ENGLISH ONLY EDITION. Light is sown like seed for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart. Psalm 97:11
Friday, March 13, 2015
Thursday, March 12, 2015
Jean-Claude Juncker Calls for EU Army
Reblogged from www.reuters.com via Bible Prophecy Blog
March 11, 2015
Arguing that NATO was not enough because not all members of the transatlantic defense alliance are in the EU, Juncker said a common EU army would also send important signals to the world.
"A joint EU army would show the world that there would never again be a war between EU countries," Juncker told the Welt am Sonntag newspaper. "Such an army would also help us to form common foreign and security policies and allow Europe to take on responsibility in the world."
Juncker said a common EU army could serve as a deterrent and would have been useful during the Ukraine crisis.
"With its own army, Europe could react more credibly to the threat to peace in a member state or in a neighboring state.
"One wouldn't have a European army to deploy it immediately. But a common European army would convey a clear message to Russia that we are serious about defending our European values."
The 28-nation EU already has battle groups that are manned on a rotational basis and meant to be available as a rapid reaction force. But they have never been used in a crisis.
EU leaders have said they want to boost the common security policy by improving rapid response capabilities.
But Britain, along with France one of the two main military powers in the bloc, has been wary of giving a bigger military role to the EU, fearing it could undermine NATO.
German Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen welcomed Juncker's proposal: "Our future as Europeans will at some point be with a European army," she told German radio.
(Reporting by Erik Kirschbaum; additional reporting by Adrian Croft in Brussels; editing by Clelia Oziel)
- Merkel backs calls for EU army • Anadolu Agency
- Putin's Army Built to Reassert Russian Influence in a Modern World • U.S. News & World Report
- Arab League Calls to Create a 'Unified Arab Military Force' • Arutz Sheva
- Jean-Claude Juncker calls for EU army • The Guardian
- More union in European defence • EU Observer
- After Russia Sends Tanks, Obama Sends Non-Lethal Humvees and Drones To Ukraine • Breitbart
Wednesday, March 11, 2015
Americans Battle the Arab-Israeli Conflict
  Be the first of your friends to like this.
I shall document and explain this counterintuitive pattern, then draw a conclusion from it. More Anti-Israel than the ArabsAmericans who hate Israel can be more volubly anti-Zionist than Arabs. At a memorable Washington dinner party in November 1984, hosted by the Iraqi embassy for the visiting foreign minister, Tariq Aziz, two tipsy American press grandees admonished and even insulted this emissary of Saddam Hussein for being insufficiently anti-Israel. Helen Thomas of United Press International complained that Iraq had not retaliated against Israel after the destruction of the Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981.When Aziz tried brushing off her criticism, she scornfully accused the Iraqi regime of cowardice: "Just yellow, I guess." Later the same evening, Rowland Evans of the syndicated Evans & Novak column, interrupted Aziz when he called the Iran-Iraq war the most important issue in the Middle East, shouting, "You must tell Secretary of State Shultz that the Arab-Israeli conflict is your main concern!" The late Barry Rubin, who was present, subsequently commented: "Unaccustomed to being attacked for excessive softness on Israel, Aziz looked astonished."
The Arabs are a great people. Islam is a great religion. But it has to, and they have to, stand up. … I asked somebody once, when [Ariel] Sharon was massacring the Palestinians in Jenin, why the huge demonstrations in the Arab countries didn't continue? Why did they go away? They answered because a student was killed in Alexandria. I am very sorry for the student and his family, but the Palestinians are losing their children every day, yet it doesn't stop them from coming out the next day. So it can be done. Hizbullah drove the enemy running from their country. Fares Uday, a 14-year-old boy, stood in front of an Israeli tank and attacked it with his hands. And when they killed him, his brother and his neighbors came in his place.In 2009, after a lecture tour of American universities, the Palestinian journalist Khaled Abu Toameh observed that there is more sympathy for Hamas there than there is in Ramallah. … Listening to some students and professors on these campuses, for a moment I thought I was sitting opposite a Hamas spokesman or a would-be-suicide bomber. … What struck me more than anything else was the fact that many of the people I met on the campuses supported Hamas and believed that it had the right to "resist the occupation" even if that meant blowing up children and women on a bus in downtown Jerusalem.
Conversely, Lewis notes the viciousness of some Westerners residing in the Middle East: Time and time again, European and American Jews traveling in Arab countries have observed that, despite the torrent of broadcast and published anti-Semitism, the only face-to-face experience of anti-Semitic hostility that they suffered during their travels was from compatriots, many of whom feel free, in what they imagine to be the more congenial atmosphere of the Arab world, to make anti-Semitic … remarks that they would not make at home.One symptom of this: The recent Hamas-Israel war prompted anti-Israel hate demonstrations, some violent, on the streets of many Western cities, while – with the exception of territories under Israeli control – the Arab street remained largely calm. More Zionist than the IsraelisSimilarly, American supporters of Israel tend to stake out more ardently Zionist positions than do Israelis. In 1978, Richard Nixon complained that "the problem with the Israelis in Israel was not nearly as difficult as the Jewish community here." In 1990, Israeli journalist Yossi Melman was surprised to find a Jewish audience in Texas taking a harder line against the Palestinians than he did himself; he responded with alarm when one young man asserted, referring to a fracas with the Israeli police that left nineteen Palestinians dead, "I do not feel sorry for those Palestinians who were killed. The Israeli police should have shot a thousand of them," and no one in the audience took issue with him.In 2000, Said complained that Zionist groups in the United States have views "in some way more extreme than even those of the Israeli Likud." Also in 2000, when Israel's prime minister offered unprecedented concessions on Jerusalem, Malcolm Hoenlein, vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, criticized his efforts "to take away or compromise Jewish sovereignty over the Temple Mount and turn it over to the jurisdiction of the United Nations or the Palestinian Authority." Later, he warned, "all of us will have to answer to our children and grandchildren when they ask us why we did not do more to stop the giving away of Har haBayit [the Temple Mount]." Polling by the American Jewish Committee regularly finds American Jews more skeptical than their Israeli counterparts on the question of the efficacy of diplomacy with the Arabs. At the same time, for an American to be pro-Israel means liking all Israelis; starting with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and Christians United for Israel, pro-Israel organizations offer unconditional support to Israel. Many American Jews go further. With neither their own lives nor those of their children at risk in the Israel Defense Forces, they do not publicly disagree with Israeli government decisions. By contrast, ranking Israelis repeatedly demand that Washington pressure their own government into taking steps against its wishes. Most famously, in 2007 David Landau, editor of Ha'aretz newspaper, told then U.S. secretary of state Condoleezza Rice that Israel was a "failed state" and implored her to intervene on the grounds that Israel needs "to be raped." ExplanationsThree reasons account for American partisans adopting stronger positions than their Middle Eastern counterparts:Pure passion: Abu Toameh notes: "Many of the Palestinian Authority and Hamas officials … sound much more pragmatic than most of the anti-Israel, 'pro-Palestinian' folks on the campuses." That is because they have real-life decisions to make, with which they must live. Israelis and Arabs maintain a patchwork of relationships and daily life that softens the harshness of rhetoric. In contrast, pure passion tends to reign in the West. Most Israelis have contact with Arabs, something few American Zionists do. Similarly, a fair number of Egyptians, Jordanians, Lebanese, and other Arabs come into contact with Israelis. For Middle Easterners, the enemy is human; for Americans, the opponent consists of two-dimensional political adversaries.
Solidarity: Israelis argue mostly with other Israelis and Arabs with Arabs; but in the United States, pro-Israelis argue with anti-Israelis. Israelis and Arabs in the Middle East feel free to disagree with their own side more than do their U.S. partisans. When a left-wing Israeli criticizes the Netanyahu government's policy, he disagrees with the Likud Party; when a left-wing American Jewish figure does the same, he attacks Israel. The former debates are within the framework of Israeli policymaking, the latter in the arena of American public opinion. Melman noted that "we Israelis have the luxury of expressing ourselves more frankly than many American Jews" and explained this by noting how "American Jews fear that their public criticism [of Israel] might be exploited by professional critics of Israel. Hence, most American Jews prefer to conceal their disagreements about Israel." Mattityahu Peled, a left-wing Israeli gadfly, similarly observed that the pressure on Jews who hold dissenting views in the United States "is far greater than the pressure on us in Israel. … probably we in Israel enjoy a larger degree of tolerance than you here in the Jewish community." Best-known policy issue: In the Middle East itself, other issues – civil wars in Syria and Iraq, the Saudi vs. Qatar vs. Iran rivalries, water problems – compete with the Arab-Israeli conflict for attention. But in the United States, the Arab-Israeli conflict is far better known than any other issue and thus dominates the discussion. As a result, the lines of debate are far more clearly etched: When the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) conquered Mosul in June 2014, no one knew what to do; but when Hamas launched rockets against Israel a month later, the facts and arguments were reassuringly familiar. ConclusionArab-Israeli partisanship fits a broader pattern, in which distance turns greys into blacks and whites, increasing political passions. In the case of the Contra war in Nicaragua, the journalist Stephen Schwartz writes that, on the one side, "Sandinistas often commented to me that they were put off to realize that their Democrat supporters in Washington employed a bloodthirsty rhetoric that would never have been heard in the towns of Central America." When asked about this, a Sandinista explained: "We have to face death, and it makes us less willing to speak idly about it; but they enjoy talking about a death they will never risk or inflict on others ."
In other wars where combatants live in close proximity to each other but their supporters do not, a similar pattern has emerged: Civil wars in Vietnam, Ireland, and Bosnia come immediately to mind. Commenting on the Spanish civil war, Trotsky observed that the rhetoric in London was far more extreme than the reality in Barcelona. In conclusion, this pattern runs contrary to the general assumption that the frenzied combatants in a war need cool-headed outsiders to help guide them to resolution and peace – an assumption that sometimes leads to the unfortunate decision to put ignoramuses in charge of diplomacy and policy. In fact, the locals may see the problem more lucidly and realistically than their foreign friends. It is time for foreigners to stop assuming they know how to achieve the region's salvation and instead to listen more to those directly involved. Mr. Pipes (DanielPipes.org, @DanielPipes) is president of the Middle East Forum. © 2014 by Daniel Pipes. All rights reserved.
Related Topics: Arab-Israeli debate in the U.S.
This
text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an
integral whole with complete and accurate information provided about its
author, date, place of publication, and original URL.
|
|||||||||
"Weeks after leaving office, Obama discovers a leak under his sink so he calls a plumber to fix it..."
Reblogged from conservativetribune.com
The Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, is a socialist scheme that does nothing more than funnel money away from the successful and into the hands of the not-so-successful.
While it might sound charitable at first glance, be very wary, for socialism in any form always produces the most horrific of results, as this example demonstrates:
Only weeks after leaving office on Jan. 20, 2017, former President Barack Obama discovers a leak under his sink, so he calls Troy the Plumber to come out and fix it.
Troy drives to Obama’s new house, which is located in a very exclusive, gated community near Chicago where all the residents have a net income of way more than $250,000 per year.
Troy arrives and takes his tools into the house. He is led to the guest bathroom that contains the leaky pipe under the sink. Troy assesses the problem and tells Obama that it’s an easy repair that will take less than 10 minutes. Obama asks Troy how much it will cost. Troy checks his rate chart and says, “$9,500.”
“What?! $9,500?!” Obama asks, stunned, “But you said it’s an easy repair. Michelle will whip me if I pay a plumber that much!”
Troy says, “Yes, but what I do is charge those who make more than $250,000 per year a much higher amount so I can fix the plumbing of poorer people for free. This has always been my philosophy. As a matter of fact, I lobbied the Democrat Congress, who passed this philosophy into law. Now all plumbers must do business this way. It’s known as the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act of 2014′. I’m surprised you haven’t heard of it.”
In spite of that, Obama tells Troy there’s no way he’s paying that much for a small plumbing repair, so Troy leaves. Obama spends the next hour flipping through the phone book calling for another plumber, but he finds that all other plumbing businesses in the area have gone out of business. Not wanting to pay Troy’s price, Obama does nothing and the leak goes un-repaired for several more days. A week later the leak is so bad Obama has had to put a bucket under the sink.
Michelle is not happy as she has Oprah and guests arriving the next morning. The bucket fills up quickly and has to be emptied every hour, and there’s a risk the room will flood, so Obama calls Troy and pleads with him to return.
Troy goes back to Obama’s house, looks at the leaky pipe, checks his new rate chart and says, “Let’s see, this will now cost you $21,000.”
Obama quickly fires back, “What? A few days ago you told me it would cost $9,500!”
Troy explains, “Well, because of the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act,’ a lot of wealthier people are learning how to maintain and take care of their own plumbing, so there are fewer payers in the plumbing exchanges. As a result, the price I have to charge wealthy people like you keeps rising. Not only that, but for some reason the demand for plumbing work by those who get it for free has skyrocketed! There’s a long waiting list of those who need repairs, but the amount we get doesn’t cover our costs, especially paperwork and record-keeping. This unfortunately has put a lot of my fellow plumbers out of business, they’re not being replaced, and nobody is going into the plumbing business because they know they can’t make any money at it. I’m hurting too, all thanks to greedy rich people like you who won’t pay their ‘fair share’. On the other hand, why didn’t you buy plumbing insurance last December? If you had bought plumbing insurance available under the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act,’ all this would have been covered by your policy.”
“You mean I wouldn’t have to pay anything to have you fix my plumbing problem?” asks Obama.
“Well, not exactly,” replies Troy. “You would have had to buy the insurance before the deadline, which has passed now. And, because you’re rich, you would have had to pay $34,000 in premiums, which would have given you a ‘silver’ plan, and then, since this would have been your first repair, you would have to pay up to the $21,000 deductible, and anything over that would have a $7,500 co-pay, and then there’s the mandatory maintenance program, which is covered up to 17.5%, so there are some costs involved. Nothing is for free.”
“WHAT?!” exclaims Obama. “Why so much for a puny sink leak?!”
With a bland look, Troy replies, “Well, paperwork, mostly, like I said. And the internal cost of the program itself. You don’t think a program of this complexity and scope can run itself, do you? Besides, there are millions of folks with lower incomes than you, even many in the ‘middle class’, who qualify for subsidies that people like you must support. That’s why they call it the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act’! Only people who don’t make much money can afford it. If you want affordable plumbing, you’ll have to give away most of what you have accumulated and cut your and Michelle’s income by about 90%. Then you can qualify to get your ‘Fair Share’ instead of giving it.”
“But who would pass a crazy act like the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act’?!” exclaims the exasperated Obama.
After a sigh, Troy replies, “Congress… because they didn’t read it.”
This anecdote, while amusing, is also extraordinarily truthful, in that Obamacare functions just like the fictional “Affordable Plumbing Act.”
It inflates the costs of health care, drives providers out of business and reduces the incentive for hard work — because why should one work hard when he or she can get healthcare (or plumbing) for absolutely free?
Socialism basically does to the country the same thing it did to it in Ayn Rand’s classic novel, “Atlas Shrugged” — it turns it upside down.
It also does nothing to fix the real problem, much like the “Affordable Plumbing Act” did nothing whatsoever to help poor Barry with that awful leak in the bathroom!
While it might sound charitable at first glance, be very wary, for socialism in any form always produces the most horrific of results, as this example demonstrates:
Only weeks after leaving office on Jan. 20, 2017, former President Barack Obama discovers a leak under his sink, so he calls Troy the Plumber to come out and fix it.
Troy drives to Obama’s new house, which is located in a very exclusive, gated community near Chicago where all the residents have a net income of way more than $250,000 per year.
Troy arrives and takes his tools into the house. He is led to the guest bathroom that contains the leaky pipe under the sink. Troy assesses the problem and tells Obama that it’s an easy repair that will take less than 10 minutes. Obama asks Troy how much it will cost. Troy checks his rate chart and says, “$9,500.”
Troy says, “Yes, but what I do is charge those who make more than $250,000 per year a much higher amount so I can fix the plumbing of poorer people for free. This has always been my philosophy. As a matter of fact, I lobbied the Democrat Congress, who passed this philosophy into law. Now all plumbers must do business this way. It’s known as the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act of 2014′. I’m surprised you haven’t heard of it.”
In spite of that, Obama tells Troy there’s no way he’s paying that much for a small plumbing repair, so Troy leaves. Obama spends the next hour flipping through the phone book calling for another plumber, but he finds that all other plumbing businesses in the area have gone out of business. Not wanting to pay Troy’s price, Obama does nothing and the leak goes un-repaired for several more days. A week later the leak is so bad Obama has had to put a bucket under the sink.
Michelle is not happy as she has Oprah and guests arriving the next morning. The bucket fills up quickly and has to be emptied every hour, and there’s a risk the room will flood, so Obama calls Troy and pleads with him to return.
Troy goes back to Obama’s house, looks at the leaky pipe, checks his new rate chart and says, “Let’s see, this will now cost you $21,000.”
Obama quickly fires back, “What? A few days ago you told me it would cost $9,500!”
Troy explains, “Well, because of the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act,’ a lot of wealthier people are learning how to maintain and take care of their own plumbing, so there are fewer payers in the plumbing exchanges. As a result, the price I have to charge wealthy people like you keeps rising. Not only that, but for some reason the demand for plumbing work by those who get it for free has skyrocketed! There’s a long waiting list of those who need repairs, but the amount we get doesn’t cover our costs, especially paperwork and record-keeping. This unfortunately has put a lot of my fellow plumbers out of business, they’re not being replaced, and nobody is going into the plumbing business because they know they can’t make any money at it. I’m hurting too, all thanks to greedy rich people like you who won’t pay their ‘fair share’. On the other hand, why didn’t you buy plumbing insurance last December? If you had bought plumbing insurance available under the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act,’ all this would have been covered by your policy.”
“You mean I wouldn’t have to pay anything to have you fix my plumbing problem?” asks Obama.
“Well, not exactly,” replies Troy. “You would have had to buy the insurance before the deadline, which has passed now. And, because you’re rich, you would have had to pay $34,000 in premiums, which would have given you a ‘silver’ plan, and then, since this would have been your first repair, you would have to pay up to the $21,000 deductible, and anything over that would have a $7,500 co-pay, and then there’s the mandatory maintenance program, which is covered up to 17.5%, so there are some costs involved. Nothing is for free.”
“WHAT?!” exclaims Obama. “Why so much for a puny sink leak?!”
With a bland look, Troy replies, “Well, paperwork, mostly, like I said. And the internal cost of the program itself. You don’t think a program of this complexity and scope can run itself, do you? Besides, there are millions of folks with lower incomes than you, even many in the ‘middle class’, who qualify for subsidies that people like you must support. That’s why they call it the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act’! Only people who don’t make much money can afford it. If you want affordable plumbing, you’ll have to give away most of what you have accumulated and cut your and Michelle’s income by about 90%. Then you can qualify to get your ‘Fair Share’ instead of giving it.”
“But who would pass a crazy act like the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act’?!” exclaims the exasperated Obama.
After a sigh, Troy replies, “Congress… because they didn’t read it.”
This anecdote, while amusing, is also extraordinarily truthful, in that Obamacare functions just like the fictional “Affordable Plumbing Act.”
It inflates the costs of health care, drives providers out of business and reduces the incentive for hard work — because why should one work hard when he or she can get healthcare (or plumbing) for absolutely free?
Socialism basically does to the country the same thing it did to it in Ayn Rand’s classic novel, “Atlas Shrugged” — it turns it upside down.
It also does nothing to fix the real problem, much like the “Affordable Plumbing Act” did nothing whatsoever to help poor Barry with that awful leak in the bathroom!
Tuesday, March 10, 2015
Congress Defies Obama. Warns Iran.
Reblogged from https://kingsjester.wordpress.com/
As you know, President Barack Hussein Obama, has been ignoring Congress, in his zeal to broker a “Nuclear Arms Agreement” with the Radical Islamic Nation of Iran.
Yesterday, the Republican – led Congress made sure that both Obama and Iran knew that our government consists of 3 co-equal branches.
Fox News reports that
On purpose.
Until He Comes,
KJ
All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States. The Constitution of the United States of America, Article VIThe preceding article gives the power to ratify treaties with other nations, to Congress.
As you know, President Barack Hussein Obama, has been ignoring Congress, in his zeal to broker a “Nuclear Arms Agreement” with the Radical Islamic Nation of Iran.
Yesterday, the Republican – led Congress made sure that both Obama and Iran knew that our government consists of 3 co-equal branches.
Fox News reports that
Forty-seven Republican senators warned Iran’s leaders on Monday that any nuclear deal needs congressional approval in order to last beyond President Obama’s term, in a stark letter aimed at re-asserting lawmakers’ role as talks near a key deadline.
In an open letter to Iranian leaders, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and 46 other Republicans said they wanted to educate Iran about the U.S. Constitution. Namely, they pointed out that without congressional approval on a deal, all Tehran would be left with is a “mere executive agreement” between President Obama and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen,” they wrote, “and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time.”
They added: “We hope this letter enriches your knowledge of our constitutional system and promotes mutual understanding and clarity as nuclear negotiations progress.”
Though the letter is addressed to leaders in Tehran, it seems as much aimed at delivering a message to Obama.
Republicans and some Democrats want Congress to vote on any agreement, and are pushing a bill that would give Congress a say despite resistance from the White House.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., though, has agreed to ease off a short-lived effort to fast-track that legislation, amid some Democratic concerns.
Notably, the Republican co-sponsor of that bill, Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., did not sign the most recent open letter to Iran’s leaders. No Democrats signed the letter, either.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Monday that a congressional vote is not what Obama envisions.
“The fact is the president does not envision substantial sanctions relief for Iran right at the negotiating table,” Earnest said during the daily White House briefing.
The nuclear pact negotiators are working on does not require congressional approval because it is not a treaty, which would require a two-thirds majority Senate vote to be ratified. However, as the 47 Republicans noted in their letter, approval from a congressional majority would give the deal the force of a “congressional-executive agreement.”
The U.S. and other nations are seeking a pact that would let Western powers verify that Iran will not obtain a nuclear weapon.
The next negotiations are scheduled for March 15, and wide gaps remain between the two sides. The deadline for an outline of a U.S.-Iranian deal is at the end of March.
Iran has said its nuclear program is peaceful and is aimed at producing energy.
There was no immediate Iranian government reaction to the letter or any discussion of it in Iranian media.The BBC reports that Obama said in response, that
Cotton is a freshman senator who serves on the Senate’s Armed Service and Intelligence committees.
I think it’s somewhat ironic to see some members of Congress wanting to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran. It’s an unusual coalition.In the “Irony” Department,
— In his book “The Audacity of Hope,” President Barack Obama praised the Constitution and the federalism it enshrines, including the “three coequal” branches of government and checks on power that “prevent tyranny by either the few or the many.”“The outlines of Madison’s constitutional architecture are so familiar that even schoolchildren can recite them: not only rule of law and representative government, not just a bill of rights, but also the separation of the national government into three coequal branches, a bicameral Congress, and a concept of federalism that preserved authority in state governments, all of it designed to diffuse power, check factions, balance interests, and prevent tyranny by either the few or the many,” Obama, who taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School, said in the 2006 book.In just 9 short years, Obama has forgotten everything he ever knew about US Civics.
On purpose.
Until He Comes,
KJ
Sunday, March 8, 2015
Friday, March 6, 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Most Visited
-
Since we know Written and posted by Jean-Louis.1995 http://lightnseed.blogspot.com http://thelightseed.blogspot.com Since we kno...
-
Written and published by Jean-Louis. 12/2011 "For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, works for us a far more exceedi...
-
Written and posted by Jean-Louis. Jesus talks with the Samaritan woman John 4 People generally tend to divide themselves into two categ... -
Post by Hakan Mengüç .
-
Published December 10, 2014 Reblogged from FoxNews.com Oct. 5, 2014: Palestinians from Gaza ...
-
Written and posted by Jean-Louis - http://thelightseed.blogspot.com “See. I will send you the prophet Elijah before that great and dr... -
Reblogged from servehiminthewaiting.com I’ve been hard-pressed, this week, to dip into the polluted stream of “news” and come up with m...
-
Joel C. Rosenberg Address to the National Religious Broadcasters Convention Nashville, Tennessee February 26, 2015 Reblogged from htt...
-
DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis April 6, 2015, 11:28 AM (IDT) Tags: ...
