Image of the Beast ALIVE in the USA

This is some really eye opening stuff here! This explains, at least to
some degree, about the silence among the churches. But even if all the
pastors and church leaders are a part of this corruption you would think
that their congregation would catch on, at least some of them. I just
cannot understand the mob mentality that is blind to the obvious. All
those who think the are good christians just because they attend a
church are the ones so easily corrupted. Thank God we do not belong to
these godless churches! Who knows, we might have ended up like the rest
who are spiritually dying and have no clue. I guess it was God all along
that got me out of church a long time ago. Now I am not saying that this
information here is absolute, or their conclusions about it, but it
makes an awful lot of sense. it is like pieces of a jigsaw all coming
together. This is why church is so demonic and why there are demoniac
apostates running around like Copeland and Hinn. I don’t hear or see
much of Benny Hinn, but I do Kenneth Copeland. I cannot stand him. He
always has such a crazy look in his eyes. He is certifiably insane and
belongs in a rubber room. Those who look up to such a fool are equally
as insane.

http://www.remnantofgod.org/image.htm

WORSHIP JESUS IN SPIRIT & TRUTH: HOME PAGE SPIRIT TRUTH!

http://www.spirittruth.com/

Bob Jones and Paul Cain Claiming To Be The Two Revelation Witnesses: The Latter Rain FALSE Revival!

This latter rain deception is exactly what my folks are plugged into. My dad
gets newsletters from the likes of ENDTIME HANDMAIDENS, who are in the
thick of this demonic deception. That particular ministry never felt
right to me in my spirit and for a number of other different reasons,
now I know why. Man, when you read this you will realize just how
serious this is. These dominionists sound like they are literally
plotting murder, just like Jesus said in Matthew 24. So many like my
family have no clue to the evil they are involved in. It will be these
dominionists that will usher in the antichrist. No wonder Jesus gave us
so many warnings about vigilance in the last days and against false
christs. But you see the complete hypocrisy? Those who dismis the old
testament but will still use it for their purpose such as tithing or
latter rain. These fools can’t have it both ways. The only way they can
interpret scripture is falsely, proving their wicked hearts. Wow, the
irony of those who think they will either escape through a secret
rapture or oppose the antichrist are the ones who will be his very
slaves. In just flipping around I heard a little bit of a TBN preacher
Casey Treat, and was blabbing so much newage garbage, you know, the
usual positivity cult stuff. Man, TBN is pure demonic. I can easily see
that they will be a tool of the antichrist. This is information
important to get out. Most of the kooks you probably deal with are these
latter rain dominionists. They will be easy marks for the antichrist.
You was surprised in the past about Bob Jones university involved in
political corruption. Well this here lists him as one of the false
prophets along with Paul Cain and Rick Joyner. Both Bob and Paul are
egotistical in thinking that they are actually the two witnesses of
Revelation. It is ironic that it will probably be them that will oppose
the true two witesses. It is these followers of the antichrist that will
be tormented in the presence of God and His holy angels. They will face
more severe humiliation than others in hell. Thank God our eyes are open
in not following this godless bunch because those who follow the beast
will have the worst of punishments for all eternity.

http://watch.pair.com/rain.html

John MacArthur: Survival Strategy For Apostate Times Part 1

Survival Strategy for Apostate Times, Part 1 :: Grace to You

Survival Strategy for Apostate Times, Part 2 :: Grace to You

Survival Strategy for Apostate Times, Part 3 :: Grace to You

Selective Constitutionalism by Chuck Baldwin

Yeah, I have been hearing this hypocritical fuss over Obama when they
know very well that McCain is no natural born citizen. The fuss over
Obama is pure slander because they are accusing him of only what they
suspect and have no proof, while McCain is a common known fact. Well the
bible is very clear where slanderers will spend eternity. Where is the
"innocent till proven guilty" mentallity in this country when the
hypocrites have already made up their own minds? There is almost nothing
but a mob mentallity in this country. It is no wonder judgment is coming
to this country. I am slightly optimistic about Obama. Apparently he
must be somewhat good for these vile neocon vermin to hate him so. I am
still convince because of their extreme hatred for Obama that the
neocons will try to put a hit out on him and try to take over this
country, like the bloodthirsty nazis that they are. People need not fear
Obama but need to be concerned with the vile hatred of the nazi right. I
have never witnessed such hatred in all my life. I pray for the return
of our Lord Jesus ever so quickly and deliver me from these psychos.
That is the prayer of all who truly love Jesus. That is how you tell the
sheep from the goats by where their loyalty lies.

This column is archived at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2008/cbarchive_20081209.html

Many conservatives are up in arms regarding the charge that President-elect
Barack Obama may not have been born in the United States and is, therefore,
not qualified under the U.S. Constitution to be President of the United
States.

Article. II. Section. 1. of the U.S. Constitution states, "No Person except
a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of
the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of
President . . . ." Some accuse Mr. Obama of not being born in the State of
Hawaii as claimed, but in Kenya, Africa. Several people have filed various
lawsuits challenging Mr. Obama’s U.S. citizenship.

Historically, "natural born Citizen" has always been understood to mean
someone born in the United States of America. If Barack Obama was not born
in the United States, he is absolutely unqualified to be President. Hawaii’s
secretary of state says Obama was indeed born in that state. However, to
date, Obama’s actual birth certificate has not been publicly released, which
only serves to add fuel to the accusations that he was not born in Hawaii.

Many conservatives seem to be obsessed with this controversy, calling it a
"constitutional crisis." The fact is, however, we have been in a
"constitutional crisis" for years! The problem is, most conservatives only
get worked up over a potential abridgement of constitutional government when
it serves their partisan political purposes. In other words, when a Democrat
appears guilty of constitutional conflict, conservatives "go ballistic," but
when Republicans are equally culpable of constitutional conflict, they yawn
with utter indifference.

For example, the one man who has the notoriety and political clout to
actually bring about some meaningful investigation and resolution to the
Obama citizenship brouhaha is none other than Senator John McCain. After
all, he was Obama’s principal opponent in the race for the White House.
Plus, as the standard-bearer for the only other major political party, he
has the attention of the national media, as well as the national legislative
and judicial branches of government. So, why is John McCain not at all
interested in the Obama citizenship issue?

Perhaps one reason that John McCain is so uninterested in where Barack Obama
was born is because he, John McCain, was not born in the United States. He
was born in the country of Panama. So, let me ask readers a question: Does
anyone believe if John McCain had been elected President instead of Barack
Obama that any notable conservative would have been distressed about a
"constitutional crisis"? Get real!

Yes, I know McCain was born to a naval officer serving in Panama at the
time. That fact changes nothing. John McCain was still born in a foreign
country, and under a strict interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, is not
qualified to be President of the United States. Even our current State
Department policy (7 FAM 1100) reads: "Despite widespread popular belief,
U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular
facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th
Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to
the jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship
by reason of birth."

Does anyone not remember the controversy surrounding the potential
Presidential campaign of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger? Born in
Austria, Schwarzenegger is a naturalized citizen of the United States and is
now Governor of California. However, since Schwarzenegger is a naturalized
citizen, but not a natural born citizen, he is considered unqualified to run
for President.

But, again, most conservatives care little about the Constitution’s
requirement that a President be a "natural born Citizen." Like liberals,
most conservatives are afflicted with a very debilitating disease that I
call Selective Constitutionalism. They only want to apply constitutional
government when it helps Republicans or hurts Democrats. Most of them really
could not care less about adherence to the Constitution. If they did, they
would have been up in arms for the last eight years as President George W.
Bush repeatedly ignored–and even trampled–the U.S. Constitution.

Where were these "constitutional" conservatives when George W. Bush was
assuming dictatorial-style powers and contravening Fourth Amendment
prohibitions against warrantless searches and seizures? Where were they when
Bush was ordering our emails, letters, and phone calls to be intercepted by
federal police agencies without court oversight? Where were they when Bush
was obliterating the Fifth and Eighth Amendments? Where were they when Bush
overturned Posse Comitatus by Executive Order? Where were they when Bush
dismantled the constitutional right of Habeas Corpus? Where were they when
Bush lied to the American people about the invasion of Iraq and took the
United States to war without a Declaration of War from Congress? Where were
conservatives when Bush turned nine U.S. military installations over to the
United Arab Emirates? Where were they when Bush ordered his Department of
Transportation to open up America’s airlines to foreign ownership? Where
were they when President Bush nullified (using "signing statements") over
1,100 statutes he did not like? Where were they as President Bush and his
fellow Republicans reauthorized one of the most egregiously unconstitutional
pieces of legislation in modern memory: the USA Patriot Act? Where were they
when Bush signed the blatantly unconstitutional McCain/Feingold Act? I could
go on and on.

Ladies and gentlemen, the Republican Party has been just as culpable in
violating constitutional government as the Democrat Party has–maybe more
so! If the Republican and Democrat parties had any allegiance to the U.S.
Constitution, neither John McCain nor Barack Obama would have been chosen as
their respective Presidential nominees.

While we are on the subject, if anyone cared about constitutional
government, Hillary Clinton (or any other U.S. Senator or House Member)
would obviously be determined as ineligible to be given any appointment in
the Obama administration under Article. I. Section. 6. of the U.S.
Constitution. Why? Because the Constitution prohibits House or Senate
members taking Presidential posts if the salary of the job they would take
was raised while they were in Congress.

However, several past Presidents have skirted this constitutional
prohibition (including Presidents Taft, Nixon, and Carter) by lowering the
salary of the job back to what it was so the nominee could accept the job
without receiving the pay increase that was approved while the appointee was
in Congress. In fact, this sleight of hand actually has a political name. It
is called "the Saxbe fix," after Nixon’s appointment of Senator William
Saxbe to be attorney general.

Do we have a "constitutional crisis"? You bet we do; but it is not limited
to Barack Obama or the Democrat Party. The real constitutional crisis is the
manner in which the American people have, for years, allowed civil
magistrates from both major parties to routinely violate their oaths to
preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. God
help us!

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by
credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

(c) Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.

To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/subscribe.php

To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/unsubscribe.php

Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact
and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web site address is included.

Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address
is P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Florida. When responding, please include your
name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all respondents will
be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.

Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com

Where Are Dobson And PCC Now? by Chuck Baldwin

This blind loyalty proves how easy it will be for the antichrist to
deceive the church itself. I will forward some stuff to you later that
says the pretrib-rapture is a deception that will make way for the
antichrist. I guess with them thinking they that a magical convenient
rapture will excuse their own apostasy opens the door to such deception.
If those who actually think they are christians have no problem with
Bush then the antichrist will have it easy in deceiving the masses. Most
neocons are in this prosperity gospel apostasy, which proves how most
deceptions go hand in hand. It is no wonder they can easily be fooled by
the likes of Copeland when they have no problem with Bush. Hypocrites
that love to use the Romans 13 bit about submission to authorities can’t
be found since Obama is president and not one of their own. By their own
standards they will be judged.

 

This column is archived at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2008/cbarchive_20081212.html

I ask my non-Christian friends to bear with me on this column. As one will
quickly see, this column is addressed to my fellow Christian conservatives.

Regular readers of this column know that one of my chief frustrations is the
way Christian conservatives (otherwise known as the "Religious Right") are
so easily deceived by Republican politicians. The all-time classic
illustration of this foible is the way the Religious Right was (and is) so
enamored with President George W. Bush. No matter what Bush did: no matter
how egregiously unconstitutional, no matter how utterly stupid, no matter
how blatantly evil his actions were, Christian conservatives (almost
universally) either robotically accepted and approved what he did, or
blindly looked the other way. It was maddening!

It was as if Christian conservatives lost all ability to reason; it was as
if they lost all discernment and discretion. Because George W. Bush claimed
to be a Christian, and because he was a Republican, he could do no wrong. To
this very day, the only group of people who yet approves of Bush’s
Presidency is the Religious Right. Everyone else on the planet realizes that
George W. Bush’s Presidency will go down in history has one of the all-time
worst.

George Bush took a prosperous and robust economy, and led America to the
verge of a second Great Depression. He has taken a (relatively) free and
independent republic to the brink of becoming a globalist Police State. He
has pushed the envelope of executive power; he has trampled individual
liberty; he has made a mockery of justice; and he has made America the
laughingstock of the world. In addition, Bush has misused and abused our
nation’s bravest and finest by his illegal and inexcusable invasion of Iraq.
No matter. The Religious Right still loves him. Why? Because he is a
"Christian" Republican.

Since 2000, James Dobson, Pensacola Christian College (PCC), and their peers
around the country have had an eight-year lovefest with George W. Bush.
Life-size cardboard posters of Bush have stood in their bookstores for eight
long, laborious years. Grade school children in their Christian schools have
been subjected to Bush propaganda for eight tedious, tiresome years. To
them, G.W. Bush ranks somewhere between Moses and the Almighty. And nothing
Bush said or did seemed to matter.

I said all of that to call attention to a recent interview Cynthia McFadden
had with President Bush on ABC’s Nightline this past Monday. During the
interview, McFadden asked Bush if the Bible was literally true.

Now, acceptance of the Bible’s literalness is one of conservative
Christianity’s most sacred doctrines. There is not a professor at PCC (or
any other conservative Christian college or university) that would keep his
or her job for a nano-second, if he or she even questioned the veracity of
the Scriptures. Right? You know it’s true! Most conservative Christians
would even go so far as to say that one cannot be a born-again Christian who
does not believe that the Bible is the infallible Word of God.

Well, what was George Bush’s response to McFadden’s question? He said, "You
know. Probably not. . . . No, I’m not a literalist." Notice, Bush twice
denied the veracity of the Scriptures.

Now, Bush has no reason to "fudge" his answers, right? He has no more
elections to face. No more, "He’s got to say this to get elected," which was
the flippant explanation given by the Religious Right to excuse Bush’s
numerous apostate positions during the past eight years.

So, George W. Bush clearly stated that he does not believe the Bible is
God’s Holy, inspired Word. Will Dobson and PCC still say that Bush is "one
of us"?

Then, as Bush attempted to give a Christian testimony, he told McFadden, "It
is hard for me to justify or prove the mystery of the Almighty in my life.
All I can just tell you is that I got back into religion and I quit drinking
shortly thereafter . . . ."

What kind of Christian testimony is this: "I got back into religion"? I
doubt that this kind of testimony would grant membership in the Campus
Church (which is not even a genuine New Testament church, you understand) at
PCC or in virtually any conservative Christian church.

I am confident, however, that Bush’s statements will do nothing to diminish
his god-like status with James Dobson and the rest of the Religious Right in
America. For eight long and bloody years, Christian conservatives have been
selling their convictions, doctrines, and even their consciences to George
W. Bush. I will even go so far as to say that, in many respects, millions of
Christians have turned President Bush into an idol. Many of them would
forsake their pastor, their friends, and even their own family before they
would forsake George W. Bush and the Republican Party.

Of course, none of this would have happened had Christians–and especially
Christian pastors–not lost touch with their American heritage. Had they
maintained a studied understanding of constitutional government, and of the
principles of Natural Law upon which it rests, they would not have become
dupes for Bush and his fellow neocons.

I doubt very much whether Thomas Jefferson was a born-again Christian (after
all, he, like Bush, expressed doubt regarding the Bible’s literalness), but
he fully understood–and embraced–the "Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God"
and was more than willing to inculcate those principles into our country’s
most sacred document: our Declaration of Independence. As such, Jefferson
will be forever regarded as one of America’s greatest Founding Fathers and
Presidents. Believe me, America was far better off with Thomas Jefferson
than with George W. Bush!

So, where are Dobson and PCC now? Will any of them utter a word of rebuke to
their "Christian" President for his apostasy? No, they won’t. (As a
comparison, contemporary pastors most certainly did rebuke Jefferson for his
public statements questioning Christ’s divinity, even though he was a
Founding Father and author of the Declaration of Independence.) Of course,
Barack Obama will not escape the public repudiation of Dobson and Company.
Why? He is a Democrat. You see, it’s not principle; it’s partisan politics
that matters, after all.

While we are asking questions, when will our fellow Christians and pastors
finally open their history books? When will they read the U.S. Constitution,
Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence? And when will they open
their minds and hearts–even a crack–to the possibility that they might
have been duped, and that there is more to being elected to the office of
President besides being a "Christian" Republican? Probably never.

In four more years, there will doubtless be another "Christian" Republican
for the Religious Right to fawn over. Where he or she stands on the
Constitution won’t matter; neither will it matter whether this newest
"Christian" Republican has any commitment to national sovereignty, the Bill
of Rights, or to fundamental freedoms. All that will matter is that he or
she professes to be a Christian, and has an "R" behind their name. And,
quite frankly, this last election proved that even a Christian profession is
not necessary. All that is required is the "R" behind the name.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by
credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

(c) Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.

To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/subscribe.php

To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/unsubscribe.php

Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact
and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web site address is included.

Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address
is P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Florida. When responding, please include your
name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all respondents will
be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.

Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com

Revival Deception

I think you will find this interesting. I found out through this that
the concept of revival came from postmillennialists who think they will
prepare the way for Christ’s kingdom. Jesus isn’t returning to a perfect
world but returning to make it perfect. He is returing for the sake of
judgment, not reward, as scriptures so say. Even back when I was
attending church I thought revival was an odd concept. I knew it was
like admitting that you were spiritually dead if you had to be revived.
I am sure that such thoughts had probably crossed your minds. All this
nonsense proves what a number the enemy is doing on all the minds of the
deceived. The rapture is the biggest deception that even those who
acknowledge most truth are still deceived. All this nonsense is manmade
tradition, which the bible tells us to forsake.

http://www.biblebb.com/files/REVIVALS.HTM

Virginia Takes Con Con Stage by Chuck Baldwin

This column is archived at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090113.html

As I noted in this column a few weeks ago, proponents of assembling a new
Constitutional Convention are a scant two states away from achieving that
monstrous reality. (Please review my column on this subject at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2008/cbarchive_20081216.html )

At that time, the state of Ohio was in the crosshairs. Fortunately, enough
people from that good state inundated their state representatives with
objections, and the matter was tabled (for how long, no one knows). Now it
appears that the Commonwealth of Virginia is going to be the next
battleground state.

In all likelihood, the Virginia legislature will be the next state
government to take up the Con Con issue. It is imperative, therefore, that
the citizens of Virginia begin contacting their various representatives,
demanding that they not authorize the call for a new Constitutional
Convention.

As I noted in my previous column on this subject, "If called, a modern
Constitutional Convention could declare the U.S. Constitution to be null and
void, and could completely rewrite the document. For example, former U.S.
Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger once declared, ‘There is no
effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention.
The Convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda.’"

Since 32 states have already approved the new Con Con, only 2 more states
are required for the enactment of this debacle.

For clarification, Virginia already passed a Con Con resolution, but in 2004
rescinded that resolution. Therefore, the debate this year will be whether
to reverse the bill to rescind. Simply put, the state legislature in
Virginia may again take up the matter of issuing their call for a
Constitutional Convention very soon, and citizens in that good state need to
rally against it now!

To give readers a simple tally, the following states have never voted to
ratify a new Constitutional Convention: California, Connecticut, Hawaii,
Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New
Jersey, New York, Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia,
and Wisconsin.

These states voted for a new Constitutional Convention but later rescinded
their resolutions: Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Idaho, Utah, North Dakota,
Arizona, Virginia, South Carolina, and Georgia.

If you do not see your state listed above, it means your state indeed voted
to call for a new Constitutional Convention and has not rescinded its vote.
I strongly suggest that citizens of these states demand that their
legislatures rescind their previous votes calling for a new Con Con. Start
now!

Of course, the problem is, it is not clear whether the court will allow
states to rescind their votes after having passed a Con Con resolution.
Article. V. of the U.S. Constitution is vague on the subject, and there is
no case law precedent on the matter. As far as I’m concerned, however, the
Tenth Amendment settles the issue, and states should be regarded as fully
qualified under the Constitution to determine their own fate in the matter.
Since there is nothing in the Constitution prohibiting rescission, states
are duly authorized to rescind their votes, as they please. But I don’t
expect the powers that be in Washington, D.C., to see it that way. Does
anyone remember that little skirmish known as the Civil War? This, in
essence, was the same view of the Confederate States: they voted to rescind
their decisions to join the Union. The tyrant, Abraham Lincoln, determined
that states have no such sovereignty (thus nullifying the Tenth Amendment,
among several others) and sent the entire federal army to force the southern
states back into the union. If history is any teacher, therefore, no state
will be allowed to rescind their votes, and we are only two states away from
a new Constitutional Convention being assembled.

There is no question in my mind that, should a new Constitutional Convention
be called, it would be the end of the United States of America as we know
it, and our current Constitution and Bill of Rights would be forever altered
beyond recognition. The globalists who currently control Washington, D.C.,
and Wall Street are, no doubt, salivating over the opportunity to officially
dismantle America’s independence and national sovereignty, and establish a
globalist North American Union–in much the same way that globalists created
the European Union. A new Constitutional Convention is exactly the tool they
need to cement their sinister scheme into law.

I urge readers to contact their state representatives regarding this
critical matter.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by
credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

(c) Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.

To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/subscribe.php

To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/unsubscribe.php

Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact
and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web site address is included.

Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address
is P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Florida. When responding, please include your
name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all respondents will
be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.

Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com

Praise For Lee And Jackson by Chuck Baldwin

This is interesting. It figures that the way everthing is going is all
backwards. It figures that Washington DC has the Lincoln memorial among
their pagan gods and occult symbols and those who they villify and hate
are the truly righteous ones. God will have no mercy on this wicked
country, or at least the wicked powers that be. The fact that we cannot
get any righteous leaders in this country proves what direction we are
headed. This country is known by its fruits. There is no hope for this
country when they do not desire righteous leaders when they had the
chance to make the difference. It is bad enough to have all the corrupt
politicians but worse having all the religious apostate mafia running
things too. All the signs are there for those who have eyes to see.

This column is archived at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090116.html

January is often referred to as "Generals Month" since no less than four
famous Confederate Generals claimed January as their birth month: James
Longstreet (Jan. 8, 1821), Robert E. Lee (Jan. 19, 1807), Thomas Jonathan
"Stonewall" Jackson (Jan. 21, 1824), and George Pickett (Jan. 28, 1825). Two
of these men, Lee and Jackson, are particularly noteworthy.

Without question, Robert E. Lee and "Stonewall" Jackson were two of the
greatest military leaders of all time. Even more, many military historians
regard the Lee and Jackson tandem as perhaps the greatest battlefield duo in
the history of warfare. If Jackson had survived the battle of
Chancellorsville, it is very possible that the South would have prevailed at
Gettysburg and perhaps would even have won the War Between the States.

In fact, it was Lord Roberts, commander-in-chief of the British armies in
the early twentieth century, who said, "In my opinion, Stonewall Jackson was
one of the greatest natural military geniuses the world ever saw. I will go
even further than that–as a campaigner in the field, he never had a
superior. In some respects, I doubt whether he ever had an equal."

While the strategies and circumstances of the War of Northern Aggression can
(and will) be debated by professionals and laymen alike, one fact is
undeniable: Robert E. Lee and Thomas J. Jackson were two of the finest
Christian gentlemen this country has ever produced. Both their character and
their conduct were beyond reproach.

Unlike his northern counterpart, Ulysses S. Grant, General Lee never
sanctioned or condoned slavery. Upon inheriting slaves from his deceased
father-in-law, Lee immediately freed them. And according to historians,
Jackson enjoyed a familial relationship with those few slaves that were in
his home. In addition, unlike Abraham Lincoln and U.S. Grant, there is no
record of either Lee or Jackson ever speaking disparagingly of the black
race.

As those who are familiar with history know, General Grant and his wife held
personal slaves before and during the War Between the States, and, contrary
to popular opinion, even Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation did not free
the slaves of the North. They were not freed until the Thirteenth Amendment
was passed after the conclusion of the war. Grant’s excuse for not freeing
his slaves was that "good help is so hard to come by these days."

Furthermore, it is well established that Jackson regularly conducted a
Sunday School class for black children. This was a ministry he took very
seriously. As a result, he was dearly loved and appreciated by the children
and their parents.

In addition, both Jackson and Lee emphatically supported the abolition of
slavery. In fact, Lee called slavery "a moral and political evil." He also
said "the best men in the South" opposed it and welcomed its demise. Jackson
said he wished to see "the shackles struck from every slave."

To think that Lee and Jackson (and the vast majority of Confederate
soldiers) would fight and die to preserve an institution they considered
evil and abhorrent–and that they were already working to dismantle–is the
height of absurdity. It is equally repugnant to impugn and denigrate the
memory of these remarkable Christian gentlemen.

In fact, after refusing Abraham Lincoln’s offer to command the Union Army in
1861, Robert E. Lee wrote to his sister on April 20 of that year to explain
his decision. In the letter he wrote, "With all my devotion to the Union and
the feeling of loyalty and duty of an American citizen, I have not been able
to make up my mind to raise my hand against my relatives, my children, my
home. I have therefore resigned my commission in the army and save in
defense of my native state, with the sincere hope that my poor services may
never be needed . . ."

Lee’s decision to resign his commission with the Union Army must have been
the most difficult decision of his life. Remember that Lee’s direct
ancestors had fought in America’s War For Independence. His father, "Light
Horse Harry" Henry Lee, was a Revolutionary War hero, Governor of Virginia,
and member of Congress. In addition, members of his family were signatories
to the Declaration of Independence.

Remember, too, that not only did Robert E. Lee graduate from West Point "at
the head of his class" (according to Benjamin Hallowell), he is yet today
one of only six cadets to graduate from that prestigious academy without a
single demerit.

However, Lee knew that Lincoln’s decision to invade the South in order to
prevent its secession was both immoral and unconstitutional. As a man of
honor and integrity, the only thing Lee could do was that which his father
had done: fight for freedom and independence. And that is exactly what he
did.

Instead of allowing a politically correct culture to sully the memory of
Robert E. Lee and Thomas J. Jackson, all Americans should hold them in a
place of highest honor and respect. Anything less is a disservice to history
and a disgrace to the principles of truth and integrity.

Accordingly, it was more than appropriate that the late President Gerald
Ford, on August 5, 1975, signed Senate Joint Resolution 23, "restoring
posthumously the long overdue, full rights of citizenship to General Robert
E. Lee." According to President Ford, "This legislation corrects a 110-year
oversight of American history." He further said, "General Lee’s character
has been an example to succeeding generations . . ."

The significance of the lives of Generals Lee and Jackson cannot be
overvalued. While the character and influence of most of us will barely be
remembered two hundred days after our departure, the sterling character of
these men has endured for two hundred years. What a shame that so many of
America’s youth are being robbed of knowing and studying the virtue and
integrity of the great General Robert E. Lee and General Thomas J.
"Stonewall" Jackson.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by
credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

(c) Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.

To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/subscribe.php

To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/unsubscribe.php

Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact
and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web site address is included.

Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address
is P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Florida. When responding, please include your
name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all respondents will
be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.

Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com

A Very Real New World Order by Chuck Baldwin

Chuck is really right on about this. He even mentions here that there is
no difference between Rush or Savage. Of course there will be neocon
hypocrites who will only blame democrats for being globalists. Just like
when I recently made a comment to my mom about the absurdity of the
global warming concept she said it was all Al Gore. How stupid can you
get? Anyone that believes that also believes he invented the internet.
No one man is responsible for the global warming lie like no one man is
responsible for globalism. It is all a collective effort from the wicked
elitists that run everything. The global warming lie is all a part of
the rise of globalism. They have managed to convince all of the fools
against their own senses. As I am writing this our roads are being iced
over in an icestorm. Anyone that believes the global warming nonsense is
dumber than a pile of bricks, to put it mildly. Just remember that Newt
Gingrich and Pat Robertson has joined Al Gore in the global warming lie
propaganda to all you hypocrites that want to just blame Al Gore. This
proves how full of it you all are. One of my christian industrial bands
has soundbites all through some of their songs of Bush Sr. talking about
New World Order. There was even a secular industrial band that used that
very title. I tell you, a lot of christian bands, and even some secular
bands, are like modern day prophets. They see all this crap for exactly
what it is. People have been warned for a long time now, whether by
music or by blog or other means, so there will be no excuse. Those who
cannot see the truth for what it is now will not be able to when the
Beast comes on the scene and demand his mark on all. If most all are so
deceived now when the Beast hasn’t come to full power then they will not
be able to fight his deception when he does rise to full power. Those
who are still sold on all the lies prove that they have no love for the
truth or any love at all. For those who fit that description may as well
go ahead and kiss your soul goodbye because you have no sanity or
conscience left to be convicted of anything. In other words, not able to
repent. Those who still look towards this world for answers prove their
idolatry and contempt for God. They do not trust Him nor do they belong
to Him. They are of their father the devil. But to all the outcasts and
all that are fed up with this world, you have hope in only Christ alone
and no other source. Keep your eyes on him and do not conform to this
wicked world.

This column is archived at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090127.html

It is hard to believe, but a majority of Americans (including Christians and
conservatives) seem oblivious to the fact that there is a very real, very
legitimate New World Order (NWO) unfolding. In the face of overwhelming
evidence, most Americans not only seem totally unaware of this reality, they
seem unwilling to even remotely entertain the notion.

On one hand, it is understandable that so many Americans would be ignorant
of the emerging New World Order. After all, the mainstream media refuses to
report, or even acknowledge, the NWO. Even "conservative" commentators and
talk show hosts such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, or Joe
Scarborough refuse to discuss it. And when listeners call these respective
programs, these "conservative" hosts usually resort to insulting the caller
as being some kind of "conspiracy kook." One host even railed that if anyone
questions the government line on 9/11, we should "lock them up and throw
away the key." So much for freedom of speech!

This is an area–perhaps the central area–where liberals and conservatives
agree: they both show no patience or tolerance for anyone who believes that
global government (in any form) is evolving. One has to wonder how otherwise
intelligent and thoughtful people can be so brain dead when it comes to this
issue. It makes one wonder who is really pulling their strings, doesn’t it?

The list of notable personalities who have openly referenced or called for
some kind of global government or New World Order is extremely lengthy. Are
all these people "kooks" or "conspiracy nuts"? Why would world
leaders–including presidents, secretaries of state, and high government
officials; including the media, financial, and political elite–constantly
refer to something that doesn’t exist? Why would they write about, talk
about, or openly promote a New World Order, if there is no such thing?

Many of us recall President George Herbert Walker Bush talking much about an
emerging New World Order. For example, in 1989, Bush told the students of
Texas A&M University, "Perhaps the world order of the future will truly be a
family of nations."

Later, Bush, Sr. said, "We have before us the opportunity to forge for
ourselves and for future generations a new world order . . .. When we are
successful, and we will be, we have a real chance at this new world order,
an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to
fulfill the promise and vision of the U.N.’s founders."

Bush, Sr. also said, "What is at stake is more than one small country, it is
a big idea–a new world order."

Bush, Sr. further said, "The world can therefore seize the opportunity to
fulfill the long-held promise of a new world order . . ."

What was President G.H.W. Bush talking about, if there is no such thing as
an emerging New World Order? Was he talking out of his mind? Was he
hallucinating?

England’s Prime Minister, Tony Blair, said, "We are all internationalists
now, whether we like it or not." He continued saying, "On the eve of a new
Millennium we are now in a new world. We need new rules for international
co-operation and new ways of organizing our international institutions." He
also said, "Today the impulse towards interdependence is immeasurably
greater. We are witnessing the beginnings of a new doctrine of international
community."

In 1999, Tony Blair said, "Globalization has transformed our economies and
our working practices. But globalism is not just economic. It is also a
political and security phenomenon."

What is Tony Blair talking about, if there is no emerging New World Order?
What does he mean by "a new doctrine of international community"? What does
he mean by "new world"? How can one have globalism, which includes "a
political and security phenomenon," without creating a New World Order? Is
Tony Blair hallucinating?

Likewise, former President George W. Bush penned his signature to the
Declaration of Quebec back on April 22, 2001, in which he gave a "commitment
to hemispheric integration and national and collective responsibility for
improving the economic well-being and security of our people."

By "our people," Bush meant the people of the Western Hemisphere, not the
people of the United States. Phyllis Schlafly rightly reminded us that G.W.
Bush "pledged that the United States will ‘build a hemispheric family on the
basis of a more just and democratic international order.’"

Remember, too, that it was G.W. Bush who, back in 2005, committed the United
States to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), which is nothing
more than a precursor to the North American Community or Union, as outlined
in CFR member Robert Pastor’s manual, "Toward a North American Community."

If there is no such thing as an emerging New World Order, what was G.W. Bush
talking about when he referred to "a hemispheric family" and an
"international order"?

The public statements of notable world leaders regarding an emerging New
World Order are copious. Consider the statements of former CBS newsman,
Walter Cronkite.

In his book, "A Reporter’s Life," Walter Cronkite said, "A system of world
order–preferably a system of world government–is mandatory. The proud
nations someday will see the light and, for the common good and their own
survival, yield up their precious sovereignty . . ." Cronkite told BBC
newsman Tim Sebastian, "I think we are realizing that we are going to have
to have an international rule of law." He added, "We need not only an
executive to make international law, but we need the military forces to
enforce that law." Cronkite also said, "American people are going to begin
to realize that perhaps they are going to have to yield some sovereignty to
an international body to enforce world law."

If there is no emerging New World Order, what is Walter Cronkite talking
about? Can there be any doubt that Cronkite is talking about global
government? Absolutely not!

Now, when Bush, Sr. talks about fulfilling "the promise and vision of the
U.N.’s founders," he was talking about the same thing former UN
Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali was talking about when he said, "The
time for absolute and exclusive sovereignty . . . has passed."

The United Nations has been on the forefront of promoting the New World
Order agenda since its very inception. In 1995, the UN released a manual
entitled, "Our Global Neighborhood." It states, "Population, consumption,
technology, development, and the environment are linked in complex
relationships that bear closely on human welfare in the global neighborhood.
Their effective and equitable management calls for a systematic, long-term,
global approach guided by the principle of sustainable development, which
has been the central lesson from the mounting ecological dangers of recent
times. Its universal application is a priority among the tasks of global
governance."

If there is no emerging New World Order, what is "global governance" all
about?

"Who are the movers and shakers promoting global government?" you ask.
Obviously, it is the international bankers who are the heavyweights behind
the push for global government. Remember, one cannot create a "global
economy" without a global government to manage, oversee, and control it.

In a letter written to Colonel E. Mandell House, President Franklin D.
Roosevelt said, "The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a
financial element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S.
since the days of Andrew Jackson."

"Old Hickory" did his best to rid the United States from the death grip that
the international bankers were beginning to exert on this country. He may
have been the last President to actually oppose the bankers. In discussing
the Bank Renewal bill with a delegation of bankers in 1832, Jackson said,
"Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time, and I am convinced
that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of
the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you
lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits
from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families.
That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on,
you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a
den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the eternal God,
I will rout you out."

Unfortunately, the international bankers proved themselves to be too
formidable for President Jackson. And in 1913, with the collaboration of
President Woodrow Wilson, the bankers were given charge over America’s
financial system by the creation of the Federal Reserve.

Ever since the CFR and Trilateral Commission were created, they have filled
the key leadership positions of government, big media, and of course, the
Federal Reserve.

In his book, "With No Apologies," former Republican Presidential nominee
Barry Goldwater wrote, "The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the
vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking
interests by seizing control of the political government of the United
States. The Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort
to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power– political,
monetary, intellectual and ecclesiastical. What the Trilateral Commission
intends is to create a worldwide economic power superior to the political
governments of the nation-states involved. As managers and creators of the
system, they will rule the future." Was Goldwater a prophet or what?

And again, the goals of the global elite have been publicly stated. Back in
1991, the founder of the CFR, David Rockefeller praised the major media for
their complicity in helping to facilitate the globalist agenda by saying,
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine
and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and
respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. . . . It
would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we
had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the
world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world
government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world
bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in
past centuries."

How could Rockefeller be any plainer? He acknowledged the willful assistance
of the major media in helping to keep the elitists’ agenda of global
government from the American people. To this day, the major media has not
deviated from that collaboration. And this includes the aforementioned
"conservative" talking heads. They know if they want to keep their jobs,
they dare not reveal the New World Order. The NWO, more than anything else,
is the "Third Rail" to the national media.

Is it any wonder that President Barack Obama has stacked his government with
numerous members of the CFR? Among these are Robert Gates, Janet Napolitano,
Eric Shinseki, Timothy Geithner, and Tom Daschle. Other CFR members include
CFR President Richard Haass, CFR Director Richard Holbrooke, and founding
member of the Trilateral Commission and CFR member Paul Volcker. Obama even
asked a CFR member, Rick Warren, to deliver the inaugural prayer.

Still not convinced? Just a few days ago, when asked by a reporter what he
thought the most important thing was that Barack Obama could accomplish,
former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said, "I think his task will be
develop an overall strategy for America in this period when, really, a New
World Order can be created. It’s a great opportunity; it isn’t just a
crisis."

This is the same Henry Kissinger, you will recall, who said back in 1991,
"Today, America would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to
restore order. Tomorrow, they will be grateful! This is especially true if
they were told that there were [sic] an outside threat from beyond, whether
real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all
peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one
thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario,
individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their
well-being granted to them by the World Government."

Even Gideon Rachman, the chief foreign affairs commentator for the Financial
Times, wrote an editorial expressing his support for world government. In
his column he said, "I have never believed that there is a secret United
Nations plot to take over the US. . . . But, for the first time in my life,
I think the formation of some sort of world government is plausible.

"A ‘world government’ would involve much more than co-operation between
nations. It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a
body of laws. The European Union has already set up a continental government
for 27 countries, which could be a model. The EU has a supreme court, a
currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability
to deploy military force.

"So could the European model go global? There are three reasons for thinking
that it might."

Rachman then goes on to explain the reasons why he believes world government
is plausible.

Do you now see why it does not matter to a tinker’s dam whether it is a
Republican or Democrat who resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue? For the most
part, both major parties in Washington, D.C., have been under the dominating
influence of the international bankers who control the Federal Reserve, the
CFR, and the Trilateral Commission. And this is also why it does not matter
whether one calls himself conservative or liberal. For the most part, both
conservatives and liberals in Washington, D.C., are facilitating the
emerging New World Order. It is time we wake up to this reality.

Presidents Bush, Sr., Bill Clinton, and Bush, Jr. have thoroughly set the
table for the implementation of the NWO, as surely as the sun rises in the
east. All Obama has to do is put the food on the table–and you can count on
this: Barack Obama will serve up a New World Order feast like you cannot
believe!

That a New World Order is emerging is not in question. The only question is,
What will freedom-loving Americans do about it? Of course, the first thing
they have to do is admit that an emerging New World Order exists! Until
conservatives, Christians, pastors, constitutionalists, and others who care
about a sovereign, independent United States acknowledge the reality of an
emerging New World Order, they will be incapable of opposing it. And right
now, that is exactly what they are not doing.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by
credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

(c) Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.

To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/subscribe.php

To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/unsubscribe.php

Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact
and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web site address is included.

Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address
is P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Florida. When responding, please include your
name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all respondents will
be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.

Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com