks make silly loans, and the American people are never told the real reason why this is happening. Instead of letting the free market decide where investments are made the Fed creates false demands, "Booms" and their subsequent "Busts" as the money supply is retracted. This has been going on for over a century and has VOLUMES of historical evidence. The great depression was even caused and then subsequently prolonged by the fed. I would recommend reading "The Creature From Jekyll Island," By G. Edward Griffin. A brief history on the Fed shows it to be the main culprit. Further government regulation (on top of the regulation we already have) is also one of the main problems. We have a banking system backed by the government which allows them to make high risk loans because the U.S. government is ALWAYS there to bail them out. This current bailout will only prolong the inevitable. Eventually, we will have to pay the piper. Huge debts to China for one. We run a system of debt. Money is not created unless a loan is generated, and even then we don't create enough money for the interest. Plus M3 (how much money the fed is creating) isn't even reported anymore. What's going to happen when foreign countries flood our market with trillions in debt that they are currently holding? The game will come to an evil end Senator. The question is only how painful will we allow it to get.

We have already experienced a slowdown in home sales and construction. Our home state bank, Washington Mutual, was unable to withstand the crisis and was acquired by another institution. Millions of Americans have tried to obtain a loan or refinance their mortgage, but have found it increasingly difficult to find a willing line of credit and in many cases have been unable to do so at all. If this crisis worsens, credit could freeze completely for consumers and companies who use credit to pay their employees or run their business operations. The bottom line is that without a steady stream of credit, American businesses will not be able to pay their workers and Americans will lose their jobs. Because of the impact the financial crisis could have on all Americans, from layoffs to access to credit, I supported the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.

The act you voted for only prolonges the inevitable. The mortgage crisis is because banks handed out loans to individuals they should never have given them to. The government created and backed companies Freddie and Fannie perpetuated this. So government intervention got into this by created and demanding false demands. More government regulation is (to make a summary of Ron Paul) like a drug addict dealing with withdrawl by looking for his next fix. More government is not the answer.

I understand the frustration of people who want those on Wall Street to be held accountable for their actions and shoulder the consequences of their own misdeeds. Americans are being confronted with two undesirable options. Either do nothing and let the crisis worsen, or take action and use taxpayer dollars to solve a problem they did not create. Americans are rightfully angry. However, those who created the problem will not be those who are hurt most if the government does not act. My top priority is to do what is best for the people of Washington State and the nation, and that is why I believe government action is urgently needed in this situation.

But by passing this bill you are hurting the people of Washington State. We have to deal with the loss of our purchase power via the hidden tax called inflation. We have to deal with the loss of jobs from an unsound monetary system. We have to assume the risks of bad business decisions of wall street. The bailout allows and encourages them to keep making high risk decisions. A good example of this was the Oregon PERS system. The public employees of the early 2000s were guaranteed 8 percent profit on their retirement accounts per year, NO RISK... These accounts in turn lost huge amouts of money in the earlier part of this decade (due to high risk taking, why not they don't risk any losses). The tax payers of Oregon had to cover the losses and pay out an additional 8 percent. No risk means high risk taking by business. Again, the history of government bailouts supports me conclusions here.

The original plan presented to Congress by President Bush and Secretary Paulson was a non-starter. Congress rightly refused to give Secretary Paulson a blank check to spend hundreds of billions of dollars without oversight. Congress refused to allow executives of failing companies to walk away with millions of dollars in severance packages while taxpayers paid for their mistakes. This legislation is a more prudent agreement to anchor taxpayer dollars to strict Congressional oversight and scrutiny by independent economic experts. We added assistance for responsible borrowers hit by the foreclosure crisis and plans to recoup money from any institutions which use government money and then see a profit. In the future, it is possible that most, if not all, of the taxpayer money invested will be returned once this crisis comes to a close.

Problem is the new one is bad too. Again, Freddie and Fannie are government programs. Government oversight didn't work too well there. Congress has to be vigilant in our oversight of how this law is implemented. I fought to ensure that every transaction that takes place regarding this funding will be on the Internet for all Americans to see. In addition, I strongly support the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) and other state and federal agencies' investigation into the wrongdoing related to the current crisis on Wall Street. If fraud and criminal activity are uncovered, the individuals responsible must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

While their at it maybe you could ask them to audit the Fed and find out where the American People's gold is at. If you want to find out who's responsible I would take a closer look at some of your fellow politicians and the Federal Reserve. Lets investigate that as well.

It will take both investment and honesty to get our economy back on track. The next administration will inherit this economic crisis along with many other serious challenges. I hope our new President is honest with the American people about where we stand and what it will take to move America forward.

The honest thing to do is to abolish the unconstitutional private bank/cabal known as the Federal Reserve. Next, would be to get the government out of business. No bailouts.... Businesses would make it or fail based on their own sound or unsound business decisions. Bailouts encourage bad decisions. They made the profits of high risk, and they must suffer the consequences. If you take a look these businesses are being eaten up by other big businesses. So next time this happens (and there will be a next time) you have bigger companies failing and impacting the economy.

I believe that to move America forward, we need to invest in the infrastructure and education that create economic growth and jobs. We have to invest in our workforce and find a way to make health care affordable and accessible. We have to increase funding for research and development and reward innovation. We have to implement a smart, forward-looking energy policy that ends our addiction to foreign oil. It is time to put America's families first and restore their faith that government works for, not against them.

If you want to make healthcare affordable we might start with getting the government out of it. The amount of illegal immigrants using the ER while paying nothing, medicare and medicaid laws, not to mention that medicare and medicaid pay hospitals out a fraction of the cost. Holding companies that don't deliver paid services to it's members would be noble, but this is not the main issue with healthcare today. I would suggest reward innovation by decreasing taxes and freeing up money that individuals can individually invest into such ideas. A good energy plan would be to allow businesses to develop such technology while not get the backside taxed in the process. Unfortunately the bailout does work against American families.

I grew up with a country at my back - one that when my own father got sick and could no longer work was there with Pell Grants and student loans and even food stamps when my family needed them. I will always remember that. I supported this legislation because the American dream of owning a home or going to college is simply too important to take a back seat to politics or to be put at risk by the misdeeds of Wall Street. Yet this is exactly what our current economic policies will bring; more hungry families. As Congress continues to work to restore our economy, I will continue to stand up for our state and listen to your concerns. Thank you for contacting me, and please do not hesitate to contact me in the future. I hope all is well in Vancouver.

Vancouver is well thank you. Senator Murray I do want you to know that although I disagree with you I appreciate and fully respect your response. Many politicians (including my congressman) don't bother to respond to my concerns. I at least know that your intentions are to do the right thing. Unfortunately, I fear your position will hurt Americans down the road for years to come. Even so, I respect the fact that you take your position seriously and that took the time to respond to my concerns.

Sincerely yours,
Marc White

Sunday, September 14, 2008

Toys Of Tyranny

Toys of Tyranny
I got up this morning as I usually do to go to work. 4:50 AM, wake up, get ready, get in the car and head to work. I was listening to the radio and on Sundays there's really nothing on (shocker). However, this paticular Sunday I was most amazed at the subject matter. A group of experts were discussing childrens toys. Sounds boring I know but check this out. One paticular expert (if memory serves me correctly it was a psychologist and educator) was discussing how modern toys DON'T stimulate our childrens imagination and in fact do THE OPPOSITE. See the toys of yester-year (legos, blocks, and the such) stimulated the imagination to create and to individualize. This expert was saying (to sum it up) that in fact modern toys only do one thing, and that the child often only has to push a button, or can ONLY use the toy in a certain predesigned way. This expert was saying that this is teaching our children to be PASSIVE and NOT THINK for themselves; and in fact this was a paticular form molding to think along a certain way.

No this expert didn't belong to any group; this was just a concerned educator who was saying it the way it is. She went on to say that these toys are better suited for a DESPOTIC government and not a free nation. This is not something I thought about before (not conerning toys anyway). Are our children being manipulated to think along a certain passive, go with the flow, and don't think philosophy? I know what I think.... How about you?
6:05 PM - 0 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment - Edit - Remove

Saturday, September 6, 2008

Don't Vaccinate Before You Educate By Mayer Eisenstein

A few years ago I had a very difficult time trying to find any research speaking out against Vaccines for a term paper in nursing school. The problem was that my school didn't carry the publications speaking out against them, and EBSCO Host (the online directory they allowed us to use) also failed at this miserably. I ended up with an overwhelming amount of pro vaccine literature. I ended up giving a gentle nod of approval to the pro vaccine camp at that time, but I was always bothered by one thing: why were so many of the experts writing these articles collecting money from the vaccine and pharmaceutical companies? This peeked my interest, and I knew I would have to do more research in the future to give both sides of the argument equal access.

The author Mayer Eisenstein MD, JD, MPH has established a medical practice with other physicians in the Illinois area. He has between 20,000 to 30,000 thousand (going off of memory on that number) patients from birth and not one of them has autism. Some of his patients that went to other clinics and received vaccinations prior to coming to him have autism, but that's beside the point. Dr. Eisentein tells the reader his bias up front and then gives arguments for and against vaccines in the book. He gives articles from established journals both for and against vaccines. He gives both sides of the argument a voice, and to truly make an INFORMED decision you have to have that...

Dr. Eisenstein makes some very good points that most parents and consumers of healthcare are not aware of. Some of which are:

The chicken pox vaccine is made from aborted fetal lung tissue (as is the rubella vaccine). He learned this from one of his patrons but couldn't confirm it until he contacted Merck himself. They listed it as Diploid tissue in the vaccine’s pamphlet. Some people might have moral objections to this, and they deserve to have this information. There is also at least one study that says the chicken pox vaccine might lose 3% of it's effectiveness per year giving your child 0% immunity by about 35 years of age. Of course the older a person gets the risk of severe illness or death becomes much greater.

The polio vaccine used to be made from primates. This transferred the simian virus over to some humans while being vaccinated for polio, and the simian virus became part of their DNA. This simian virus has been found to be a carcinogen, and can be transferred to future generations potentially leading to cancer in the children of the vaccinated individual. They don't use primates anymore, but what are we using now that could be doing more harm than good?
The Hepatitis B vaccine is no longer mandated in France. There have been studies that have linked it to Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Multiple Sclerosis. The CDC doesn't agree with this, but than again they won't fund any studies on it either.

Here are some things you find in vaccines: Ethelyne glycol (also known as antifreeze), Thimerisal (a mercury based perservative), aluminum and others.

Now I'm not telling you to not get your children vaccinated (you do the research and discuss it with your doctor). All I'm saying is that there is a fair amount of information out there that parents are never informed of prior to receiving vaccines for their children. I worked in a clinic setting and read the pamphlets are still being given to parents. The section dedicated to the potential side effects (or risks) barely composes a paragraph; where the sections advocating vaccines can go on for multiple pages at times. This is pretty one sided, and dare I say this nurse doesn't feel it really gives parents all the information in order to make an informed decision. I don't think that should be too much to ask. There are plenty of benefits to vaccines and your physician will give you tons of information on that… But I implore you to not vaccinate before you educate yourself on the risks being conveniently left off the immunization information pamphlet at your doctors office. You do the research, you discuss it with your physician, and than and only than can you make An INFORMED DECISION…..

Thursday, August 28, 2008

The Top Twelve Foods for Long Term Storage Category: News and Politics
The Top Twelve Foods for Long Term Storage

by Neil McLaughlin (see all articles by this author)(NaturalNews) With the recent surge in food prices it makes sense to buy foods that last and to obtain a bulk discount. However it is pointless to stock up on unhealthy food. During an emergency, having enough snacks won't increase the odds of survival. So what are some of the best foods to stock up on? The keys to consider are: shelf life, bulk price and nutritional content. This article will explore some of the best options.Top 4 Packaged Foods to Store (Indefinite shelf life)1) Jarred Raw Nut Butters - Sesamum indicum (Pedaliacea), Arachis hypogaea (Fabaceae)Having peanut butter, almond butter and sesame tahini (sesame seed butter) will provide for many recipes and a concentrated protein source that is easy to prepare. $5.00 per pound.2) Canned Tomatoes - Solanum Lycopersicum (Solanaceae)The amount of Lycopene, the key phytonutrient in tomatoes, actually becomes more bioavailable when they are canned. Canned tomatoes can be used to make homemade pasta and pizza sauce along with chili. $1.25 per pound.3) Canned Beans - Cicer arietinum (Faboideae), Phaselous vulgaris (Leguminosae)Having cans of black beans, red beans, chili beans and garbanzo beans handy supports a variety of complementary sources of complete protein (when served with rice). Garbanzo beans are the key component of hummus. They are available in extra large 25 ounce cans and even 108 ounce cans. $1.15 per pound.4) Canned Sardines - Harengula jaguana (Clupeidae) (Unsalted, in Spring Water)Sardines are whole organisms with lots of healthy Omega-3 oil. Sardines offer a complete protein source along with trace minerals. The healthiest ones still have the bones. Small fish like sardines contain far less mercury than tuna. $2.00 per pound.______________________________________

Top 4 Bulk Grains to Store (2 year shelf life)1) Brown Rice - Oryza sativa (Poaceae)A staple grain, brown rice is cheaper than white rice and while it doesn't taste as good it is a health food versus a junk food. A blend of brown and white rice is the ideal for both health and flavor $1.25 per pound.2) Spelt flour - Triticum spelta (Poaceae)Having the ingredients to make bread dough will provide for many recipes. It is important to keep flour sealed in water tight containers to keep out moisture and insects.3) Popcorn - Zea Mays Everta (Poaceae)Cooked on the stove top, fresh popcorn beats any snack from a bag and is a great source of fiber. Ideally one will buy organic as popcorn is one of the most pesticide-laden foods and might be GMO corn. Store in air tight containers to preserve freshness and keep out bugs. See recipe below. $1.26 per pound. 4) Dried Peas - Pisum sativum (Papilionaceae)Dried peas are a great source of protein and if mixed with rice provide a balanced meal. Dried peas can be cooked with ham hocks or soup bones to make soup.NOTE: Bulk rate is for 25 lb bag. Store grains in sealed containers or they will become host to bugs. Observe grains carefully before using.______________________________________

Top 4 Protein Sources to Store (6-12 month shelf life)1) Raw Milk Cheese from Grass Fed Cows - Bos taurus (Bovidae)Raw milk cheese gets better with time and is a complete food, meaning you could survive and thrive consuming absolutely nothing but raw milk cheese! It should be aged 60 or more days. Buy it in one big piece if possible, and keep it at about 44-48 degrees (F). Keep an eye on mold growth, and if small spots develop just scrape them off. If the cheese has come in contact with plastic it should be scraped off as it will absorb the taste and chemicals in plastic. $8 per pound.2) Grass Fed Beef and Lamb - Bos taurus (Bovidae), Ovis aries (Bovidae)If purchased in bulk grass-fed beef costs as little as $3 per pound and lamb for as little as $5.25 per pound. It can be canned, frozen, or divided up. The bones are even cheaper and can be used to make nutrient dense stock. See the product review for Grass fed Beef and Lamb for details on buying meat in bulk. $3-$20 per pound.3) Free Range Chicken - Gallus domesticus (Thesienidae)Whole chickens with the organs are essential for providing long term health via chicken soup. They keep for long periods in the freezer. They can provide several different meals. For quality chicken, the lard is useful, and the skin is healthy to consume. Chickens can be stuffed with leftover (dried) bread scraps, the chicken organs fortify the gravy with nutrients, and the bones can be made into soup. Not to mention the meat itself. Leftover bone scraps can be composted or ground up for pet food.4) Miso soup - Glycine max (Fabaceae)Miso soup is extremely concentrated and provides a great source of protein. Miso is a fermented food that contains living enzymes. One or two tablespoons of miso paste make a whole pot of soup.______________________________________

Is Saving Money Hoarding?Some people consider stocking up on food to be "hoarding", imagining that this causes a shortage and price increases. Perhaps this makes them feel better about the fact that the only food they have is 2 liters of Diet Cola, a half-eaten Italian sub and a frozen burrito. In reality there is no world food shortage, but a delivery shortage, and the illusion of a shortage created by having too many U.S. dollars in circulation. Ideally, everyone would store enough (non-GMO, royalty-free) seeds to plant every fruit, vegetable, spice and medicinal herb that will grow in your area, and enough long-term storage food to last about one year (or until you could grow and harvest your own seeds from scratch). While you may not have land, the seeds will still hold value during a food emergency and they can be used to barter for food with those in the opposite situation. Start learning how to grow a garden even if you have to use 5 gallon buckets.______________________________________

Recipe for Stovetop Popcorn It's amazing how few people today have ever made popcorn without the microwave. Microwaved popcorn is often made with hydrogenated oil, contains toxic diacetyl in the butter flavoring, cooks packaging material residues right into the food, and produces more plastic waste. Meanwhile popcorn can be made on the stovetop in the same amount of time, high quality organic palm oil and coconut oil can be used and then real butter and sea salt can be added. These oils contain healthy Omega-3 fatty acids and are solid at room temperature so they can absorb more heat. Here is a recipe to make real popcorn:Ingredients:* 1/2 cup organic popcorn* 1 Tbsp organic palm oil (and/or coconut oil, high oleic sunflower or safflower oil)* (option 1) 2 tsp sea salt and 1 pat of unsalted, biodynamic, cultured (or raw) butter* (option 2) 1 tsp kelp (or dulse) with 1 dash of cayenne pepper* (option 3) 1/2 packet of organic powdered cheeseInstructions:* Heat oil on high in a large stainless steel pot (steel, cast-iron, or glass only - avoid non-stick).* When oil starts to smolder (about 60 seconds) add popcorn, which ideally forms a single layer.* Shake pan back and forth to keep popcorn moving or it will scorch.* When first kernel pops, cover and keep shaking, lowering temperature to medium-high.* When popcorn has thunderous popping rate, you can turn off the heat but continue shaking pot.* Crack lid slightly to allow steam to release (watch out for escaping kernels).* When popping rate slows to less than 1 per second, pour popcorn into large paper bag.* Add pat of butter to now-empty pot where it will melt from the heat (for extra, add some olive oil).* Add dry seasonings to paper bag and shake well.* Pour popcorn into large serving bowl and top with melted butter.______________________________________

References Support your local farmers market and buy organic if possible.Thanks to Tropical Heat's Organic Market in Lake Mary, FL for delivering above grains.

Saturday, August 23, 2008

You shall Not Surely Die!!!

One World By Tal Brooke

Genesis 3:4-5 The serpent said to the women, “ You surely will not die! For God knows in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.

The author Tal Brooke spent years in India studying under an eastern guru in his attempt to be enlightened. He felt that he had found a religion of peace and every lasting life. After all both eastern thought and America’s New Age spiritualism promise just greater degrees of enlightenment. You don’t really die you just reincarnate, and grow spiritually until you become like GOD… Tal Brooke exposes these movements for what they really are: The first lie on record in The Bible with a new twist.

John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “ I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the father but through me.

Behind this New Age religion that is being preached world wide is the concept that ALL roads lead to God. The author really demonstrates how this process is behind all worldly religions, and that it is one of the main pillars behind the up coming global religion. You can’t get the masses to accept the coming world religion unless all roads lead to God. But that’s not what our Lord and Savior said. He said that the gate is narrow, that he is the way. In order to accept the global concept you have to deny the words of Christ. I at one time believed that all ways lead to God because that is what my mother taught me. She learned it from a nun. The bible however, says something different.

Tal Brooke also informs the reader of the economic reality behind the up coming New World Order. The master planners of world government mean to achieve this through a global central bank (the world bank/IMF). The Federal Reserve is the central bank in the United States (a private bank I might add). This is the economic arm of the future world government. The author also discusses The Illuminati, RFID (radio frequency identification) chips that can be used to track every product and human on earth through implantable chips.

To the modern reader this information may seem like utter nonsense. That is until you start looking into it, and doing YOUR OWN RESEARCH. Tal Brooke does a masterful job of exposing these hidden global chess players who are manipulating the world into a state of global government. Every country is have their representatives by population. How long do you think our constitution and it’s protections are going to last with China, Russia, and other unfriendly regimes out voting us? It’s time to wake up before we wake up and wish we had a government as kind as the one described in Orwell’s 1984.

Great book at giving a general overview of the upcoming New World Order from a spiritual, economical, military, and governmental viewpoint. My only criticism is that it’s 269 pages are too brief to fully explain this material. You will need to look at other sources to fully grasp the BIG PICTURE.

Final Assessment: Solid 5 stars, great overview. However, the reader is encouraged to branch out and look at other sources after reading this.

Suggested books and resources:
The Holy Bible
The Creature From Jekyll Island by G. Edward Griffin
America: Freedom To Fascism by director Aaron Russo
The Naked Capitalist By W. Cleon Skoussen
None Dare Call It Treason 25 Years Later By Strommer
Terrorstorm By Alex Jones.
Original Intent By David Barton

Sunday, August 17, 2008

33 Questions About American History You're Not Supposed to Ask, By Thomas E. Woods Jr.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."- Thomas Jefferson

The authors approach is brilliant. Thomas E. Woods Jr. will take you on a journey through 33 myths that the elite would love to keep you ignorant of. The American public education system (or should I call it public misinformation system) subjects our children to revisionist history that should scream scenes from Orwell's 1984. This makes books such as these just that much more important.

The author will take you on a journey from the very unenvironmentally friendly Native Americans (there were less old growth forrests during their time than our own) to President Bill Clinton's mistakes in Kosovo. You'll learn why our city streets our less safe than the wild west, and why our founding fathers didn't believe in the elastic clause. Better yet, you'll start to question just why you were never taught any of these things while attending the public misinformation system. Were fed slogans in school, not facts. Yet I believe the author says it best.

" For this reason alone the state's official version of history, which is always and everywhere another such apologia on behalf of itself, deserves not the benefit of the doubt but an abiding and informed skepticism. No free people ever survived on a consistent diet of official propaganda. Hayek was right: how we understand the past dramatically influences how we view the present. That is why, for the sake of American freedom , there should be no question about American history you're not supposed to ask."

Friday, August 15, 2008

Terror Storm

Alex Jones “Terrorstorm”

"The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either."
-Benjamin Franklin.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."- Thomas Jefferson

This is the first documentary that took me over four hours to watch (having a newborn will do that to you). Terror-storm can be a mind blowing experience if your one of the many who thinks the war on terror is for our safety. I used to believe that myself. My life like so many others was based around my love for God and the American Dream. To be honest there are times I still wish I didn’t know what I now know. Life is a lot less complicated when you believe the status quo will go on forever. Problem is I can’t lie to myself or my family. What follows is my impression of Alex Jones “Terrorstorm.”

What I love about this documentary is how Alex ties in the history or terrorism and relates it to 9/11. The film starts off revealing how Hitler used a prisoner he dressed in a Polish army uniform, shot him, manufactured an “alleged” attack on a Nazi radio station, and then used that even to attack Poland. After that Alex uses actual government documents to show how our own government has done the same prior to 9/11 (Norwood, Ajax). Next, Jones takes us into the U.K. and systematically shows how their train bombings are being used to strip the British of their freedoms the same way 9/11 is being used to strip ours via “The Patriot Act.” Mr. Jones also reveals substantial evidence that should make any American question the authenticity of the government story behind 9/11.

In closing, I would like to say that at one time I was a naysayer to such information. I didn’t believe it and thought that individuals who held such opinions were “Nut cases.” However, after Alex had many former government employees (some of which worked for Reagan), professors from established university’s , and footage that just doesn’t back the governments story. I had to take notice. After a ton of reading, research, and thinking I’ve changed my mind. I don’t expect you to. As a matter of fact I challenge you not to take anyone’s word on this. Watch the documentary and do your own research. Then, and only then will you know the truth.

Saturday, August 9, 2008

thomas jefferson quote

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."- Thomas Jefferson

Tuesday, August 5, 2008

the father connection by josh mcdowell

I was waiting for my wife to finish her visit to the maturnity store at our local mall when I saw a christian book store. Not wanting to watch pain dry on a slow and uneventful day at the mall I decided to browse. My wife was pregnant (but has now recently delivered our first child) so I took a look through the parenting section. I was unaware of the book store's employee standing behind me until I heard, "Everytime we get that book in it immediately fly's off the shelf." A little startled I turned around to see a lovely middle aged women with a beaming smile behind me. She then informed me, "it has done quite well since Dr. Dobson featured it on his show." I know many of you probably know who Dr. Dobson is but I don't. Still, I figured I would give it a shot. After all I havent' encountered a lot of christian books on fathering.

The premise of the book is fairly simple: Learn about fathering by having your heavenly father as the example. Josh McDowell does a phenominal job of not only teaching you how to be a better daddy, but he also helps bring to your attention the things (great and small) that your heavenly father does for you. He helps the reader take an honest look at their life without condemnation, and teaches the reader how to tap into God's awesome power, and then with Gods help you can have confidence in any situation. This book isn't so much a do and don't book as it's greatest strength is teaching you how good of a daddy God is and then encouraging you to mimic his example. Will we fail? You bet. But our God is bigger than our faults and can use our mistakes to teach our children to confess when their wrong. Not only that but I found that it helped build a stronger relationship between myself and my heavenly father which I know will translate into an even stronger relationship with my wife, and my newborn son.

It's good to note that there is a fantastic list of things a father can do with his children in the back. Great suggestions.

God Bless You...

Thursday, July 17, 2008

The Creature From Jeckyll Island, By G. Edward Griffin

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." Thomas Jefferson, our 3rd President

I sit before you tonight with a great deal of concern for the future of our nation. In 1913 President Woodrow Wilson passed into law the Federal Reserve, and once this banking cartel(part private bank backed by government) came into being it brought with it the seeds of misery and totalitarianism. Griffin will tell you a tale that reads better than any fiction novel about a private network of Central banks that plan to enslave the world through a one world currency and government. He documents everything he brings before the reader with congressional records, U.N. documents, and the words of the international bankers themselves. By the end of this book you will see the Federal Reserve for what it really is: A mechanism of our republics destruction, a mechanism of taxation via the hidden tax inflation, and one of the greatest threats to both our liberty and freedom. I can not put into words the impact this information has had on me. A well researched and thorough book not only of our Federal Reserve system, but of all the torment that has and will someday come with it; some of which you are starting to witness now. If you read only one book outside The Bible this year this should be it. 5 stars hands down....

"They may pass a law to issue paper money, but twenty laws will not make the people receive it. Paper money is founded upon fraud and knavery." George Mason in a letter to George Washington.

"The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either." Benjamin Franklin.

"For the love of money is the root for all kinds of evil.: 1 Timothy 6:10A

Saturday, July 12, 2008

End game, blueprint for global enslavement

I have been very skeptical of any and all quote on quote "conspiracy theories" my entire life. However, having done a little homework, and looking at this material without blinders on I have to say I've changed my tune. This documentary by it self didn't turn me full circle but it was a crucial piece in the puzzle. If you are a skeptic please give this DVD a chance...

Alex Jone's "Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement" is not a good first encounter to this information. His passion for informing the people I applaud, but some of his over the top megaphone usage will probably turn off most new comers to this subject matter. For a good over view of The Bilderberg group and the up coming one world government I would suggest Aaron Russo's "America: Freedom To Fascism", and read The Naked Capitalist by W. Cleon Skoussen. Having said that "Endgame" is top notch in it's production, content, and ability to scare the daylights out of you. What you will find as you watch this is a short history of totalitarianism, socialism, feudalism, and the blueprint for the mind set for a ruthless dictator. Alex Jones then ties all of it together into our time with a group of Global Elites who are at this very moment setting up the foundation of The New World Order... National microchiped I.D. cards within a couple of years so they can track you everywhere you go. Discussions of implantable microchips in all society... However, what really caught my attention is the eugenics (selective breeding, sterilazation, and population control methods) programs. The end of America as we know it as it gets absorbed into the North American Union. A lot of this stuff has even been covered briefly by the news media... My short review can't do this documentary justice. I just don't happen to think it's the best one if this is your first look at this material. Buy it, and watch it after you look at a couple others...

I would also suggest G. Edward Griffins, "The Creature From Jeckyll Island"

Wednesday, July 9, 2008


I'm going on vacation for the next couple of days. I decided even though I'm not going anywhere that I will in fact stay away from the computer. I'll see ya all when I get back from my vacation from the computer.


Sunday, July 6, 2008

Learn about how the U.S. dollar is crashing

Go to this link and learn about how the U.S. dollar is crashing....

National Republic vs. Federal Democracy.

I found this on my friend Corey's myspace page and had to share it with you.

National Republic vs. Federal D’arcLyte Category: News and Politics
National Republic vs. Federal Democracy: Understanding the Political Nature of the United States of America
- by D'arcLyte ©, Sept. 16th, 2004
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
The Constitution for the United States of America purportedly guaranteed a Republican form of government, so did the constitutions of the several States. Nowhere in those instruments, nor in the constitutions predecessor, the Articles of Confederacy, is the mention of Democracy. The Founding Fathers didn't want Democracy and as will be shown, they knew it leads to the destruction of nations employing it. Many of the founders voiced very strongly, and expressly against Democracy. In the understanding of the founders, irrespective of recent decades of judicial legal wording manipulations, Democracy was not a "Republican form" of government.
A Republic is one of the highest forms of government yet devised by man, but it also requires the greatest amount of human focus, care and maintenance. If neglected, it will quickly and silently deteriorate into a variety of less desirable forms of government including Democracy, Anarchy, Oligarchy, or Dictatorship as witnessed by our recent governmental slide. "Representative National Republic" defined herein as a republic that is a "government of laws and not of men". This definition appears to be most appropriate while accurately describing what the founders intended, to wit:
"Remember, Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a Democracy yet that did not commit suicide", John Quincy Adams, founder.
"The experience of all former ages had shown that of all human governments, Democracy was the most unstable, fluctuating and short-lived", John Quincy Adams, founder.
"A simple Democracy . . . is one of the greatest of evils", Benjamin Rush, signer of the Declaration of Independence. "Pure Democracy cannot subsist long nor be carried far into the departments of state, it is very subject to caprice and the madness of popular rage", John Witherspoon, signer of the Declaration of Independence.
"It may generally be remarked that the more a government resembles a pure Democracy the more they abound with disorder and confusion", Zephaniah Swift, Author of America's First Legal Text.
Why are the people promoting Democracy? What the $%^& are we voting for? Don't you understand that we are partially living in, and voting for more socialistic governance? People, we have been warned that this is societal and political suicide. Democracy does not promote freedom, it lies about promoting freedoms and in the end, by force if necessary, takes all those freedoms away as witnessed by all recorded history, James Madison said:
"Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives, as they have been violent in their deaths."
Virginia's Edmund Randolph, participating in the 1787 constitutional convention demonstrated a clear grasp of Democracy's inherent dangers, he reminded his colleagues during the early weeks of the Convention that the purpose for which they had gathered was:
"[T]o provide a cure for the evils under which the United States labored; that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and trials of Democracy...."
Samuel Adams, Declaration of Independence signatory, championed the new Constitution in his State precisely because it would not create a Democracy, he stated:
"Democracy never lasts long," "It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself." He insisted, "There was never a Democracy that 'did not commit suicide'."
New York's Alexander Hamilton, in a June 21, 1788 speech urging ratification of the Constitution in his State, thundered:
"It has been observed that a pure Democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity."
Earlier, at the Constitutional Convention, Hamilton stated:
"We are a Republican Government. Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of Democracy."
Fisher Ames served in the United States Congress during the eight years of George Washington's presidency. A prominent member of the Massachusetts convention that ratified the Constitution for that State, he thus defined Democracy:
"[A] government by the passions of the multitude, or, no less correctly, according to the vices and ambitions of their leaders."
On another occasion, he labeled Democracy's majority rule one of "the intermediate stages towards … tyranny." Ames later opined:
"Democracy, in its best state, is but the politics of Bedlam; while kept chained, its thoughts are frantic, but when it breaks loose, it kills the keeper, fires the building, and perishes."
And in an essay entitled "The Mire of Democracy", Ames wrote that the framers of the Constitution:
"[I]ntended our government should be a Republic, which differs more widely from a Democracy than a Democracy from a despotism."
John Marshall, Supreme Court chief justice, 1801-1835, echoed the sentiments of Ames:
"Between a balanced Republic and a Democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos."
American poet James Russell Lowell warned:
"Democracy gives every man the right to be his own oppressor."
Ralph Waldo Emerson joined Lowell in his disdain for Democracy, remarking:
"Democracy becomes a government of bullies tempered by editors."
Across the Atlantic, British statesman Thomas Babington Macauly agreed with the Americans:
"I have long been convinced, that institutions purely democratic must, sooner or later, destroy liberty or civilization, or both."
Perhaps the most concise and definitive condemnation of Democracy came from Lord Acton:
"The one prevailing evil of Democracy is the tyranny of the majority, or rather that party, not always the majority, that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections."
In light of the Founders' view on the subject of Republics and Democracies, it is not surprising that the Constitution does not contain the word "Democracy," but does mandate:
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of government."
By the 20th century however, the falsehoods that Democracy was the epitome of good government and that the Founding Fathers had established such a government for the United States of America became an increasingly widespread fallacy. This mis-information was fueled by President Woodrow Wilson's famous 1916 appeal that our nation enter World War I "to make the world safe for Democracy", and by President Franklin Roosevelt's 1940 exhortation that America "must be the great arsenal of Democracy" by rushing to England's aid during WWII.
From the U.S. Government Training Manual, No. 2000-25 WAR DEPARTMENT, Washington, November 30, 1928 and prepared under direction of the Chief of Staff, under the title of "Citizenship":
"Democracy: A government of the masses, authority derived through mass meetings or any other form of direct expression; results in mobocracy; attitude toward property is communistic negating property rights; attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate whether it is based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences; its result is dem-o-gogism, license, agitation, discontent and anarchy."
"Republic: Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best suited to represent them. Attitude toward property is respect for laws and individual rights and a sensible economic procedure. Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles that establish evidence with a strict regard for consequences. A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass, it avoids the dangerous extremes of either tyranny or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice contentment and progress, is a standard for government around the world."
The War Department training manual went on to state:
"Our Constitutional fathers, familiar with the strength and weakness of both autocracy and democracy, with fixed principles definitely in mind, defined a representative republican form of government. They 'made a very marked distinction between a republic and a democracy and said repeatedly and emphatically that they had founded a republic.'"
By 1952 the U.S. Army via the new War Department Field Manual 21-13, sub-section entitled "The Soldier's Guide" was singing the praises of Democracy instead of warning against it. This new manual incorrectly stated: "Because the United States is a Democracy, the majority of the people decide how our Government will be organized and run...." [Emphasis in original]
Meanwhile, other important voices continued to warn against the hurried siren song for Democracy and in 1931, England's Duke of Northumberland issued a booklet entitled "The History of World Revolution" in which he stated:
"The adoption of Democracy as a form of Government by all European nations is fatal to good Government, to liberty, to law and order, to respect for authority, and to religion, and must eventually produce a state of chaos from which a new world tyranny will arise."
In 1939, historians Charles and Mary Beard added their strong voices in favor of political historical accuracy in their "America in Mid-Passage", writing:
"At no time, at no place, in solemn convention assembled, through no chosen agents, had the American people officially proclaimed the United States to be a Democracy. The Constitution did not contain the word or any word lending countenance to it, except possibly the mention of 'We, the People,' in the preamble.... When the Constitution was framed no respectable person called himself or herself a Democrat."
On September 17, 1961 [Constitution Day], John Birch Society founder Robert Welch delivered an important speech, entitled "Republics and Democracies," in which he proclaimed:
"This is a Republic, not a Democracy. Let's keep it that way!"
The speech was later published and widely distributed in pamphlet form amounting to a jolting wake-up call for many Americans. In his remarks, Welch not only presented the evidence to show that the Founding Fathers had established a Republic and had condemned Democracy, but he warned that those basic definitions had been distorted, and that powerful forces were at work to convert the American Republic into a Democracy in order to bring about eventual totalitarian dictatorship.
Eighteenth century historian Alexander Fraser Tytler, says Lord Woodhouselee is claimed to have argued:
"A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a Democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship."
And as British writer G.K. Chesterton put it in the 20th century:
"You can never have a revolution in order to establish a Democracy. You must have a Democracy in order to have a revolution."
Communist revolutionary Karl Marx understood this principle all too well. Which is why, in "The Communist Manifesto" this enemy of individual freedoms stated:
"[T]he first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class, to win the battle of Democracy." For what purpose? To "abolish private property"; to "wrest, by degrees, capital from the bourgeoisie"; to "centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the State."
Another proclaimed champion of Democracy was Communist Mao Tse-tung who proclaimed in 1939 [a decade before consolidating control on the Chinese mainland]:
"Taken as a whole, the Chinese revolutionary movement led by the Communist Party embraces the two stages, i.e., the democratic and the socialist revolutions, which are essentially different revolutionary processes, and the second process can be carried through only after the first has been completed. The democratic revolution is the necessary preparation for the socialist revolution, and the socialist revolution is the inevitable sequel to the democratic revolution. The ultimate aim for which all communists strive is to bring about a socialist and communist society."
Still another well-known champion of Democracy is Mikhail Gorbachev, who stated in his 1987 book Perestroika:
"[A]ccording to Lenin, Socialism and Democracy are indivisible.... The essence of perestroika lies in the fact that it unites Socialism with Democracy [emphasis in the original] and revives the Leninist concept.... We want more Socialism and, therefore, more Democracy."
The push for Democracy has only been possible because the Constitution is being ignored, violated, and circumvented by our un-informed and mis-guided vote. The Constitution defines and limits the powers of the federal and national government. Those powers, all of which are enumerated, do not include socialistic agricultural subsidy programs, housing programs, education assistance programs, food stamps, etc. Under the Constitution, Congress is not authorized to pass any law it chooses, it is only authorized to pass laws that are constitutional [except in D.C. and its other territories where Congress exercises sovereignty, this does not include most areas inside the 50 states]. Anybody who doubts the intent of the Founders to restrict federal and national powers, thereby protecting the rights of the individual, should review the language in the Bill of Rights, including the opening phrase of the First Amendment ("Congress shall make no law...").
Fisher Ames, one of the great Founding Fathers and author of the First Amendment, argued forcefully that the new United States of America was to be constructed as a "Constitutional Republic". Ames' demonstrated the fine intellectual rigor required to distinguish between democratic and republican forms of government, to wit:
"A Democracy is a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction. These will produce an eruption and carry desolation in their way. The known propensity of a Democracy is to licentiousness which the ambitious call, and ignorant believe to be liberty."
Ames further stated that:
"Liberty has never lasted long in a Democracy, nor has it ever ended in anything better than despotism."
In fact Ames believed that it was:
"Democracy that pollutes the morals of the people before it swallows up their freedoms."
For pure Democracy, Ames argued, would lend itself to the new nation's coming under the influence of the basest of human motivations: greed and a lack of public virtue. Ames further believed that:
"[T]he United States must lash itself to a constitution of laws, not the whim of democratic preference."
The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin:
"Well, Doctor, what have we got, a Republic or a monarchy?"
With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded:
"A Republic, if you can keep it"
Constitution signer James McHenry in a diary entry, later reproduced in the 1906 American Historical Review recorded that purported exchange. Not only have we failed to keep it, most people don't even know what it is and ignorantly keep voting for its further subjugation and destruction.
Our society used to exist noticeably within a "Republican form" of government (approx. up until the civil war), it has taken all this time to subvert our Republic into a Democracy, which we now live noticeably under. The revealed time scale shows how strong a Republic can be, and how difficult it is to subvert it. Don't be fooled, the current Republican and Democratic parties are now opposite ends of the same side of the coin... Democracy… Wake up people!
Just because Democracy [a.k.a. self voted enslavement] is the only choice that is currently presented for us to vote for does not mean we have to vote for it... if we do, then we deserve, and shall by force live with the resulting societal enslavement. If we resist, then our license to live will be revoked. We cannot vote away our present or future enslaved predicament in a Democracy; it is virtually impossible, history is our witness.
Again, as British writer G.K. Chesterton put it in the 20th century:
"You can never have a revolution in order to establish a Democracy. You must have a Democracy in order to have a revolution."
In a Democracy, the sovereignty is in the whole body of the free citizens with the few controlling the many or the one. The sovereignty is not divided to smaller units such as individual citizens. In a Republic, the sovereignty resides in the people themselves, whether the one or the many, and one may act on his own or through his representatives as he chooses to solve a problem. And similarly, one remains free to exercise his or her Rights without government interference, or interference from the many. Here the people have no obligation to the government; instead, the government being hired by the people is obliged to its owner, the people.
"No such ideas obtain here that the State is sovereign to the people: at the revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects [unless the African slaves among us may be so called] and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty. Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 419, 1 L. Ed. 440 (1793).
Let's explain the difference another way. A republic is a government of law under a constitution. The constitution holds the government in check and prevents the majority (acting through their government) from violating the rights of the individual. For example, the suspected criminal cannot be denied the right to a fair trial even if a majority of the citizenry demands otherwise. A democracy, meanwhile, is majority rule and is destructive of liberty because there is no law to prevent the majority from trampling on individual rights. Whatever 51% of the majority says goes, no matter what.
Which do you want, a Democracy where the many or the few can tell you how to live your life, or do you want a Republic whereby the individual man and woman, with all Rights and expressions of Rights secured and defended are recognized Sovereign? When was the last time you felt like you had your rights defended? When was the last time you felt like the Sovereign?
I for one cannot with good conscience, place a vote into a rigged democratic system that purposely brings about the eventual enslavement of my fellow countrymen. The folks on the current ballot know this material inside and out. What the hell do you think they are doing?! What the hell do you think you are doing?! Don't you really want to know? Liberty and ignorance cannot co-exist; we must choose our path… Thomas Jefferson was under no illusion when he stated:
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be… If we are to guard against ignorance and remain free, it is the responsibility of every American to be informed."
And well informed with the truth my friends, not the half-truth fairy tales the spinners throw at us in the newspaper and at the 10 o'clock ritual feeding, nor that doctored, half-truth version of history that our children are subjected to in the government regulated and controlled public school system.
We should absolutely refuse to vote for Democracy. Our battle cry should be "Back To The Republic for Which We Stand."
The wool has not been pulled over our eyes; we were born wearing a hood. And since our parents didn't know any better, they left it on. Further argument on these issues will be forthcoming but the founders' intent is extremely crystal clear and simple, they set up a Republic not a Democracy. It's well past time to take back our rightful organic heritage and quit voting for this Democratic government that is fast leading us to our permanent national enslavement and destruction.
"It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from falling into error, it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error." American Association v. Douds 330 U.S. 382.
Secondary Treatise:
Exposing the distasteful attitudes the founders held regarding Democracy, let us now look at the real balance of power that the founders intended to implement in the then contemplated, United States of America.
"In questions of power...let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution", Thomas Jefferson.
Nearly every politician, teacher, journalist and citizen believes that the founders created a Democracy; this is absolutely and simply not true as should now be evident from the information presented thus far.
Our "Representative National Republic" form of government contained a very limited democratic process confined to the election of representatives of the States to Congress, the rest of America was intended to operate on the general principles of a republic based upon quasi common law ideals. The new, current trend of electing Senators by mass vote is another step downward toward pure Democracy. There are two forms of government set up in this country, the national controlled by the States, and the federal strictly controlled by Congress. Congress legislates for both. Neither holds sovereignty over the other in their respective spheres but may acquiesce thru contract. The republic side of government as it were, barely seems to exist in practice anymore as it has been largely usurped; yet, it can still be resurrected and re-ushered into its rightful place via the voice of the people, come' on people let's speak up.
Today's some-call Democratic Republic is a mis-balance of the concepts of a Republic and a Democracy. This term represents nothing more than a particular stage on a sliding scale as our Republic changes into a Democracy. This nation will fail if we keep up with this Democratic-Vote-Ourselves-Out-of-Rights policy. Every time we vote for more governmental power we are voting away more of our rights and freedoms. By the way, this is all one can vote for in a Democracy. You can't have it both ways. British historian, Lord Acton said:
"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely!"
John Marshall, Supreme Court Chief Justice, 1801-1835, stated:
"Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos."
Elbridge Gerry representing Massachusetts at the Continental Congress, warned:
"The evils we experience flow from the excess of democracy. The people do not want (that is, do not lack) virtue; but are the dupes of pretended patriots."
In Alexander Hamilton's June 21, 1788 speech, he recognizes the fallacy of the theory of applying a democracy, "the many shall speak as one":
"It had been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience had proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity."
The government's greatest victory was convincing the world that democracy was an essential good. Misconceptions of the beguiled masses aside, democracy clearly destroys freedom, and its fundamental disrespect of property rights is unquestionably opposite to the prosperity which democracy contrarily boasts. Empirical historical evidence indicates that democracy promotes ethnic and religious conflict, loss of rights and property, and eventual slavery at the hands of dictatorship in a socialistic state. This begs the question; why would our so-called government emphatically promote such a well-known, eminently destructive devise as democracy?
Rome slowly converted from a Republic into a Democracy and look what happened. Come on people, you had better *&%$ wake up before it is too *&%$ late! or you and your progeny will soon be suffering the same fate as Rome. The same historical fate that every other democracy has historically experienced; they self vanquish from the face of the earth after self-voted dictatorship has run its course. Is that what you want? That is what you are voting for! Didn't you know? Now you do. Change it, do something about it, educate yourselves, your children, and your friends into taking your collective futures into your own hands before your hands are forcibly taken from you.
Again, we should absolutely refuse to vote for Democracy. Our battle cry should be "Back To The Republic for Which We Stand."
Note: The Army manuals containing the above-described definitions of Republic and Democracy were ordered destroyed without explanation about the same time that President Franklin D. Roosevelt, without any authority to do so, appeared to make private ownership of our lawful money [US Minted Gold Coins] illegal. Shortly after the people turned in their $20 gold coins, the price was increased from $20 per ounce to $35 per ounce. Talk about good investment.
Almost overnight Roosevelt, the most popular president in the 20th century [elected 4 times] looted almost half of this nation's wealth, while convincing the people that it was for their own good, in the name of Democracy. His right hand man, Harry Hopkins, suggested many of Roosevelt's policies, he said:
"Tax and Tax, Spend and Spend, Elect and Elect, because the people are too damn dumb to know the difference".
We use the word 'politics' to describe the current process so well: 'Poli' in Latin meaning 'many' and 'tics' meaning 'bloodsucking creatures'... Think about what you are really doing the next time you think you are voting for freedom.
The founders were not at all confused about the meaning of Democracy. They were largely unanimous and unequivocal in their rejection of it for the new nation.
At the time of the American Revolution and Constitution, the meanings of the words "Republic" and "Democracy" had been well established and were readily understood. Most of this accepted meaning derived from the Roman and Greek experiences. The two words are not, as most of today's Liberals would have you believe — and as most of them probably believe themselves — parallels in etymology, or history, or meaning. The word Democracy [in a political rather than a social sense, of course] had always referred to a type of government, as distinguished from monarchy, or autocracy, or oligarchy, or principate. The word Republic, before 1789, had designated the quality and nature of a government, rather than its structure.
Another, older definition of the word uses the term "Republic" to describe what is commonly, and mistakenly called a "Representative Democracy"; it restricts the term "Democracy" to refer only to "Direct" or "Pure Democracy". Even this usage does not cover the many Republics, past and present, that are not Democratic at all [though a few modern ones admit their lack of Democracy].
Using this older meaning, it is mistakenly said that the United States is a "Federal Republic" [see definition below], not a Democracy. [Although most people, including most Americans, call it a Democracy, they are using the modern definition, not the older one referred to here]. This usage of the term Republic was particularly common around the time of the American Founding Fathers. The authors of the Constitution for the United States of America intentionally chose what they called a Republic for several reasons. For one, it is impractical to collect votes from every citizen on every political issue. In theory, representatives would be more informed and less emotional than the general populace. Furthermore, a Republic can be contrived to protect against the "tyranny of the majority."
Definition: The word federal comes from the French word "federal" which comes from the Latin foedus, foederis. To give you an idea of the true meaning of foedus when it is used as an adjective it means foul, hideous, revolting; vile, disgraceful. Feudal also comes from the Medieval Latin word foedum. Feudalism was a system where a lord held title to the land and the vassals and serfs lived on it. The vassal owed service and fealty to his lord.
The Federalist Papers outline the idea that pure Democracy is actually quite dangerous, because it allows a majority to infringe upon the rights of a minority. By forming what they called a Republic, in which representatives are chosen in many different ways [The President, House, Senate, and state officials are all elected differently], it is more difficult for a majority to control enough of the governmental power to infringe upon the rights of the minority.
The following external treatise is from Steven Montgomery (Utah)
The U.S. Constitutional Republic is more than simple equal representation however. The differences between the American Republic and a Democracy of equal representation are highlighted by the fact that unequal representation was written into the Constitution. For instance, Article 1, Section 2, says, ". . . each state shall have at least one Representative," regardless of population. Or, in the same article and section, "Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states . . .," even if the number of people represented is not the same. The biggest difference however comes with Article 1 Section 3, which states that regardless of size or population, "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state."
When setting up their Republican governments most states adopted the Federal Model, known as the "Federal analogy," and assigned one State Senator to each county. Reasoning that just as Federal Senators represented their respective State (before adoption of the seventeenth amendment), State Senators should represent counties. Furthermore, Hamilton reasoned, if the Federal Government were to deny the States this independent power it would be a "premeditated engine for the destruction of the State governments (Federalist 59)."
Advantages of the "Federal analogy" are numerous — such as: The tendency to pull power from centralized State Government back to counties; Keeping counties whole, rather than split; to give sparsely populated rural counties protection from heavily populated metropolitan areas; placing a check on gerrymandering; The identity it would give citizens in their particular county; To protect lesser populated counties from counties that have major industries and thus competing interests.
At any rate, the Constitution also left it entirely up to the States to decide how to conduct their elections, determining who was eligible to vote, what positions were needed to run State government, how officers of government were elected, and the drawing up of districts. States, for instance, were perfectly free to adopt the Federal analogy and assign their state Senators by county.
All of this was to change however. Beginning with a series of cases better known as the "Reapportionment cases," the "Federal Analogy" was denied to the States and the Court instead demanded that "The seats of both houses of a bi-cameral legislature must be apportioned on a population basis (Reynolds v. Sims)" and demanded that there should be "One person, One Vote." For justification the Supreme Court twisted the so-called "Equal Protection Clause" of the 14th amendment. The Equal Protection Clause simply means that everyone is entitled to equal protection under the law and were thus entitled to "One Person, One Vote." But, as Justice Harlan's dissenting voice pointed out, the equality clause has nothing at all to do with the States power of choosing "any democratic method they pleased for the apportionment of their legislatures."
Further, as we learned, "One Person, One Vote" was not built into the Constitution for the United States of America. Instead it was unequal representation that was built in. The dissenting opinion of Justice Frankfurter demonstrated this knowledge when he wrote that equal representation, "has never been generally practiced . . . It was not the English system, it was not the colonial system, it was not the system chosen for the national government by the Constitution, it was not the system . . . practiced by the States . . . [and it was not then] practiced by the states today."
So today, to recap, because of the Reapportionment cases (Baker v. Carr & Reynolds v. Sims), States are denied a Republican form of government when it comes to their State Senators. State Senators can no longer represent single counties but instead Senatorial districts must be drawn up by population.
The Supreme Courts faulty reasoning on this issue should be obvious to anyone. Taking the Supreme Courts logic — Why shouldn't populous states such as Texas or California have say, 75 or 100 U.S. Senators, and limit sparsely populated states such as North Dakota or Wyoming to only one? The Founders clearly rejected proportional representation for the Senate. Isn't it about time the Supreme Court reversed itself and allow the States freedom to adopt the "Federal Analogy" if they choose — instead of punishing them with the worst of all forms of government — unchecked Democracy?

Saturday, July 5, 2008

Open letter to friends

Below is an open letter I wrote for my myspace blog to friends. It's free thought with no grammar checks. Just honesty, with a little bit of frustration.

Open Letter To Friends
Dear Friends,
I sit before my computer thoroughly frustrated with my country, our financial outlook, and mostly my own inability to see it coming over 5 years ago. Much smarter people than myself told me years ago to look out for some of the things I'm seeing now. Here are a few.

* Our incremental loss of freedom. Under President Bush bills such as: executive orders as to force citizens into work camps are now on the books, legislation to to strip individuals and hold them indefinately in the name of national security have passed, and much much worse.
* The high prices were paying at the pump and everywhere else is not only due to over seas oil companies sticking it to us (though it has something to do with it) but also has to do with the inflation of our dollar. I have suggested to my family and friends that 5% of your retirement and savings investments in precious metals (gold, silver) would not be a bad idea now. Even financial planner Rick Edelman in one of his books (I since given them both away do to space) will tell you precious metals retain their value even in the hardest of economic climates. As a matter of fact it was illegal in this country to own gold or silver through part of the past century (probably had to do with the federal reserve protecting their fiat money supply) . A short history of money reveals that any government that does not back their money with precious metals has to pass laws to require it to be legal tender. The only major party candidate who was talking about this upcoming financial crisis due to our fiat money was Ron Paul.
* I don't see any end to sight. The Republicans run a welfare state to the banks and big business (if you would like examples of how big banks and big business are the biggest welfare collectors just message me), and the Demacrats promise free hand outs. Neither of them are taking on the challenges that are really hurting this country, and I honestly don't believe either of them will do much of anything to fix it. You don't want to hear why I believe this, and I'm not going to try to convince you. As a matter of fact I haven't made the greatest choices at the ballot box in the past myself, so I can't very well expect anyone to listen to me anyway.
* On a parting note has anyone actually looked at these stupid John McCain adds. Seriously, my demacrat friends have got to be happy right now. This guy is running ads telling people that we have to have a strong economy to support our neighbors to the south. I about lost my lunch!!! Are you freaking serious John???!!! Are you trying to throw the election???!!! Ya, Americans are broke, paying more for everything, and many of our fellow citizens are going hungry!!!! Ya, were really receptive to your, "Our neighbors to the south" speech.... Hey John, since your too stupid to be President anyway why don't you just concede now and both campaigns can give all those billions to feeding the poor. Maybe you can ship in some of that neighbor to the south food to feed our out of work (due to our neighbors to the south) AMERICANS.... Or better yet, just pass along some of arrogance your smoking... I can use some confidence. ....
I would love to hear from some of you,,

Love you guys,

Wednesday, July 2, 2008

Something is going on

Something Big is Going On

http://www. campaignforliberty. com/blog/?p=115

The above is a link to a blog post written by Ron Paul. It will give you a good idea where our country is heading. It's not good, but it's also not too late..

Monday, June 16, 2008

Our future hangs in the balance...

The Revolution: A Manifesto, by Ron Paul
{"According to the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, all powers not delegated to the federal government by the states (in Article 1, Section 8) and not prohibited to the states in the Constitution (in Article 1, Section 10) are reserved to the states or to the people. Thomas Jefferson held that this principle formed the very foundation of our Constitution. It was a guarantee that the experience Americans endured under the British would not be repeated and that political decisions would be made by their own government rather than a distant central government that would be much more difficult, if not impossible, for them to control."}
The above statement is from Ron Paul's book and is for all intensive purposes why they don't want you reading the constitution in public school any more. Most of the power the feds have ceased shouldn't have been there's to begin with. Most of the power belongs with the state which we the people have more say in. It is sad in our day and time that this is a revolutionary idea when it was in fact the original intent of our founding fathers. The biggest federalist from yesteryear would have been appauled at the size and abuse of our current government...
{ In 2002, as war with Iraq loomed, I proposed that Congress officially declare war against Iraq, making clear taht I intended to oppose my own measure. The point was to underscore our constitutional responsibility to declare war before commencing majormilitary operations, rather than leaving the decision to the president or passing resolutions that delegate to the president the decision making power over war. The chairman of he International Relations Committee responded by saying, "There are things in the Constitution that have been overtaken by events, by time. Declaration of war is one of them. There are things no longer relevant to a modern society. We are saying to the president, use your judgment. What you have proposed is inappropriate, anachonistic; it sin't done any more."}
When I read that it blew me away.... The chairman of the International Relations Committee just told Ron Paul that the Constitutional provision that congress declares war is no longer used. Congradulations everyone you now live in a very dangerous time. Were becoming a police state. It's time for us all to wake up before we lost our country....
In this book Ron Paul tackles the major issues of our country. Everything from healthcare, social security, and the loss of our freedom piece by piece... The section that unvails the federal reserve might be the most chilling. Our money is quickly becoming worthless and historical evidence backs this up (Ron Paul uses Germany as an example). Germany prior to world war 2 kept printing money to the point people spent it as quickly as they could due to its rapid devaluing property's. This eventually collapsed Germany and made way for Hitler. An argument can be made that were doing the same thing with our dollar.
If you want a real look at the federal government and some real solutions to our current impending financial collapse you should read this book NOW... Seriously, please don't walk RUN to obtain a copy. Our national sovreinty depends on it.
"when all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another, and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated." Thomas Jefferson

Sunday, June 15, 2008

What is hell?

What is Hell?

a post from

FAQ: I live in the USA, and it seems that our language is riddled with references to “hell.” I constantly hear that extremely versatile word used in conversations of all kinds. People say: “What the hell?” or “The hell with it,” or “Hell, yes / no,” etc. On occasion, some people, though not travel agents, have encouraged me to “go to hell.” I don’t think I want to, because I’ve heard that the Devil lives there, but if I did want to just drive by, where exactly is it located? Based on what people are saying, I assume that “hell” is a word used in the Bible, and if so, what is “hell”?
Actually, at this time, there is no such place, other than the small town of Hell, Michigan, which, by the way, has, on occasion, frozen over. But it hardly meets the description of the “Hell” that is propounded by so many Christians who erroneously believe that it is a place of everlasting fire where the “living dead” (???) are tormented forever in flames.
Also, the word “hell” is not found anywhere in the original text of Scripture. In the King James Version, you will find it as the translation of the Greek words hades and gehenna, but most modern translations recognize that “hell” is an incorrect translation for hades, and more correctly render it as “grave.” Even modern translations, however, do sometimes mistakenly translate the Greek word gehenna as “hell.”
So how did the word “hell” so permeate our culture? In this relatively brief answer, we refer you to two excellent books that will clearly show you, in detail, just what the Word of God says about this most significant issue. Our book, Is There Death After Life?, sets forth what the Word says about death and its aftermath, while The Fire That Consumes, by Edward Fudge (211 pp), is a very thorough exposition of “conditional immortality,” including the origin of the idea of “hell” as a place of everlasting torment for the wicked.
One of Satan’s ploys to make Christianity look foolish is to introduce ridiculous ideas (that is, ideas that can legitimately be ridiculed because they make no sense) into its theology. In regard to this overall subject, here are two such errors that came into Christianity from Hellenistic (Greek) thought:
There is no such thing as actual “death” (defined in just about any dictionary as “the end, or absence, of life”).
When one “dies,” he then lives on in some conscious, incorporeal form called the “soul” or “spirit.”
The lie that man is deathless (introduced by the Devil in Genesis 3:4 and later believed by the Greeks) spawned the corresponding notion that there must be an eternal residence for good people and another address for bad people. Thus arose the following falsehoods:
A dead person goes either to “heaven” or “hell” and stays there forever.
“Hell” is a place of everlasting torment in flames.
Fire is a preservative (who else believes this?).
It is ironic that most Christians believe that Adolph Hitler will have everlasting life. You might be thinking: “What?! No they don’t.” But think again—if Hitler is being tormented forever in fire, does he or does he not have everlasting life? It’s a crummy life, but it is everlasting life, right? On the contrary, Romans 6:23 says: “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is everlasting life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” God never says that the wages of sin is eternal torment. No, He says that the penalty for sin is an end to one’s life.
It is important to realize that no verse in the Bible says that the “soul” or “spirit” lives on by itself. No verse says that “hell” is a place of everlasting torment in fire. These falsehoods originated with God’s archenemy, and infiltrated Christianity via mistranslation and the mixing of Greek culture and beliefs with the truths presented in the Word of God.
Thinking logically, does it seem fair to you that God, who the Bible says is love, would forever inflict upon wicked people the excruciating agony of constantly burning? Think about it—if “forever” were likened to a feast, 50 million years of torment is a small hors d’oeuvre. Wouldn’t most rational thinkers conclude that, even for quintessential bad boys like Hitler or Bin Laden, that is simply not fair? Sure they would. Justice would not be served by such an egregious atrocity, and how sad it is that this erroneous belief has contributed to many people turning away from the God whom they were told would do such a thing.
The late Sidney Hatch well expressed how twisted is the idea of a just God forever tormenting by fire those who refused to believe in Him:
“A civilized society looks with horror upon the abuse and torture of children or adults. Even where capital punishment is practiced, the aim is to implement it as mercifully as possible. Are we to believe then that a holy God—our heavenly Father—is less just than the courts of men? Of course not.”
And the late Swedish Lutheran Bishop John Persone wrote:
“For me it is inexplainable how a person who holds the orthodox view [of eternal torment] can at any time have a glad moment in this life. He is constantly mingling with people whose final destiny will be to be tormented eternally without end…To me it is even more inexplainable that such an ‘orthodox’ person can expect even a happy moment in eternity, when he knows that contemporaneously with his blessed estate continues the endless torment and agony of innumerable millions of the accursed. Can he, if he loves his neighbors as himself, yes, even if he has just a little bit of human love and is not solely a selfish wretch, have even a single happy moment?”
Well said, wouldn’t you agree?
Think for a moment about fire. What does it do to things it touches? What do you do if you come home and discover that your house is on fire? Do you feel any sense of urgency? Or do you say, “Hey, let’s go to a movie, and when we get back, we’ll call the Fire Department. There’s no hurry, because we know that our home will burn forever.” Nothing burns forever, and a simple word study of “fire” in Scripture shows that its primary purpose is to destroy useless things, like chaff, and evil things, like wicked people, evil spirits, and Satan (Malachi 4:1 is a classic example).
This article about “hell” is not the place to exposit the biblical truth that death is the end of life, and that one who dies no longer exists anywhere in any form. That by itself renders fallacious the notion that “hell” is a place where “dead” people are alive and conscious. In His Word, God artfully chose the metaphor of “sleep” to figuratively describe death. Why? Because sleep is a temporary condition of unconsciousness that ends with an awakening. Ditto for death, for one who believes in Jesus Christ.
Where there is no consciousness, there is no awareness of time passing. Therefore, the Apostle Paul’s next conscious thought will be when he sees the face of the Lord Jesus at his appearing. Until that glorious moment, Paul, like all who have died and “returned to dust,” no longer exists. Nor will he ever exist again unless Jesus Christ actually died, rose from the dead, ascended to heaven, and comes again to raise Christians who have died. 1 Thessalonians 4:18 says that this truth is the only basis for genuine comfort for the bereaved. How important is this subject? It’s a matter of life and death.
In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word sheol means “the state, or place, of the dead,” and is usually translated as “grave” (see Ps. 6:5, 16:10, 49:15, 89:48, et al). Because there is not literally any such place, it could also be translated as “gravedom.” The Hebrews recognized that man is an integrated being who is either alive or dead (to us, this is obvious). They understood that man does not have a soul, but rather that, as per Genesis 2:7, man is a living “soul” (nephesh), that is, a living person. When he dies, he is then a dead soul (e.g., Lev. 19:28, 21:1; Num. 5:2, 6:6, 11), that is, a dead person.
In contrast to the teaching of the Old Testament, most Greeks believed that man has “an immortal soul,” which they saw as the non-corporeal essence of his being that was trapped in the temporal, fleshly prison of his body until the wonderful moment when his body “died” and his “soul” could freely wing its way to Mt. Olympus, the land of Shades, or somewhere else.
Because of this belief, the Greeks had no word that corresponded with the idea expressed by the Hebrew word sheol. The closest thing they could find was hades, and that is what those who produced the Septuagint (a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew to Greek) chose as the counterpart to sheol. As they do with sheol in the Old Testament, some English versions of the Bible erroneously translate the Greek word hades as “hell” in the New Testament [For a thorough examination of the meaning of sheol and hades, see the word “hell” in E.W. Bullinger’s A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament (Zondervan Pub. Co., Grand Rapids MI)].
The impact of translating sheol as hades cannot be overstated. In sheol, everyone is dead, but in the Greek language and culture, everyone in Hades is alive. Thus, by the stroke of the pen of the Septuagint’s translators, all the dead (in sheol) were granted life after death in hades. The Greek-speaking Hebrews, reading their Greek Bible, would naturally come to believe that “the dead are alive” (it was, after all, in their Bible). This explains why, at the time of Jesus, many Jews believed that the souls of the dead lived on after the person died, and why Jesus would speak a parable springboarding off that belief (Lazarus in “Abraham’s bosom” – Luke 16. For a full explanation of this, see “Difficult Scriptures Explained.”
We should note that the English word “hell” comes from an Old English word meaning “to conceal.” The first definition in Webster’s Third New International Dictionary is “a place or state of the dead or of the damned; usually under the ground” (hence, the idea of “concealed”). The second definition is “a place or state of misery, torment, or wickedness.”
The idea that “hell” is a place of eternal torment came about because the word hades carried with it all the connotation of Greek mythology, in which Hades was the god of the underworld, a place where the souls of dead people went to be tormented. As Bullinger writes in Appendix 131 of The Companion Bible:
“The Old Testament is the fountainhead of the Hebrew language. It has no literature behind it. But the case is entirely different with the Greek language. The Hebrew sheol is divine in its origin and usage. The Greek hades is human in its origin and comes down to us laden with centuries of development, in which it has acquired new senses, meanings, and usages.”
Scripture most certainly does speak of a place of fire where wicked people will be “punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord” (2 Thess. 1:9). This is gehenna, a Greek word that the Gospel writers used in reference to what is elsewhere called “the lake of fire.” It is significant that not only wicked people will be destroyed there, but also “death and the grave” will be forever exterminated (see Rev. 20:12-15).
Gehenna is the Greek word for the Hebrew “valley of Hinnom,” which was the city dump outside of Jerusalem. When Jesus used this word to refer to the place of the future destruction of the wicked (e.g., Matt. 10:28—still erroneously translated as “hell” even in modern Bible versions), all who heard him knew exactly what he meant. As the note on Matthew 5:22 in the NIV Study Bible says:
“The Greek word is gehenna, which derives its name from a deep ravine south of Jerusalem, the ‘valley of Hinnom.’ During the reigns of the wicked Ahaz and Manasseh, human sacrifices to the Ammonite god Molech were offered there. Josiah desecrated the valley because of the pagan worship there (2 Kings 23:10; Jer. 7:31, 32; 19:6). It became a sort of perpetually burning city dump and later a figure for the place of final punishment.”
As Edward Fudge points out in The Fire That Consumes:
“New Testament writers chose the word gehenna to describe the fate of the lost only in the Gospels, speaking only to Jews, and only when addressing people familiar with the geography of Jerusalem.”
The lake of fire is also called “the second death” (Rev. 21:8). What does that mean? God’s Word clearly states that the Lord Jesus Christ will raise from the dead everyone who has ever lived, and that “those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:29). Pending that Adolph Hitler or Saddam Hussein had no “deathbed conversion,” they will one day face the Lord Jesus to account for their evil ways, and after that be cast into the lake of fire to be annihilated. They died once physically, and they will “die” again—forever out of existence.
Do you think that those listening to Jesus speak of the wicked burning in gehenna thought he meant they would burn forever? Of course not, because they knew that the garbage they took to the city dump did not continue to exist in the fire without being consumed. Rather, it burned up, and was gone. Jesus used the word gehenna to illustrate that the wicked were like the garbage, refuse worthy only of destruction. The only reason the fire continued to burn was because the whole city kept throwing their garbage there. Likewise, when it has done its job, the lake of fire will be no more.
If Revelation 20:10 is coming to your mind as an apparent contradiction to what you have read thus far, that’s great—it should. It speaks of the Devil and a couple of his henchman being thrown in the lake of fire and being “tormented day and night forever and ever.” However, the Bible was not written in English, and when we dig a bit deeper, we see that “forever and ever” in the Greek is more accurately “for ages unto ages.” In keeping with God’s decree in Genesis 3:15 that Jesus would eventually “crush the head” of the Devil (that is, destroy him), Ezekiel 28:18 declares that the Devil will be “brought to ashes.” Apparently, as a fitting recompense for his monstrous evil, this will take a long time.
Some Christians argue that annihilation is not a sufficient threat to stop people, and that the threat of burning forever is a more effective deterrent to sin. However, this is looking at Scripture the wrong way. God says that it is His “kindness” that leads people to repentance (Rom. 2:4), not His threats of death, although that might work, because it is programmed within mankind to do whatever it takes to stay alive. Apparently, the thought of not existing is more terrifying to most people than the thought of living even under horrible conditions. What God does do is set forth His great love in giving His Son, and encourage people to believe in him and have everlasting life.
If God were trying to use the threat of eternal torment as a deterrent to sin, John 3:16 might read: “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not burn forever, but have everlasting life.” And God could have made that plain in many other verses as well. The fact that the Bible simply says “perish” indicates that the unsaved will die, and thus exist no more. What faces those who refuse God’s gift of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ is annihilation. They will be terminated, gone—history. And the rest of us, because of the grace of God and the work of Jesus Christ, will live happily ever after.
For those who believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, he has paid the price for their sin, and he will give them the gift of life in the age to come. Those who refuse to believe in him will pay the penalty for sin themselves. How? By dying forever in the lake of fire. Everlasting life is just that—life without end, and everlasting death is destruction without hope of recall—permanent extermination. This is God’s perfect justice, and it is definitely a matter of life and death.