The latest on Iran...

Thanks to sites like Debkafile, there is access to information on Iran like this and this. In addition to that, is the latest that has been posted at Captain's Quarters - that the IAEA has offically said there has been no cooperation with Iran.

Here, no means no, and it would seem the IAEA is letting their nay be nay in not beating around the bush and getting to the point - Iran is not on board. It's clear that the US and the UK are going to continue to push the idea of sanctions, with China and Russia against such a move (of course).

I certianly echo the Captain when he said that "Much rides on the next step. Too bad the main actor in this drama is a nutcase like Ahmadinejad."

Iran: Among other things is a Terrorist State

One look at most of my posts recently and it's clear that Iran has continued to be a subject of interest to me (as well as circumstances surrounding it). Reason being is that Iran is a problem. Not only is Iran a problem, but other influential nations (such as Russia and China) become an issue when they support Iran (by not supporting action that the rest of the world wants to take against Iran to stop the chances of a nuclear confrontation).

A few days ago I came across a post at Captain's Quarters that was also backed up by Regime Change Iran - that Iran had brought on board (to deal with a possible US led attack) known terrorist operative Imad Mugniyeh, a man who is on the FBI's "Most Wanted" list for his role in a series of high-profile attacks against the West, including the 1985 hijacking of a TWA jet and murder of one of its passengers, a US navy diver. - Sunday Times Article

It has been said again and again, something needs to be done here, and not some soft handed action either. We know Iran is playing this game for keeps, and that they are ready and willing to wear-down and out-last the West in such a game. Time, for all practical purposes, is on their side - not ours. I go back to the posts on "The Plan" and "Iran's Secret Program"

Also reported on Captian's Quarters in recent days is that Russia and Iran have reached an enrichment agreement. The questions that the Captian poses are indeed good ones; the answers are probably not ones that the United States wants to hear.

Keep an eye on the news this week, as Iran is nearing the end of the 30 day time frame that the UNSC gave it to deal with it's nuclear ambitions. The question now is, "will the United Nations take strong action against Iran in the form of sanctions or otherwise?"

I wouldn't count on it, not with Russia and China in Iran's corner. Look for the UNSC to deliberate more and more on the issue, while Ambassador John Bolton does his best to move towards some sort of action.

Babylon Rising from the Ashes as a Pheonix?

I know very well that the Scriptures speak of this, but happening in my lifetime? It very well may be happening, as I came across this morning on Joel Rosenberg's blog.

I want to laugh, I really do, but I can't. I want to say, not while I'm here, but I can't. In my spirit I know that many of the events the Scriptures speak of will either happen in my lifetime, or the precursors to them will transpire...

Frightening yet exciting at the same time...

Has the USA lost to China?

Is this really true?

If it is, which I hope it isn't, I figured it would happen sooner or later. I wonder how this will play into Future events...

Russia still Iran's "Friend" by opposing sanctions...

So the United Nations Security Council still seeks to impose sanctions on Iran, but Russia (as well as China) still oppose such a move.

Both Russia and China want to see additional diplomatic avenues pursued. Such a desire is pointless in light of the fact that such efforts by the EU 3 have proven absolutely fruitless up till now. Iran isn't going to give up enrichment of uranium unless they are forced to do so, and all of this diplomatic talk that has been going on just serves as a effort to stall anything really being done. It would seem that Iran's Plan may be working after all.

Somebody needs to take they're wodden shoes called "Sabo" and put them "into the machines (of Iran's plan) to stop them" - hence Sabotage...

Iran's Plan...

Came across this in the Telegraph today, thanks to Hugh Hewitt.

If playing the waiting game is in fact Iran's plan at this point, someone or something needs to halt that plan. If Iran has her heart set on waiting out the "Bush anomaly", with a Democrat comming into the Oval Office in November 2008 - a likely occourance - then there will be little national or governmental will at that point to tackle the Iran issue through anything but diplomatic means; even Tony Blair has publicly stated that Britian will not support military action. All the while, Iran will continue to try and produce the bomb; not just one but as many as she can. This would put America and Israel in grave danger.

Iran's Secret Program?

Is this a new development?

The plot thickens...

If you give a mouse a cookie...

You know he'll become emboldened and ask for a glass of milk, right?

What if you let a radical enrich uranium? Then he'll start speaking out against his enemies! And yet again!

A dark time is ahead if things don't change here, as Iran's President continues to speak out against against Israel and the United States (as Joel Rosenberg notes).

It seems to be much like the era of the 1930's as Bill Kristol wrote about in recent days, when the world could have done something about Hitler to prevent the events of WWII but did little or nothing, learning the hard way that appeasement isn't a course of action that works. Which is in line with comments that Benjamin Netanyahu (former PM of Israel) has made of numerous occasions about the mindset of the the people in the Middle East - that appeasement only invites more carange and mayhem, that if someone hits, you hit back twice as hard, or prevent them from hitting you in the first place.

Rosenberg also mentions Russia in recent posts, and how nearly half of the people in russia favor Putin having a third term, something that is currently unconstitutional for them to do.

Why would I mention Iran and Russia in the same "breath"? Aside from the fact that Iran, through Russia, has an ally on the United Nations Security Council - someone that will work to move against any action that the United States or the EU 3 want to take against Iran through the vessel of the UNSC - and that there is an alliance between the two nations (through weapons selling and Russia willing to assist Iran with nuclear proliferation, albeit on Russian soil), I believe that the fate of both nations is tied together, as one rises and falls so will the other.

Hugh Hewitt also has some links on "Iran and the American Left". As Hugh suggests, I also do - take a look at Regime Change Iran, probably the best place to keep up on what is happening inside and outside Iran, and how that affects Iran and the rest of the world.

Remember though, these wise and immortal words - "all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

We aren't doing anything as of right now, as it has even been admitted that "our policy has been all carrots but no sticks"

If that's the case, evil will triumph...

May it never be...

Hamas resognizes Israel?!

Woah, stop the presses! Thanks again to Captain's Quarters for this momentous piece of news.

The Captain says it much better than I ever could. I do find it facinating that Hamas would make such a statement, but in the end I think it's all part of a game to say - "Hey, we were willing to recognize Israel (under the '67 boarders) but they would not allow us to do so, it's their fault, not ours" It's true that Israel would most likely never allow herself to be recognized under such a condition, Hamas knows that and is just trying to play a game and make Ehud Olmert and his cabinet look bad.

I do agree with the Captain that such a move though, will force Hamas to be honest with their own and acknowledge their words, that and to admit that the United States has indeed won this round.

Civil War Brewing...but not in Iraq

Thanks to Captain's Quarters this morning, I came across a piece that talks of civil war in the Palestinian territory of Gaza (now that Israel has withdrawn and given up that land). It will be a battle between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority.

Now I don't agree with the fact that Sharon pulled out. I see that as former Prime Minister Netanyahu does - as showing a sign of weakness to the terrorists and others that would like to harm Israel or flat out destory her (treaty with Egypt and Jordan aside, that would mean most ofthe surrounding countries).

However, that decision was made and is now past. We are seeing some benefit from it as it does leave the Palestinian's to their own devices, reaping that which they have sown though their choices of political representation.

Keep watching in the comming days for outbreaks of violence, and as the Bible instructs, pray for the Peace of Jerusalem.

The key to Iran is Russia?

According to a NY Post Column, written by Amir Taheri, it would seem so.

Having found this, thanks to Joel Rosenberg, it sure does support the ideas that he writes about in the Ezekiel Option. Add to that the fact that Russia has been far less than cooperative when it comes to the West dealing with Iran, because in Russia and China (as shown by the UNSC) Iran has two big Allies that will work against anything "significant" happening to deter Iran from her course to produce a bomb.

So if Russia is the key, then what is do be done, as we've seen that they are already "buddy buddy" with Iran and don't support the United States or the "EU-3" (France, Germany, and Russia) in trying to stop Iran.

Hard Choices lay ahead...

Iran: "Revenge of the Mullahs?"

There's alot going around the blogsphere in the last few days about Iran because of the uranium enrichment situation and the latest is not good.

According to Drudge Report this morning, Iran has vowed to not back away from enrichment, saying that their efforts are "unstoppable". If that were not enough already, Joel Rosenberg cites parts of a Bloomberg story that says Iran could have a nuke in 16 days. This just conjures up visions of Bruce Greenwood as JFK in the movie 13 days about the Cuban Missile Crisis...

Hugh Hewitt has posted both his and Bill Kristol's thoughts and reactions on Iran as they shared a stage yesterday, as well as other links to thoughts on Iran...

Hard choices are ahead...

For Real: Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine

Thanks to Porkbusters!

Byrd kinda looks like ol' Sidious doesn't he?

Iran: Begun, the "Enriched War" has...

It's all over the blogsphere and the news, so much so that I read it on my Pocket PC while on the Subway - Iran has joined the Nuclear Club

We knew this was coming...

Now we either find a way to restrain the Iranian government or wait till they have the bomb, and watch the world change in an instant...

Iran: No longer a "Phantom Menace"

The government of Iran and their "Quest for the Bomb" under the guise of "energy production" continues to be an issue.

As always, Joel Rosenberg has some great thoughts.

Ian Schwartz over at Expose the Left has the video of Hugh Hewitt on Hardball with Chris Matthews discussing Iran and the "nuclear option"

I don't have any answers here, except that I know this - America cannot let Iran get the bomb, if that happens, the world as we know it could change overnight, as the President of Iran has spoken out against both Israel and the United States, threatening to wipe Israel off the map and saying "Imagine a world without America".

Consider all of this in the context of what both Rosenberg and Hewitt call "the 12th Imam" - a situation where the Iranian President believes that within the next few years the 12th Imam (the Islamic Messiah) will return, and it is part of the Iranian President's destiny (or so he says) to usher in that return. There is striving here, towards something, an end of the world senario where radical Islam is saved and it's enemies are dealt with.

Scary Senario...

If we are not a nation of laws...

Then what are we?

Laws are part of what makes this nation great, precepts that are put down for people's safety and betterment. Law helps to hold civil society together, for without such a mechanism it would no longer be civil.

I ask this question because of events that have transpired over recent days in reguards to the immigration issue in this country.

A number of weeks back, there was a pro illegal immigration rally in San Francisco that drew half a million marchers. Such efforts have continued over the time that has elapsed between then and now, culminating yesterday with various illegal immigration marches around the country, in cities like Detroit, Washington D.C., Houston, Berkley, and other places.

Why have such demonstrations taken place? The answer lies in the halls of a Capitol - immigration reform legislation that has come down in both houses of Congress. On the House side of things, legislation has been passed that would make it a felony for someone to be here illegally. In other words, if someone came to the United States and did not do so using the legal process put in place, they could be sent to prison (and probably deported). While this legislation passed, it has angered many people, as those it has angered believe that they have a right to be here, regardless of what the law says.

Which brings us to the Senate. In order for this House bill to become law, it needs to pass approval in the Senate (as welll as the House) so that President Bush can sign it - it's what the Constitution says in Article I, Section 7. So the question is, will the Senate take the same hard-line stand of "pro-enforcement" that the House has taken? This is not likely, as one of the main sticking points of this Senate version of immigration legislation has been a "guest worker" program.

This guest worker program provides a path to citizenship that is dependent not on following the law, but on how long someone has been in the country, illegally, already. In the Senate right now, the legislation cannot pass because there cannot be an agreement between both parties on this. Some conservative voices in the Senate are adamently against such a program because it provides amnesty to illegal immigrants, sending a message of "if you break our laws, that's ok, we'll help you out anyway". The President is the one that proposed such a program in the first place.

So the question comes, why would the Senate allow for a "guest worker" program, even though it sends a "breaking the law is ok" message?

It's simple - Fear.

It's a mid-term election year in the USA. Democrats are vying to take back power in the Houses of Congress, while Republicans seek to keep it. Since "all who attain power are afraid to lose it", that makes for some interesting situations.

The African American vote in the United States has been solidly going to the Dems for a long time. Thanks to President Bush, the Latino/Hispanic vote has been sucessfully courted by Republicans for the last six years. Republicans in Congress are afraid to lose this voting bloc, afraid to let it go to the Dems. Due to this fear, they are willing (for the most part in the Senate) capitulate to this voting bloc in order to make them happy and keep that voting demographic squarley in their camp (while the Dems try to do all they can to take it away). To do so means "let them stay" instead of enforcing the law.

Here, not only are we dealing with an immigration problem, but also a National Security one, as terrorists can come across the border into the United States to try and harm our nation.

Don't expect the Senate to pass something hard hitting like the House did, but do expect that whatever they do eventually pass will land us in this same spot in 2026 (twenty years from now) as what was passed in 1986 under Regan (twenty years ago) did litle to stem the tide and helped us get to where we are today, and were yesterday.

If we are not a nation of laws, then what are we?

Michelle Malkin has posted pictures and video from various demonstrations around the country.

A Burden for Truth...

Note: I normally don't double post something on two blogs, but this is an exception.

I cannot explain in full what's happened over the last 2-3 weeks. Just that God has afforded me the perfect place within which to learn and study about our Nation's founding. In so doing the findings are astounding.

There is so much that we as Americans are no longer taught or instructed about when it comes to the History of our nation, some good, some bad. But it is our beginnings that I find most amazing, in focus, the reliance of our Founding Fathers on Christ and the Bible. At one time such things permiated our country, so much so that when Alexis De Tocqueville, author of Democracy in America, came to America to deduce from whence her greatness came he said:

"On my arrival to the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the loger that I stayed there the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things"

"I sought of the greatness and genius of America in her comodious harbors and her ample rivers, and it was not there; in her fertile fields and boundless praries and it was not there; in her rich minds and vast world commerece, but it was not there. Not until I went to the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because she is good and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great" (Itallics Added)

Is that not amazing, does that not make you want to weep? So many in this great nation don't know that, they have no idea of such things because such things aren't taught. They aren't taught in the name of "Seperation of Church and State" that "invisible wall" that pervents religion from entering the public square. This isn't what the Founders intended, such a wall existed so that the State could not control the Church. It was fully intended for the Church to work hand in hand with the state, as some of our greatest statemen at the time of our founding were clergy.

As I have said before, even education was set apart for God's purposes then, as some of our oldest and most respected establishments of post secondary education (such as Princeton, Harvard, Yale, and Rugeters) were started by stalwart Christian men, having set before them as institutional missions the grounding of students in the Word. Consider for a moment Harvard University and one of it's original precepts:

"Let Every Student be plainly instructed, and earnestly pressed to consider well the main end of his life and studies is, to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternal life, and therefore to lay Christ at the bottom, as the only foundation of all sound knowlege and learning"

This just the tip of the iceberg; how far we've come, come away from the things that the nation was founded upon.

I believe with great certianty that if our nation was educated soundly in such history, it would have a great effect upon the minds and hearts of those who reside here, for when you study such matters, you learn the central precept that the Fathers knew - solid government of a nation only comes when there is solid governance of the hearts of the people of said nation, governance that comes from a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. For "from the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks" (and a man acts).

What will we do, will the "Revolutionary" ideas of governance and government that formed this great nation some day return?

I sure hope so...

Teachers against Religion?

It would certianly appear that way, according to an article in the UK's Gauardian.

"Britain's biggest teaching union, the National Union of Teachers, warned yesterday that religious fundamentalists were gaining control of state schools - predominantly through the government's city academy programme..."

So the "religious fundamentalists" are "gaining control" of the schools through the use of a program that the government put in place, and the government is doing little about it, as the program is being executed. Does that not tell the NUT something; does that not tell them that the government that pays their salaries, as they are in a way public servants, teaching in schools that are government funded, having taxpayer dollars as the vessel through which they earn a living, that this government is ok with what is apparently happening, therefore they shouldn't be as alarmed as they appear to be?

"A motion to be debated at the NUT's annual conference in Torquay over the Easter weekend calls for an end to state funding for faith schools, and legislation "to prevent the growing influence of religious organisations in education and the teaching of creationism or intelligent design as a valid alternative to evolution".

So they want to government to hault what it has decided to do: to promote a healthy education and debate for a child as to the origins of themselves and the universe; an alternative to the whole "you're a worthless cosmic accident" way of teaching?

"The NUT's attack is in response to proposals in the education and inspections bill which give faith groups a much bigger role in running state schools."

There's a bill in Parliment that would give faith based organizations a larger role in running state schools?! They have a role?! Imgaine if that happened in America, my gosh, the ACLU would be asking a bigger price than David's 200 Philistine foreskins to try and stamp out such an effort!

"The motion cites a recent Guardian/ICM poll in which a majority said they were opposed to state funding of faith schools."

What don't we know about the sample that was used for the poll?

Recently, the Archbishop of Canterbury warned that creationism should not be taught in schools.

A man of the cloth against the teaching of Creation? Is this what it's come to?

The Department for Education and Skills said last night: "We have a long tradition of faith schools in this country. They are popular with parents and make an important contribution to community cohesion by promoting inclusion and developing partnerships with schools of other faiths, and with non-faith schools."

If our Dept of Ed said that, the ACLU and the NEA would fall over dead!

To think that the Founding Fathers of our country could not imagine education apart from Christ and the Bible. Noah Webster, American Education's "Founding Father", published a dictionary where a majority of the original definitions of words were biblically grounded. (Since that time, and in many of the recent versions, these definitions are omitted.) Many of our University's were started by evangelical Christians and it's Presidents were Christian well into the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The mission of these locations of learning was to ground it's students in the Word and as such have it overflow into the various disiplines.

It is no longer like this in America, yet in England, ENGLAND, the country our forefathers left because of religious persecution, it is better than it is here, with a greater acknowledgement of Christ in education. Yet in America we have cases that come down that say no prayer in schools, no "under God" in the pledge, and no prayer at sporting events or graduations...in the words of DC Talk "what have we become?"

The Revolution must Return...

To Tony Blair: Carry on good Sir, and listen not to the sqwakings of the unions...

Krauthammer on Illegal Immigration

This morning, in the Washington Post, Charles Krauthammer has written a piece on what shouldl be done about illegal immigration in our country.

About the "wall", I can agree totally. I like the fact that he cited the example of the effectiveness of the wall in Israel, then brought it down to basic terms in relaying what a fence around a person's house is for, discussing the purpose it serves.

However I don't agree with the amnesty idea being put forth for those already here once the "wall" is built. You're still giving a free pass to those that have broken the law - even if it serves a purpose of assisting to secure the future. There needs to be enforcement all around, period.

Conservatives and Democrats United?!

There's the saying that goes something like "if it's too good to be true, then it probably is", but this time it may very well be true. In the Washington Times this morning (via Drudge) this article appeared. I couldn't believe it. Here's the first sentence:

"Senate Republicans will filibuster their own immigration bill today in the face of steadfast refusal by Democrats to allow amendments to the bill that many conservatives view as granting amnesty to illegal aliens."


It looks as if conservatives in the Senate and Democrats are united against various members of the GOP over this immigration issue, as the GOP doesn't want to do much about the amnesty concerns that have arisen. Conservatives of course are concerned about this and the many veins it touches such as security and terrorism, jobs, and the economy, and the Rule of Law. Conservatives don't believe in a "free pass", as they shouldn't. The curious thing (that isn't really when one looks at it closely) is the Democrats on this issue. They appear to be against amnesty this time around, however, the mostly likely reason is because Republicans are for it, something that normally, Dems would support, as they have no problems with giving a "free pass". However, they see this as a political opportunity to do some damage and hopefully gain an upperhand for November, doing what it takes to get the job done of trying to take back a congressional majority that has not been theirs for twelve years or so.

School Vouchers: Parental involvement in Education and the 200th Post

I don't talk much here at Truth and Justice about Education, maybe I should. The only overtures I've made toward the subject can be found here.

However, this morning, Captain's Quarters has a post about the subject of school vouchers and an interesting one at that. The reason I bring this up is because of the idea of responsibility. I believe that it is just as much (or more) the responsibility of the parents to train and teach their kids, as it says in the Bible - "Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it".

For some, this might mean homeschooling their kids, and I have friends who I know will be doing that. For others, this whole suject of school vouchers is an example because it allows the parents to choose what school they want their children to attend, using some of the money they would have paid in taxes for their child's public education to fund the choice they as parents make.

I agree with the Captain that this is a great idea and it would appear as one that the Republican Majority and the White House have fallen behind on. Not only that, but the following quote frim the Captain makes a great point:

"The GOP had an opportunity in 2001, and a better one in 2003 with complete control over Congress, to push for school vouchers in order to empower parents with real choices for their children. That more than any other government program holds the key to unlocking people from the cycle of poverty -- a good education."

Not only that, but it brings responsibility back into the equation, in that in people leave the schools for greener pastures then those left need to get their act together, a crucial piece that seems to be missing in a time where a song by MxPx says it all "Responsibility, what's that?"

Abraham Lincoln once said that "the philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of the government in the next". If we want to find a way to drive out practices and philosophies within our government that do not agree with what the Founding Fathers had in mind, it must start now with the school system. Giving parents control, input, and influece into their child's education is a good first step.

Mark Tapscott: on the "same page" as Richard Miniter

As I was surfing the net yesterday, I came across a video of Richard Miniter being interviewed by Roger L. Simon of Pajama's Media. In this video, Miniter puts forth the idea of using the collective power of the blogs to help translate the documents that have been released recently.

I sent that link over to Mark Tapscott, my blog father and a great advocate for freedom of information and bringing in the sun to uncover the darkness of government, and this morning I find it on his site, Tapscott's Copy Desk, and there I am. Thanks Mark, glad to help.

New Ann Coulter book?

Yes folks it's true. This book is set to release on 6/6/06. I don't know what it's about, but in jest I'd laugh if it was about the Antichrist. Why? On that same day is the release of Omen 666 (the remake of the 70's horror classic) and the final piece in the Left Behind prequel trilogy The Rapture

Can't wait...

A long week of nothing...

This my no means means that nothing has happened in the last 7-9 days, but just that I didn't post on it, which I know is not normal. However, last week was a hard week for me as much of the physical pain I deal with on a day to day basis was at a heightened level, which meant that every night, instead of posting I would sleep, and every morning I'd get extra sleep instead of getting up early to check the headlines.

However, I'm going to try and put an end to that now, as many things have happened this week...

1. Cynthia McKinney - if you haven't caught wind of this, check Drudge or Malkin.

2. Moussaui Trial - Death Penalty an option (as it should be).

3. Iran - UNSC comes out formally against Iran, and as expected, Iran resists.

4. Tom Delay to give up seat - here and here