Jesus Christ was Wrong: Turning the other cheek is a dumb idea

Jesus Christ was a socialist—they were of course called something else back in the day as religion and politics were less distinctive from each other. But a quick study through history will show that while Jesus was traveling in the wilderness he obviously came across Buddhism and adapted it for his own homeland in a way that conflicted with the powerful orthodox of the Jews who worked closely with the Roman Empire to be regional governors. Jesus used passivity to inspire the poor to rebel against their overlords and the Jews killed him for the threat to their society. Several centuries later the Roman Empire had a desire to turn to the political left so they imposed Christianity onto the regions they controlled and shortly thereafter the their entire society collapsed. The Dark Ages followed which had a Medieval Church that used the blunt hammer of Jesus Christ’s “sacrifice” as a mechanism to keep the living from trying to overtake their church leaders who ruled the lands with a Bible only they could read, as ignorance was the most powerful weapon in those days. People were too stupid and superstitious to think of individual rights until the Age of Reason rescued Europe from its long dark past. It was during the Renaissance that the ideas for America were born culminating in a mad dash for a country overrun with oriental savages from China with the same kind of leftist occult driven superstition as Jesus ran into during his days in the wilderness. The American frontiersman confronted those left leaning heathens on the western frontier and won. But along the way the Christian values they brought with them from Europe became the basic tenants of conservatism which worked well among their own kind. But the many oriental ideas in the teachings of Jesus paralyzed conservatives as they tried to deal with enemies to their value system—after all their leader had been crucified due to his threat to the Roman/Jewish relationship in Jerusalem.

That brief history flashed through my mind as I watched an exasperated Brit Hume on Fox News attempt to put his conservative finger on the problems of our day, as leftists were openly calling for violence against any Trump supporter in the streets of America. Brit’s comments showed us why we had turned away from Jeb Bush, John Kasich, John McCain and Mitch McConnell and started flying our flags behind Trump. It was a mystery to Brit how we could regain a civilized society under the value systems he embodied as a conservative. The Christian conservative is perfectly fine as a value system in the open spaces between the big cities of America. Just visit a Bob Evens at around 8:30 AM anywhere, and you’ll see America at its best. People are good to each other as old men sit at the counter and read the newspaper. Families eat in peace and treat each other respectfully, it’s an idea that has a lot of appeal—until a political leftist tries to steal that value through some kind of protest. At that point the same elements that ended the Roman Empire, destroyed the Churches of Europe and essentially led to every war that mankind had fought with each other throughout history is exposed and the conservatives have no recourse to deal with the intrusion because of their paralysis in the teachings of Jesus Christ. They turn the other cheek to their enemies only to find that cheek slapped too, and not just once, but twice, three times, and more, until the skin is literally falling off their face. The typical leftist is a heathen not that much unlike the Indians that Laura Ingalls Wilder’s mother described in the famous novels written by that author constituting the Little House on the Prairie series.

The big story of the day when Brit Hume was musing about the lack of civility in our modern political world was that Laura Ingalls Wilder was having her name removed from a prestigious literary award due to her comments on Indians, which in her day were always a threat to kill families on the frontier. Modern leftists have attempted to reinvent the past by defining the Indians as the original inhabitants of North America and that the white European settlers that brought with them new philosophies of self-management from the Age of Reason were confronting Chinese settlers who had radically different ideas on the nature of existence, and the two sides fought it out. The new Americans won over the oriental colonists from China. Many of these Chinese colonists came to North America during the Ming Dynasty when their giant ships were trading with countries all over the world, well before the Europeans were even thinking of a journey to North America. The New World at that time was already well-known in the East because they had been traveling there for centuries. And before the Chinese it was the Vikings and Phoenicians. Ancient descendents from all those nationalities were already in North America and had many empires rise and fall well before Laura Ingalls Wilder’s mother said that “the only good Indian was a dead Indian.” Many of the Indian nations were warring factions that used violence as a test of manhood—they were not docile nature lovers. They were the original leftists in the New World and the modern left has tied themselves to their ancient ancestors and have been trying for quite a long time to use that guilt as leverage over the newly founded country of America.

That is where conservatives find themselves paralyzed because the leader of most right-thinking people is ultimately Jesus Christ who was very ideologically aligned with the typical socialist and Indian warrior on the frontier of America. Maxine Watters isn’t the first radical to call for action through collective assimilation. So when the political left plays Jesus against conservatives by taking advantage of a turned cheek or a desire for peace, the political leftists attack and has been pushing conservatives further and further back for as long as humans have interacted with each other and we’re at a point where the running has to stop.

I would say to Brit Hume and to the estate of Laura Ingalls Wilder, and to Trump supporters in general that peace is not possible with the leftists. Just as treaties were not possible with the Indians because they were of a different mindset that was not conducive to the American idea. Or the Renaissance artist who was drawing naked bodies on buildings after hundreds of years of stagnant thinking coming out of the Dark Ages—the two sides of thinking are not compatible. Values cannot stand up to constant attack if the person with values always surrenders to the aggressions of the heathens. The Chinese were heathens during the Ming Dynasty because they were a collective based society seeking to impose themselves on the entire world. The Indians were heathens because they were another mixed batch of collective based cultures seeking to put superstition over the minds of reason, no different from the cults of churches in the Dark Ages were inclined to follow some priest who could magically read words on a page and decipher meaning from them. Or the Romans and Jews who were collectively based cultures who wanted to execute an individual preaching a collective eastern based religion that didn’t even need a church to guide them—a hippie from the wilderness known as Jesus who taught us all to turn the other cheek even as he was crucified on a cross with his blood dripping out upon the ground. The Roman Empire in its last days turned left and told us all that we should follow the teachings of the oriental Christ and sacrifice ourselves to the living so that we could live eternally in the afterlife. But in so doing they implied that we sanction evil in the here and now putting peace on earth above the morality of the good—and that is something that we as conservatives need to stop doing. We cannot surrender the world to evil with an eye to the everlasting. Because as many wise people have said over many centuries, what we do in life, does reflect us in death, and yielding to evil in life or death is not permissible. Jesus was wrong.

It’s one thing to be good to your fellow neighbors and to preach peace to people who have shared values at church, in our neighborhoods, and even at Bob Evens on a morning breakfast at 8:30 AM. But when the leftist as they are known to do, whether it’s the barbarian hordes that sacked Rome to officially end the Empire, or the Indians who were Chinese conquerors from the Ming Dynasty, and probably earlier, the Vikings or the latest clan of Maxine Waters supporters, they intend always to attack those of us who have individual values so war is always their first option. And when faced with such an option it is not enough to sacrifice ourselves to the crosses they wish to nail us to, which has been the path of most mainstream conservatives for many years—the world of Brit Hume. When faced with such a menace we must fight, and that goes beyond what our religions instruct us to do—unless you seek the deeper meaning of the plight of the Christian Soldiers, marching as to war. Not all of Christianity is a turn the other cheek religion. But for the parts that are, do not listen to those instructions, because they were created from the very beginning by liberals of countless names throughout history, and their intention was always to leave conservatives with no other option but to be conquered. And its time to change that history for a change toward the rights and freedoms of the individual.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Why There is Trouble in the Middle East: The whole issue explained–“one side wants the other side dead”

Many find the situation in the Middle East confusing, and have little ideal why there is any trouble there. The political left wishes to deny there is anything wrong at all, and sides with the Palestinian/Muslim factions, the political right with Israel along the typical Christian conservatives. Each side points to the other and says there is no evidence to support their theories of aggression and this is largely due to the fact that tyrants, thieves and cut throats in our modern age have destroyed evidence so that proper arguments against them can never be rooted. Common sense explanations about the Middle East seldom occur like they have in the video below—because few people are left in the world who can make value judgments based on observation—due to the evidence that is so cryptic as to who is the villains really are.

 

The video featured nationally syndicated radio talk show host Dennis Prager, who is known for his strong conservative views, the pro-Israel YouTube video aims to explain the Middle East conflict in under six minutes.

“The Middle East conflict is framed as one of the most complex problems in the world,” the video claims. “But, in reality, it’s very simple.”

“It may be the hardest to solve, but it is the easiest to explain,” Prager says. “In a nutshell, it’s this: one side wants the other side dead.”

According to Prager, the “simple” problem is difficult to solve because most Palestinians and Arabs “do not recognize the right of the Jewish state of Israel to exist.”

To support his thesis, Prager briefly overviews several decades of history, contending Israel has always sought peace with its neighbors. The conservative talk show host concludes the video leaving viewers with one final thought.

“If tomorrow, Israel laid down its arms and announced, ‘We will fight no more,’ what would happen? And if the Arab countries around Israel laid down their arms and announced, ‘We will fight no more,’ what would happen?” Prager asks. “In the first case, there would be an immediate destruction of the state of Israel and mass murder of its Jewish population. In the second case, there would be peace the next day.”

The video, officially titled “The Middle East Problem,” has amassed more than 3 million views since it was uploaded in late April. According to YouTube statistics, most of the views have poured in over the past couple weeks.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08/04/some-are-calling-this-the-most-important-video-about-israel-ever-made-and-its-taking-the-internet-by-storm/

While that may seem simplistic, it is in fact the case, there is nothing that Palestinians will ever do to accept the 1947 creation of a Jewish state—erected out of the violence of World War II to attempt to bring peace to the Biblically driven people. Likely some of that decision by the members of the United Nations at the time believed that it was their earthly obligation to restore the nation of Israel to God’s chosen people.

Revelation 12:12-17 speaks of how the devil will make war against Israel, trying to destroy her (Satan knows his time is short– Revelation 20:1-3, 10). It also reveals that God will protect Israel in the wilderness. Revelation 12:14 says Israel will be protected from the devil for “a time, times, and half a time (“a time” = 1 year; “times” = 2 years; “half a time” = one-half year; in other words, 3 1/2 years). So if the root cause of the establishment of the Jewish state were analyzed, it is likely that religious superstition was at the heart of it more than compassion for a tortured people.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/Revelation-chapter-12.html#ixzz39XFilWoN

On 2 April 1947, the United Kingdom delegation addressed a letter to the Acting Secretary-General of the United Nations requesting that the question of Palestine be placed on the agenda of the next regular session of the General Assembly.[88] On 15 May the General Assembly resolved (Resolution 106) that a committee, United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP), be created “to prepare for consideration at the next regular session of the Assembly a report on the question of Palestine”.[89] In July 1947 the UNSCOP visited Palestine and met with Jewish and Zionist delegations. The Arab Higher Committee boycotted the meetings. At this time, there was further controversy when the British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin ordered an illegal immigrant ship, the Exodus 1947, to be sent back to Europe. The migrants on the ship were forcibly removed by British troops at Hamburg after a long period in prison ships.

The principal non-Zionist Orthodox Jewish (or Haredi) party, Agudat Israel, recommended to UNSCOP that a Jewish state be set up after reaching a religious status quo agreement with Ben-Gurion regarding the future Jewish state. The agreement would grant exemption to a quota of yeshiva (religious seminary) students and to all orthodox women from military service, would make the Sabbath the national weekend, promised Kosher food in government institutions and would allow them to maintain a separate education system.[90]

In the Report of the Committee dated September 3, 1947 to the UN General Assembly,[91] the majority of the Committee in Chapter VI proposed a plan to replace the British Mandate with “an independent Arab State, an independent Jewish State, and the City of Jerusalem” …, the last to be under “an International Trusteeship System”.[92] On November 29, 1947, in Resolution 181 (II), the General Assembly recommended to the United Kingdom, as the mandatory Power for Palestine, and to all other Members of the United Nations, the adoption and implementation, with regard to the future government of Palestine, of the Plan of Partition with Economic Union set out in the resolution.[93] The Plan was to replace the British Mandate with “Independent Arab and Jewish States” and a “Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem administered by the United Nations”. The Plan of Partition in Part 1 A. Clause 2 provided that Britain “should use its best endeavors to ensure than an area situated in the territory of the Jewish State, including a seaport and hinterland adequate to provide facilities for a substantial immigration, shall be evacuated at the earliest possible date and in any event not later than 1 February 1948”. Clause 3. provided that “Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem … shall come into existence in Palestine two months after the evacuation of the armed forces of the mandatory Power has been completed but in any case not later than 1 October 1948.”

Neither Britain nor the UN Security Council took any action to implement the resolution and Britain continued detaining Jews attempting to enter Palestine. Concerned that partition would severely damage Anglo-Arab relations, Britain denied UN representatives access to Palestine during the period between the adoption of Resolution 181 (II) and the termination of the British Mandate.[94] The British withdrawal was finally completed in May 1948. However, Britain continued to hold Jews of “fighting age” and their families on Cyprus until March 1949.[95]

In the immediate aftermath of the General Assembly’s vote on the Partition plan, the explosions of joy among the Jewish community were counterbalanced by the expression of discontent among the Arab community. Soon after, violence broke out and became more and more prevalent. Murders, reprisals, and counter-reprisals came fast on each other’s heels, resulting in dozens of victims killed on both sides in the process. The impasse persisted as no force intervened to put a stop to the escalating cycles of violence.[96][97][98][99] By the end of March, there was a total of 2,000 dead and 4,000 wounded.[100] These figures correspond to an average of more than 100 deaths and 200 casualties per week in a population of 2,000,000.

Shielded Jewish convoy during the blockade of Tel Aviv–Jerusalem road

From January onwards, operations became increasingly militarized, with the intervention of a number of Arab Liberation Army regiments inside Palestine, each active in a variety of distinct sectors around the different coastal towns. They consolidated their presence in Galilee and Samaria.[101] Abd al-Qadir al-Husayni came from Egypt with several hundred men of the Army of the Holy War. Having recruited a few thousand volunteers, he organized the blockade of the 100,000 Jewish residents of Jerusalem.[102] To counter this, the Yishuv authorities tried to supply the city with convoys of up to 100 armored vehicles, but the operation became more and more impractical as the number of casualties in the relief convoys surged. By March, Al-Hussayni’s tactic had paid off. Almost all of Haganah‘s armored vehicles had been destroyed, the blockade was in full operation, and hundreds of Haganah members who had tried to bring supplies into the city were killed.[103]

While the Jewish population had received strict orders requiring them to hold their ground everywhere at all costs,[104] the Arab population was more affected by the general conditions of insecurity to which the country was exposed. Up to 100,000 Arabs, from the urban upper and middle classes in Haifa, Jaffa and Jerusalem, or Jewish-dominated areas, evacuated abroad or to Arab centers eastwards.[105] This situation caused the US to withdraw their support for the Partition plan, thus encouraging the Arab League to believe that the Palestinian Arabs, reinforced by the Arab Liberation Army, could put an end to the plan for partition. The British, on the other hand, decided on February 7, 1948, to support the annexation of the Arab part of Palestine by Transjordan.[106]

Supply convoy on its way to besieged Jerusalem, April 1948 Although a certain level of doubt took hold among Yishuv supporters, their apparent defeats were due more to their wait-and-see policy than to weakness. David Ben-Gurion reorganized Haganah and made conscription obligatory. Every Jewish man and woman in the country had to receive military training. Thanks to funds raised by Golda Meir from sympathizers in the United States, and Stalin’s decision to support the Zionist cause, the Jewish representatives of Palestine were able to sign very important armament contracts in the East. Other Haganah agents recuperated stockpiles from the Second World War, which helped improve the army’s equipment and logistics. Operation Balak allowed arms and other equipment to be transported for the first time by the end of March.

Ben-Gurion invested Yigael Yadin with the responsibility to come up with a plan in preparation for the announced intervention of the Arab states. The result of his analysis was Plan Dalet, which was put in place from the start of April onwards. The adoption of Plan Dalet marked the second stage of the war, in which Haganah passed from the defensive to the offensive. Within the framework of the establishment of Jewish territorial continuity foreseen by Plan Dalet, the forces of Haganah, Palmach and Irgun intended to conquer mixed zones. Palestinian Arab society was shaken. Tiberias, Haifa, Safed, Beisan, Jaffa and Acre fell, resulting in the flight of more than 250,000 Palestinian Arabs.[107]

The British had, at that time, essentially withdrawn their troops. The situation pushed the leaders of the neighboring Arab states to intervene, but their preparation was not finalized, and they could not assemble sufficient forces to turn the tide of the war. Most Palestinian Arab hopes lay with the Arab Legion of Transjordan’s monarch, King Abdullah I, but he had no intention of creating a Palestinian Arab-run state since he hoped to annex as much of the territory of the British Mandate for Palestine as he could. He was playing a double game and was just as much in contact with the Jewish authorities as with the Arab League.

On May 14, 1948, on the day in which the British Mandate over Palestine expired, the Jewish People’s Council gathered at the Tel Aviv Museum and approved a proclamation declaring the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz Israel, to be known as the State of Israel.[108] The 1948 Palestine war entered its second phase with the intervention of the Arab state armies and the beginning of the 1948 Arab–Israeli War.

The Arab League members Egypt, Transjordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq refused to accept the UN partition plan and proclaimed the right of self-determination for the Arabs across the whole of Palestine. The Arab states marched their forces into what had, until the previous day, been the British Mandate for Palestine. The new state of Israel had an organized and efficient army, the Haganah, under the command of Israel Galili. The Arab forces were of varying quality, but Arab states had heavy military equipment at their disposal. The invading Arab armies were initially on the offensive but the Israelis soon recovered from the initial shock of being invaded on all sides. On May 29, 1948, the British initiated United Nations Security Council Resolution 50 and declared an arms embargo on the region. Czechoslovakia violated the resolution supplying the Jewish state with critical military hardware to match the (mainly British) heavy equipment and planes already owned by the invading Arab states. On June 11, a month-long UN truce was put into effect.

Following the announcement of independence, the Haganah became the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). The Palmach, Etzel and Lehi were required to cease independent operations and join the IDF. During the ceasefire, Etzel attempted to bring in a private arms shipment aboard a ship called “Altalena“. When they refused to hand the arms to the government, Ben-Gurion ordered that the ship be sunk. Several Etzel members were killed in the fighting. Large numbers of Jewish immigrants, many of them World War II veterans and Holocaust survivors, now began arriving in the new state of Israel, and many joined the IDF.[110]

After an initial loss of territory by the Jewish state and occupation of Arab Palestine by the Arab armies, from July the tide gradually turned in the Israelis favor and they pushed the Arab armies out and conquered some of the territory which had been included in the proposed Arab state. At the end of November, tenuous local cease fires were arranged between the Israelis, Syrians and Lebanese. On December 1, King Abdullah announced the union of Transjordan with Arab Palestine west of the Jordan, the new state name being the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. He adopted the title “King of Arab Palestine”; only Britain recognized the annexation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Israel

Many, including Christians have an untrustworthy eye toward Jews for a lot of reasons, the first of which was the assassination of their savor Jesus Christ by the Pharisees. The Pharisees didn’t want Jesus cutting in on their religious action in Jerusalem so they conspired to kill him. This has left a strange discombobulating effect between the Biblical New Testament and the Old—the two books are essentially different books of religion with the land of the Jews serving as the essential bridge. In the Old Testament, God is all about revenge, fire and brimstone, and conquest over oppressors, as the New Testament is about churchless religion which Jesus preached from hill tops—a religion of peace, pacifism, and love of life—except when Jesus got into that argument with the fig tree because it didn’t have any fruit.

What the Jews and Muslims have in common is that they both revere the same essential Biblical text—the Old Testament as their sacred document of religion.   The problem is that the Islamic states call their text the Koran, but the characters are essentially the same—only the viewpoint are changed. So there is no rectifying peace even between Christians and Jews where real trust takes place—let along two religions fighting over a version of the same characters from the same book, one called the Old Testament, the other called the Koran. Of course when faced with all this “evidence” and opinion—ideologues who wish to protect their point of view from reality—and facts—will declare that what has been presented here is too simplistic and that nobody understands their problems. But in essence, the Jews just want to live life and visit the temple of their King David. Muslims want to kill Jews. It really is that simple—and has been that way for many thousands of years—because both religions share the same Biblical stories, but one is a peaceful religion and the other is one of violence and conquest. So long as Jews live, Muslims will seek to destroy them and that is the essence of the trouble in the Middle East.

As a lesson to the United Nations, they never accomplished the micromanagement of the State of Israel correctly, so they should expect the same trouble everywhere they wish to tamper, whether it is the United States in pitting progressives from the coasts against the conservatives of the Heartland, or communists against capitalists, or dogs against cats. The United Nations has no ability to bring people together without antagonizing tensions. The only way for life to flourish and people to solve any problems is to change their foundation thoughts—and that cannot be done with silly laws or lines on a map. People have to change the way they think—and in that absence violence will dominate always.

Rich Hoffman www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com