God in 60 days

A cheer-up for the lost and weary atheist traveller, to help them decide whether their antipathy towards God is really showing the kind of fruit required for a life of anti-spiritual, liberal, slap-the-face-of-a-believer ease…

142 thoughts on “God in 60 days

  1. Just for a bit of fun yeah? Wasn’t something you would show a non believer and expect to win them over? Not real good to start by insulting your prospect! Great concept though.

  2. “Wasn’t something you would show a non believer and expect to win them over?”

    Nah Klavan preaches to an extreme right wing conservative audience and is their pinup boy.

    Until he stuffs up such as gets divorced or porn is found on his computer.

    Then he’ll see how wonderful they really are.

    Of course you can see from Signposts, belief in God is irrelevant. You have to have the right belief in God and all associated doctrines.

  3. I notice you deal in extremes yourself, Bones. There’s no middle ground for you. It’s all really, really really bad, or really, really, really good, depending on your perspective.

    The point of satire is to make people think about their position.

    Your sense of humour needs tweaking!

  4. Yeah I probably thought it was funny five years ago.

    Used that argument myself. Atheists would point out that the totalitarian regimes of Stalin, Mao, Hitler (a believer in God), North Korea and Pol Pot were religious in that a man was given divine qualities. Totalitarian dictators are actually like mini-gods. They have a doctrine and if you don’t do their will, you die.

    Western atheism is different.

    That argument doesn’t stand.

    You need a better one.

  5. I didn’t see that as overly antagonist or offensive at all.

    Bones, if you can’t class the Stalin and Mao regimes as atheist, then I’d say there really aren’t that many “pure” western atheists in the world anyway.

    Most people believe in some kind of God or are agnostic.

    And in the end, if you argue as you do that all the pentecostals are mad, and all the evangelicals, Catholics and others who believe in demons, hell or the Devil or wrong – your brand of Christianity is really an exclusive club.
    So, if you preach the gospel to atheists, there’ll probably not be many out there, and you may have to start your own church to bring them to because almost everyone is wrong.

    Even Greg – because he thinks homosexuality is not sin, while you do.

    If you ever make a youtube gospel presentation to atheists, let me know.

    For the record, can you give me the name of an evangelist who you could recommend?

  6. And I know that modern atheists really don’t want to admit that Stalin and Mao were atheists, but come on. Saying that a regime gave the dictator god-like qualities to prove the they weren’t atheistic systems is really a cop out.

    A dictator being able to kill anyone who disagrees with them doesn’t make a religion. You’re confusing a religious system with a political system.

    And the websites I looked up that try to argue so hard that Hitler wasn’t an atheist but a good Catholic give quotes from very early on. 1933, !922. I dont think anyone considers Hitler in 1942 to still be a good Catholic respecting the Pope and running his regime based on the Beatitudes.

    Mao wasn’t worshiped as a god. If you have evidence I’d like to see it.

    If the fact that people had to swear allegiance to him makes a religion …then in your definition no dictator can ever be called an atheist.

    So you can only be an atheist if you live in a democracy?

    If I were you, I’d read up a little more on what Stalin and Mao actually said. That counts you know.

    Hard-core atheists antagonistic towards Christianity just don’t want to accept Stalin as one of them. And for good reason. I totally understand why that do that.

    It still is valid for theists to point to examples of countries in modern history where religion was outlawed.

    And regardless of what they like to say, it’s not pretty.

    As for Pol Pot being a Buddhist (as the atheists claim), maybe they should look more into the form of buddhism that he is said to belong to. I’d say their knowledge of the branches of buddhism is a little lacking.

  7. The best evangelist I have EVER heard is John smith of God Squad.

    Get Advance Australia Where that book though 15-20 years old is still relevant.

    John is the only evangelist I have heard who is able to dismantle atheistic philosophy from Voltaire to Nietsche.

    Look I’m not defending atheism. I’m just telling you, you’re argument doesn’t make sense to them.

    They find Stalinism and the other -isms offensive. And they argue God is replaced with a man (the law giver, Hitler, Stalin and Mao were worshipped and feared, they gave life and took it away), the Bible replaced with manifestos or Mein Kampf, doctrine replaced with ideology. They argue that many of the socialist totalitarian regimes were religious in that the dictator became a religious figure.

    Western atheism is a totally different animal. It has no god figure and is based on science, evidence and reason which is ostensibly a continuation of the Enlightenment.

    I’ve tried and used this argument.

    It doesn’t wash, no matter how clever you and other Christians think it is.

    Try it and see if it works.

  8. I was just explaining why this clip is suitable only for its intended audience eg to make Christians laugh at atheists.

    By the way don’t bother arguing with me. Go and find an atheist and try it and argue with them.

  9. @Bones . I understand the point of the -isms, but a potlical philosophy or dictatorship still doesn’t negate the atheism.

    And I’m not trying to be clever by saying that.

    I don’t think his video will convince atheists. But some people say they are atheists pretty lightly and haven’t really thought through stuff. So, I think his video will have more positive effect than negative. – there are atheists who probably won’t even be impressed with your John Smith.

    But thanks for the answer. I’ll look the guy up. If you think he’s good then that’s probably the best recommendation. (I mean that in a good sense).

    I just think that while they argue that way, it’s not a great argument.

    When there’s a whole country where religion is banned without a dictator and all based on science and reason we’ll be able to see what kind of society is produced. But so far there hasn’t been one.

    But the attempts so far haven’t been promising.

    And maybe there’s an argument in there. Why hasn’t a society been formed where religion was banned but everything went ahead nicely without the alleged “religious’ figures who get “worshiped”.

    I believe man is fallen, and the state of mens hearts is not full of love and kindness and goodwill to all men.

    Anyway, in case you don’t see it on the other thread, have a good relaxing time away from signposts. And remember to resist the Devil! 🙂

  10. who probably won’t even be impressed with your John Smith.

    Why the derogatory comment? Did you want to know someone who can challenge atheism or put a let’s all laugh at atheism video together?

    John has spent decades preaching in Australian high schools and universities as well as starting God Squad and other outreach centres.

    Don’t know how much longer John’s got left either.

    Last I heard he had cancer.

  11. Maybe Bones and Greg could try the 60 day test. Spend 10 minutes a day in a quiet place praying to God out loud. See what happens!

  12. @Bones

    ” Hitler (a believer in God)”

    And you have fallen for one of the interwebs biggest hoaxes!
    The book Hitler’s Secret Conversations 1941-1944 published by Farrar, Straus and Young, Inc.first edition, 1953, contains definitive proof of Hitler’s real views. The book was published in Britain under the title, _Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-1944, which title was used for the Oxford University Press paperback edition in the United States.

    All of these are quotes from Adolf Hitler:

    Night of 11th-12th July, 1941:

    National Socialism and religion cannot exist together…. The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity’s illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity…. Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things. (p 6 & 7)

    10th October, 1941, midday:

    Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure. (p 43)

    14th October, 1941, midday:

    The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death…. When understanding of the universe has become widespread… Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity…. Christianity has reached the peak of absurdity…. And that’s why someday its structure will collapse…. …the only way to get rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little…. Christianity the liar…. We’ll see to it that the Churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State. (p 49-52)

    19th October, 1941, night:

    The reason why the ancient world was so pure, light and serene was that it knew nothing of the two great scourges: the pox and Christianity.

    21st October, 1941, midday:

    Originally, Christianity was merely an incarnation of Bolshevism, the destroyer…. The decisive falsification of Jesus’ doctrine was the work of St.Paul. He gave himself to this work… for the purposes of personal exploitation…. Didn’t the world see, carried on right into the Middle Ages, the same old system of martyrs, tortures, faggots? Of old, it was in the name of Christianity. Today, it’s in the name of Bolshevism. Yesterday the instigator was Saul: the instigator today, Mardochai. Saul was changed into St.Paul, and Mardochai into Karl Marx. By exterminating this pest, we shall do humanity a service of which our soldiers can have no idea. (p 63-65)
    13th December, 1941, midnight:

    Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery…. …. When all is said, we have no reason to wish that the Italians and Spaniards should free themselves from the drug of Christianity. Let’s be the only people who are immunised against the disease. (p 118 & 119)

    14th December, 1941, midday:

    Kerrl, with noblest of intentions, wanted to attempt a synthesis between National Socialism and Christianity. I don’t believe the thing’s possible, and I see the obstacle in Christianity itself…. Pure Christianity– the Christianity of the catacombs– is concerned with translating Christian doctrine into facts. It leads quite simply to the annihilation of mankind. It is merely whole-hearted Bolshevism, under a tinsel of metaphysics. (p 119 & 120)

    9th April, 1942, dinner:
    There is something very unhealthy about Christianity (p 339)

    27th February, 1942, midday:

    It would always be disagreeable for me to go down to posterity as a man who made concessions in this field. I realize that man, in his imperfection, can commit innumerable errors– but to devote myself deliberately to errors, that is something I cannot do. I shall never come personally to terms with the Christian lie. Our epoch in the next 200 years will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity…. My regret will have been that I couldn’t… behold .” (p 278)

    Still, it doesn’t surprise me that you’d fall for something like this

  13. Hitler was probably a deist and wrote a lot about Providence.

    Didn’t say he was a Christian.

    You can believe in a god and not be a Christian you know.

  14. You seem to be the one pointing the finger, Bones.

    This tragedy is appalling, and guns should be removed from the public realm, but the US has such a love affair with deadly weaponry it is unlikely to happen.

    One school massacre should be enough to bring all firearms in.

    Video game violence must be seen as a contributory factor as well.

    It’s a sick world, full of evil, wouldn’t you say?

  15. My heart goes out to my teaching colleagues who have to endure this and have lost their lives.

    A child died at my sons school this week at his break up party when a large umbrella fell on her. The grief at the school is devastating.

    But this….

    Can’t possibly imagine the grief that’s over there now.

    I’m grieving here.

  16. @Bones

    “Didn’t say he was a Christian. You can believe in a god and not be a Christian you know.”

    Good point. I’ve seen this spurious claim hundreds of times on atheist sites, so I guess I jumped the gun a little with your comment.

    I heard about the little girl killed by the umbrella. Very sad. My daughter’s school had a boy killed in a freak motorbike accident a while back. It’s amazing how the entire school can be affected by this type of thing. I cannot fathom what it would be like at the school in Connecticut right now.

  17. I actually just got around to watching the video. This guy has pretty much nailed it. His comments re liberals is on the money.

    @Greg, methinks you took it a little too seriously. Why can’t a Christian use a little satire now and then? The media, Hollywood and society in general use humour to criticise Christianity. Why can’t we give a little back?

  18. OK

    The Right’s response to the shootings in Connecticut.

    From pj media who Klavan writes for

    What can one say? The horror is particularly close to home for me and my family if only because until this year our son went to school in Newtown (but not at Sandy Hook). Mute horror seems appropriate as a first response to such obscene displays of malevolence. But already one is hearing the predictable homilies about “gun control,” as if depriving people of their liberties would somehow contravene evil. Some wacko loads up some firearms and murders a couple score innocent people, ergo certain moralists conclude that they must confiscate guns from the rest of us. Had a few teachers been packing heat, the twisted soul who murdered his mother and those school kids might have been stopped after getting off but a couple of shots. Who knows how many lives might have been saved?


    The problem was that the teachers weren’t armed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  19. @Bones

    “The Right’s response….”

    Umm, no, it’s an AMERICAN’S response. Their constitutional right to be arms is championed by both the left and the right. You just searched for proof of your prejudice and you found it.

  20. Ummm no, think you’ll find the left would be in favour of gun control.

    Most of the Right aren’t.

    Best decision John Howard ever made limiting gun control.

    The US Right would see that as a threat to their way of life.

    Shooting people.

    Here’s a right wing summation of the Left’s view of gun control just two days ago.


    ergo my right to bear arms is more important than your kids safety.

  21. ” Best decision John Howard ever made limiting gun control ”

    Good for the time being!

    New International Version (©1984)
    He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the hearts of men; yet they cannot fathom what God has done from beginning to end.

    New International Version (©1984)
    In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will,

  22. @Bones

    What are you doing for the holidays? You’re in FNQ aren’t you? You won’t need to go anywhere! I was in Mackay recently. I love QLD. I’d move there in a second if we didn’t have so many responsibilities down here.

  23. Live in Bundaberg, which is SEQld. Going to the Gold Coast for hols.

    But yeah anywhere in Qld is pretty perfect (apart from our government).

    It truly is God’s country.

    Heading off right now.

  24. @Bones

    I thought you were further north. I was in Bundaberg a few months ago. I love it there too. Have a great time

  25. Thanks EYES. Not sure what significance this has with me, but it is a subject I am interested in. Here’s a biblical view of Gog and Magog. If you haven’t heard of Chuck Missler before, I encourage you to check his stuff out. He’s an amazing teacher

  26. Actually the US constitutional right to bear arms is based on a misinterpretation.

    When the founding fathers were framing the constitution, Thomas Jefferson suggested a clause giving people the right to partial nudity, mainly because the internet would not be invented for another 200 years. The right to “bare arms” was then subsequently misspelled in the constitution giving rise to much confusion and indirectly leading to a great loss of life.

    It just shows how texts, even great and important ones, can be misinterpreted.

  27. The right to bare bums was subcheeckally pre-smelled in the prostitution, giving guise to crutch affusion, and subsequently leading to a big toss of strife.

    It shows how sex, even great and important ones, can be………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

  28. John Smith is an absolute legend. I am a nom in God’s Squad and have the immense honour of being able to hear him talk and to talk with him reasonably often. I don’t know of another preacher who I love as much as John.

    Steve, funny you should suggest we take the 60 day test…I was thinking that woul be good in any case…I’m. It an athiest so Gid doesn’t need to reveal ‘his’self to me (I used the ‘..’ because God is neither male bit female), however I do need to develop deeper spiritual practice.

  29. “Why the derogatory comment? ”

    @Bones. You totally took me the wrong way. That wasn’t meant to be derogatory. I simply mean that there are hard core atheists who won’t be convinced by the best of the best of Christian apologists.

    I will look up John Smith – and I meant it sincerely that if you recommend him then he must be good.

    You need to stop always being in fight mode buddy.

  30. The shooting in America is too sad for words. The hard-core gun lobby won’t waver though.
    Believe it or not there are people who think the Port Arthur massacre was a setup in order to de-arm Australians.

    I don’t want to offend any Americans, but I honestly believe that right-wing and many Christians have a blind-spot when it comes to this issue. And I wish they’d listen to Christians from other countries on this one.

    Angry and depressed men (especially young white males) and guns don’t mix.

  31. your right q. Weapons away. Sometimes we r read our own interpretations into comments.

    btw i never fail to get something out of johns ministry whether its about aussie dociety, the chirch, philosophy, the bible, my own walk with god.

    hes a tender and compassionate man too. I wish i could spend time with him. I wouldnt be such a cynical bastard.

  32. @Bones – I think you’ll find that Raymond has a point. The Democrats could have passed gun control. But there are plenty of Democrats who like their guns too. You’d be surprised.

  33. @Bones. You’ve been through a lot mate.

    But if you were that cynical you wouldn’t grieve over the tragedy in another country. And a lot of your views come from a compassionate heart, not a cynical one.

    I do agree that the far right is stronger on guns though. That’s a given. But, the Democrats in the US don’t go for gun control at election time because they know it would hurt them. Though, this last one, will probably influence a significant number of people.

    Most people respond differently when kids are involved.

  34. For other people named John Smith, see John Smith (disambiguation).

    Captain John Smith, after an early portrait by Simon de Passe, 18th century
    Sir John Smith (c. January 1580 – 21 June 1631) Admiral of New England was an English soldier, explorer, and author. He was knighted for his services to Sigismund Bathory, Prince of Transylvania and his friend Mózes Székely. He was considered to have played an important part in the establishment of the first permanent English settlement in North America. He was a leader of the Virginia Colony (based at Jamestown) between September 1608 and August 1609, and led an exploration along the rivers of Virginia and the Chesapeake Bay. He was the first English explorer to map the Chesapeake Bay area and New England.
    Smith’s books and maps are considered extremely important in encouraging and supporting English colonization of the New World. He gave the name New England to that region and encouraged people to migrate by noting, “Here every man may be master and owner of his owne labour and land… If he have nothing but his hands, he may…by industrie quickly grow rich.”[1]
    When Jamestown was England’s first permanent settlement in the New World, Smith trained the settlers to farm and work, thus saving the colony from early devastation. He publicly stated “he who shall not work, shall not eat.” His courage and tenacity overcame many adverse situations in a new land. This strength of character and determination overcome problems presented from the hostile Indians, the wilderness and the troublesome and uncooperative English settlers.[2] Harsh weather, lack of water, living in a swampy wilderness, English unwillingness to work, and attacks from the Powhatan nation almost destroyed the colony.
    Smith is buried in the church of St. Sepulchre-without-Newgate, the largest parish church in the City of London, where there is a handsome window designed by Francis Skeat and installed in 1968.[3]

    Not sure about the JOHN SMITH that we are talking about.

    Or is it someone else?

  35. Just looked him up. I like his thoughts on self-esteem.

    Another famous guy who I didn’t know. Every day I realize how little I know.

  36. btw, I love Americans and American history fascinates me. Obama did great speaking to the nation today.

    Bones – Bundaberg? Bert Hinkler and Bundi Rum!

    Have fun at the coast. You’re not going to use your maths skills at the casino I hope…..

  37. Training and arming schoolteachers is never going to solve the problem in the US of gun control. It’s actually out of control. 200 million firearms is out of control, and, of course. there will be people with the mental issues who are going to do something stupid.

    Apparently the youth’s mother legally owned the firearms. He shot her dead. What kind of society allows a person to own multiple firearms and work in a school?

    Connecticut had the strictest of all gun laws, yet it was easy for a 20 year old mentally deranged man to get hold f them and commit mass murder.

    There are wider issues than gun control here, and it is not a matter of left/right politics. It is the condition of society which produces its worse case scenarios. There is always going to be an extreme action by someone.

    The truth is that it will now be almost impossible to police gun control when so many firearms are already available. Plus the citizenry doesn’t trust an armed police force.

    These are historically ingrained issues for the US. It has fashioned its own monster, which, with the increasingly godless society can only deteriorate into chaos unless a strong government can enforce a more protected education system, not policed by teachers and staff, but by armed guards, walled enclaves and stronger security systems.

    That is a tragic development of their own creation.

  38. Q, the democrats hevengt enforced gun control because of the bitch fight that will happen. Stazes rights, constitutional lawyers, gun lobby and gun industry will make a powerful enemy. It wouldnt surprise me to see some sort of uprising over it.

  39. Eyes, sigismund bathory prince of transylvania was related to countess elizabeth bathory.

    Theres a nasty piece og work who used to bathe in virgins blood before zhey walled her up.

  40. “”””””””unless a strong government can enforce a more protected education system, not policed by teachers and staff, but by armed guards, walled enclaves and stronger security systems.”””””””””

    If this will work, ‘STEVE’, then Christ died for nought!

  41. As usual, EYES, you make no sense whatsoever.

    If people in the US must have guns, and there are mentally deranged people amongst them who are prepared to use weapons on children in schools, then it follows that the children need to be defended somehow.

    One suggestion has been that teachers should be armed and trained. That is not fair on teachers, in my opinion.

    The only other solution, if they are to maintain the right to be armed, is to better protect schools by turning them into guarded enclaves where it is almost impossible for an armed madman to get in.

    My ideal solution would be to remove all firearms from society, but I don’t see this happening in the US, since they have a historic love affair with guns.

    Jesus actually said it would be better for a man to have millstone around his neck than to harm one of his little ones.

    If an entire society refuses to deal with its problems with firearms and innocents are harmed then they all must take some responsibility, especially if they are holding on to their right to be armed as a matter of principle and not expedience.

    Christ died for the sinner.

    It is sin which prolongs the need for armed conflict.

    Sin and demonic oppression.

  42. Dear STEVE,
    Your solution is based on the the law, not faith in
    Christ.New International Version (©1984)
    know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.

  43. New Living Translation (©2007)
    You say you have faith, for you believe that there is one God. Good for you! Even the demons believe this, and they tremble in terror.

  44. Yes, well I’m sure that all makes sense to you, Eyes, and you take great comfort in declaring some kind of victory over me in some unfathomable way.

    However, in the real world, where children are massacred in schools by madmen, people are, or should be, seeking a solution so that other children are made safe, either through stricter gun laws, the complete removal of all firearms from the citizenry, which I do not think will happen any time soon, or through heightened protection of children in schools in every State of the US.

    All of these solutions will cost far more than the US can presently afford, but something needs to be done to protect innocent lives from insane gunmen.

    Given that the citizenry has traditionally had an affair with gun ownership and the right to self-defence on a deadly scale, one would expect that neither side of the political spectrum will be making any moves to remove firearms from the people.

    This mens they either leave things as they are and allow their children in schools to remain vulnerable in every State of the US, knowing that there is an epidemic of madness which could potentially strike any school at any time in the future, or they begin the process of creating schools which are protected enclaves with limited access to authorised personnel, where there is a security force in place, and where children are made safe from demented murderers.

    Jesus has won the victory, and sin and the grave are defeated, but, until he comes again at the end of the age, the world is still filled with lost people, including those who have either lost their minds or are demonised and dangerous.

    There have always been wars and rumours of wars, and Jesus promised they would continue until he comes, because many people are filled with sin, hatred and malice. Some are driven by demons. Some are simply so full of drugs they can’t control themselves any longer, especially amphetamines.

    Some are crazy but free and walking around in our community supposedly controlled through medication, but I know they sometimes stop taking the medication and think they are OK, until the trigger is pulled and someone has to be rescued from their obsession.

    Jesus’ victory is no guarantee that our children are safe. That is why we need to do everything in our power to protect them.

  45. Thing is though its anyone with an axe to grind. Theres been mass shootings at cinemas,malls, homes, exemployers,universities.

    I can see that increased security will be a response. We dont wanna give up our guns and john wayne lifestyle.

  46. What happened over there is unthinkable…we in Australia can’t begin to understand the mentality of a nation that won’t give up what kills it’s children…and yet the US considers itself a superpower?

  47. I’ve said elsewhere that our response to this can only be to work in our sphere of influence toward a world where this sort of tragedy can’t happen…in a dark room we don’t try to chase out the darkness, we bring in a light and the darkness vanishes. Each of us must be a light in this stupid darkness that thinks its ok to take lives.

  48. I’ve left some comments at pj media (klavan’s mob) where they’re blaming evil, no prayer in schools and the mentally ill but definitely NOT guns. Some interesting comments such as arming teachers will force the leftards out of teaching and parents will send their kids to schools that have armed teachers.

    You guys need to talk with your US mates on the Right about this.

  49. The more the man made laws, the more the man made sin.
    It is the deep breath before the plunge.
    What will happen is now coming to pass.

  50. Got myself banned on Klavan’s pj site for speaking about gun control and how australia hasnt had a mass murder since 1996 when Howard banned automatic weapons.

    They dont wanna know its gonna happen again and again and…..

  51. “You guys need to talk with your US mates on the Right about this.”

    That’s a very good point Bones. One big problem is though that Americans (and esp American evangelicals) see themselves as being a unique country with a unique history and calling.

  52. I think the answer is not to take guns off Americans, but restrict the amount of guns, and what type that each person can have. The shooter’s mother owned all three guns, including the Bushmaster .223 assault rifle. Why on God’s green earth does a 50 year old woman need an assault rifle?

  53. I agree Raymond. I think it’s fair enough for farmers to have a gun.

    I think it’s amazing that people can buy all this body armor stuff and dress up like a commando.

    What’s amazing is that there are people who honestly think that one main reason to have guns is so the population can overthrow a tyrannical governmet trying to oppress them.

    So at what point would people decided they needed to march on Washington with their guns?

    And as unbelievable as it sounds I’ve actually met a man who thought it feasible that people might have to do that. And that was in the Clinton years. And yes, that guy was an evangelical.

    But maybe the fact that I find that a totally implausible scenario shows that I’ve already been feminized and indocrinated by big brother????

  54. @Bones. If you are still reading this blog…..tell me what you think of that secret code from ww2 (carried by the carrier pigeon).

    The top brains in the UK say its undecipherable, but some Canadian reckons he cracked it in 17 minutes.

    Thought you might be interested.

  55. “The top brains in the UK say its undecipherable […]”

    It sounds like a one-time pad; if this was the case, it would indeed have been indecipherable (that is, in the same class as Bones or Greg trying to make head or tail of the Bible).

    The big problem with one-time pads is the fact that they use a symmetric key, which somehow must be exchanged in a secure manner. The only way of being sure that the key hasn’t been compromised is to hand it over to the recipient of the message in person, which is obviously not always practical.

  56. Been having fun creating chaos with Klavan’s mates at PJ media. Americans dont have much of a sense of humour, nor do they like being called nutters or they are sacrificing their children on the altars of their guns.

    Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.

  57. Zorro has a better understanding of scriptures than Americans though. Apparently Jesus’s comments to the disciples about carrying a sword means arm yourself with the latest assault rifle.

    It was confusing for them when I suggested Jesus’s comment that he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword could be he who lives by the gun shall die by the gun.

  58. “So at what point would people decide they needed to march on Washington with their guns?”

    Maybe at the point where they were told that failure to receive a mark in the forehead or right wrist constituted a crime against the state that was punishable by death?

  59. Well Steve you and alexander downer and anyone else who wants to limit gun control is a leftist liberal fascist. Just check the forums at pj media.

  60. I just read that the mother of the killer was preparing for the end of the world and she used to take her sons to the rifle range.

    It’s an incredibly sad story.

    To me it’s not only guns (I’m for gun control), but issues concerning mental health, and why modern people choose to take out their anger on innocent children.

  61. So, Bones, if left wingers like yourself made more of an effort to stop labelling conservatives right wing nutbags and the like, pointing the finger of blame, doing all they can to irrationally stir the mix, or accusing others of bigotry or hypocrisy by expressing a bigoted, hypocritical perspective, perhaps there could be a dialogue set up between the less extreme amongst us.

    In short, a less overreactive response form both sides may need to precede a rational outcome.

  62. Whilst I agree there needs to be better gun controls in the US, especially in regard to assault rifles and semi-automatics, which have only one clear purpose, it is also clear that, as the conservative lobby points out, there also needs to be better people controls.

    The perpetrator of this crime actually had access to his mother’s firearms, which indicates they were not safely secured. The age limit for gun ownership is 21 in Conneticut, and they have the strongest gun legislation, so this was an act of civil disobedience by the perpetrator.

    Quite how you police this is up for debate, but you can’t blame the gun lobby for it. Even if the laws were changed to prohibit certain weapons from being owned by people outside a designated group, there will always be those whose determination, even to the extent of breaking the law, will cause them to gain ilegal access to the firearms they desire.

    Removing all firearms from the US public is just not a practical issue at this stage. It could take years to accomplish, and it will not prevent deranged people from committing these kinds of atrocities. Only a total ban could achieve this, and the nature of US empathy with gun possession is simply too far away from a rational solution in this regard.

    So the sanctions and controls must be on people and their access to firearms. Certainly, anyone who works in the school industry, or is a student, should be highly vetted before they can gain access to the schools. Why a school teacher was permitted such easy access to these weapons is worthy of investigation.

    So blaming people who are otherwise sensible with their control of guns, or only use them for sporting activities, is counterproductive. Approaches must be made to the gun lobby to dig out a productive solution to this issue, rather than continuing to build a divide between the different lobbies.

    That is the work of a true leader. We will see if Obama has it in him to bring the different stake-holders together to work on a rational and acceptable solution which all parties can claim involvement in.

    Bones’ strategy is that of a failure going somewhere to happen. He has no intention of finding a solution, just a name to blame.

  63. Back to the original topic.

    The video will have no useful effect on anyone seeking God. It is a sarcastic put-down of the agnostic or atheist position. Anyone watching it will not be attracted at all, they will just see it as more of the same kind of argy-bargy push-and-shove antics that the extreme atheists use.

    Then it says, no-one can prove anything either way, so just pray to God out loud for 60 days (why not 40? Is there inflation in the kingdom of God too?). The same could be said for Scientology or Pilates… just try it and see. Fake it till you make it.

    The same thing was said by Mormon missionaries. I said “Your scripture stories just seem wild and a fantasy to me.” They said, “Have you prayed about it?”

    The video is not a serious attempt at evangelism, more a strike back at the neo-atheists and an attempt to make himself feel good.

  64. Yeah, wazza, but it’s still quite funny!

    Perhaps you would prefer Richard Dawkins’ arrogant put-down approach!

    It’s obviously a satirical response to the Dawkins/Hitchens era ‘god is fiction’ novels.

    It’s probably a take on ‘Gone in 60 Seconds’.

    And it’s far more enlightening than discussing whether devils have sex with people!

  65. Well, Andrew Klavan’s offer is just about as good as the add underneath it.

    “Hyundai believes, brilliant is: When a tunnel becomes a magical portal, A puddle becomes a wave, A hill becomes an amusement park, When stars shower down on you. Brilliant is the laughter. Hyundai makes every moment brilliant. Live brilliant.”Hyundai”

  66. “Zorro, do you think Stephen should have thrown rocks back?”

    No, his time had come and that was it – and as Paul pointed out, it’s far better to depart and be with the Lord.

    There may be times when one course of action is the correct one, and there may be other times when a different tack is called for. There is a time for everything under the heavens, and a man who is guided by God’s wisdom will know which path to choose.

    And although it may not be of any comfort to those who don’t believe, all of those children who died are with God; they are safe in the arms of Jesus, and no one can hurt them any more.

  67. Hey Eye-Undies, when the stars shower down on you, there won’t be much laughter!

    Revelation 6
    12 I looked when He opened the sixth seal, and behold, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became like blood.
    13 And the stars of heaven fell to the earth, as a fig tree drops its late figs when it is shaken by a mighty wind.
    14 Then the sky receded as a scroll when it is rolled up, and every mountain and island was moved out of its place.
    15 And the kings of the earth, the great men, the rich men, the commanders, the mighty men, every slave and every free man, hid themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountains,
    16 and said to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb!
    17 “For the great day of His wrath has come, and who is able to stand?”

    Some people seem to ting this is allegorical! Maybe the allegorical rocks won’t hurt so much as real ones, so why hide?

  68. The stars of heaven fell to earth- seems allegorical or metaphorical to me or that John didnt know what stars were like the ancients.

    How do you explain that verse literally?

  69. I bet Andrew Klavan will put out a funny video on why gun control is stupid and how the left causec the shooting on the weekend.

  70. Meteor shower? Followed by cataclysmic earth-tremours? Certainly a very physical description of an overpowering natural event referring to God’s judgment of the world.

    The only other meaning for stars of heaven refers to fallen angels being ejected from the presence of God, mentioned in Revelation 12, which could run parallel.

    But since it refers to the wrath of God being unleashed, it would more likely be a physical judgment.

    It is poetic language, but that could also be a prophetic description of a cataclysmic event.

    If passages are allegorical, they must still have a physical, political or social interpretation. They cannot be dismissed as mysterious or unfathomable.

    For instance, the parable of the sower is interpreted as the seed being the Word of God being sown in the hearts and lives of men, some good soil, some rocky soil, were the seed, or word will not take. The analogy is made clear.

    If you want an allegorical meaning to anything in Revelation, which I agree there is a substantial amount of figurative meaning, you still have to have a natural outworking of the passages.

  71. Ok so it was poetic or allegorical or metaphorical. The stars wont literally fall to earth. Of course if that was John’s way of desribing a meteor shower he would be wrong as meteors arent stars.

  72. Gun control will only solve part of the problem, that is, the easy access to firearms by deranged people. Gun access must be made more difficult, but as long as there are so many firearms remaining out in the community, this is an almost impossible problem to resolve.

    The other part of this is better protections for schools as long there are basket cases who feel the need to take out a large number of innocent and vulnerable people before they top themselves.

    The first such cases involved crazy people who used dynamite to blow up their victims.

    Taking away the guns is only a small part of the issue. There also needs to be better control over people who are potential weapons themselves, because it is the killer who is the main weapon, not the tools he uses.

  73. Yeah, yeah, Bones, that’s right. Now I suppose you’ll be saying that God will not be releasing his wrath on the earth at the end of time, and it has some other, indirect, less powerful, more psychological, meaning, or has already happened, or that this passage wasn’t really in the Bible.

    Even if it is completely allegorical, it could only mean that God’s wrath, when released, will be so terrifying that people will want to run and hide from his judgment.

    It is a warning. Whether the rocks are literal rocks or not is of no importance, since, whatever method God uses, it will be as if the very stars were falling to the earth and there was a seismic upheaval of terrifying proportions.

    In other words, it will come from above and beneath, and the very earth and heavens will appear to be rolled up like a scroll, indicating great power and turmoil.

    So what is you allegorical interpretation?

  74. I cant. see gun control happening. The loony right already sees Obama as a muslim, antichrist. Taking away their assault rifles will just confirm it. Obama doesnt have anything to lose though. He cant nominate for the presidency again. This’ll see if he’s just talk.

  75. Indeed! He is in a strong position to call the stakeholders together and pressure them into making concessions, at least on semi-automatic weapons, militia mentality and better protections for the vulnerable.

    I don’t think there is a large group which is that far to the right. I think they may be vocal, but they are just small groups with megaphones and blogs.

    The real target should be the families with children who are feeling the pain of the attacks on innocents and have a stake in seeing better controls, both over guns and over those who are prone to using them.

    Let the lobby protest. Leadership isn’t about bowing to popular sentiment, but making sensible decisions which take nations to another level.

    If leadership was about popular consensus anyone could take us down the garden path. Leaders make decisions and see opportunities where no one else can. Leaders break the status quo. Leaders withstand criticism and take people in the right direction.

    Antagonising people is not a good way to go forward, though. He has to take opposers and well as promoters. That is leadership.

    This is his biggest and best chance.

  76. The case for armed resistance.

    When mass killers meet armed resistance
    It took place at a university in Virginia. A student with a grudge, an immigrant, pulled a gun and went on a shooting spree. It wasn’t Virginia Tech at all. It was the Appalachian School of Law in Grundy, not far away. You can easily drive from the one school to the other, just take a trip down Route 460 through Tazewell.

    It was January 16, 2002 when Peter Odighizuwa came to campus. He had been suspended due to failing grades. Odighizuwa was angry and waving a gun calling on students to “come get me”. The students, seeing the gun, ran. A shooting spree started almost immediately. In seconds Odighizuwa had killed the school dean, a professor and one student. Three other students were shot as well, one in the chest, one in the stomach and one in the throat.

    Many students heard the shots. Two who did were Mikael Gross and Tracy Bridges. Mikael was outside the school having just returned to campus from lunch when he heard the shots. Tracy was inside attending class. Both immediately ran to their cars. Each had a handgun locked in the vehicle.

    Bridges pulled a .357 Magnum pistol and he later said he was prepared to shoot to kill if necessary. He and Gross both approached Odighizuwa at the same time from different directions. Both were pointing their weapons at him. Bridges yelled for Odighizuwa to drop his weapon. When the shooter realized they had the drop on him he threw his weapon down. A third student, unarmed, Ted Besen, approached the killer and was physically attacked.
    But Odighizuwa was now disarmed. The three students were able to restrain him and held him for the police. Odighizuwa is now in prison for the murders he committed. His killing spree ended when he faced two students with weapons. There would be no further victims that day, thanks to armed resistance.

    More stories of armed resistance here…

  77. Hey, I want a gun. Imagine the terror I could pput into those 7th graders while i walk around class with a chain gun.

  78. They cannot be dismissed as mysterious or unfathomable

    Uhm, I think that in the case of Revelatoin that is excatly what one can and should do if they have any integrity whatsoever. You can certainly toy around with what you THINK it mught mean – you may even be right – but you can have absolutley not one shred of assurance as to the accuracy or not of anyting based upon Revelation

  79. @Greg

    “You can certainly toy around with what you THINK it mught mean – you may even be right – but you can have absolutley not one shred of assurance as to the accuracy or not of anyting based upon Revelation”

    That’s true to a certain extent. Revelation is a book where no one can be absolutely sure of what the writer meant until the events are actually occurring. It’s important to note however that some of the events depicted in Revelation, as well as in Ezekiel and in Daniel have already occurred, so one could safely say that because of this the rest of the events depicted will most certainly occur. I’m of the opinion that 2000 years of scholarly study have certainly explained and interpreted the book in a way that makes a certain amount of sense. Like the rest of scripture, it is open to individual interpretation, but I am more than satisfied that the current theological view of the events in Revelation are the correct interpretations. But I could be wrong. As time progresses, and the event depicted begin to occur, then we will know either way.

  80. Hey Steve,
    I think that in the Hyundai add, when it said, “When stars shower down on you”, that it was implying ‘good luck’ showering down on you.
    Not that this has anything to do with the righteousness that comes from God, and is by faith in Jesus Christ!
    Anyhow it’s the end of the world on friday, so i would not worry to much about the guns till saturdee morn.

  81. It seems the NRA wil be prepared to take the initiative after all.

    Four days after the primary school massacre in Connecticut, the powerful National Rifle Association (NRA) has broken its silence, saying it is “prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again”.

    In a statement, the NRA says it has stayed silent until now out of respect for the families and as a matter of common decency, but it will hold a major news conference later this week.

    The gun rights organisation says it is made up of 4 million mums and dads, sons and daughters, and they were shocked and heartbroken by the murders in Newtown.

    The statement comes as the White House confirms president Barack Obama is now actively supporting the re-introduction of a ban on assault weapons.

    The NRA is one of the most powerful lobbying groups in the United States, partly because of its large and active membership.

    The National Rifle Association of America is made up of four million moms and dads, sons and daughters – and we were shocked, saddened and heartbroken by the news of the horrific and senseless murders in Newtown.

    Out of respect for the families, and as a matter of common decency, we have given time for mourning, prayer and a full investigation of the facts before commenting.

    The NRA is prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again.

    NRA statement on Newtown shooting
    It uses political pressure against individual lawmakers in the US Congress and in state legislatures to press for loosening restrictions on gun sales and ownership across the United States while promoting hunting and gun sports.

    For decades, the NRA has opposed almost all new gun control laws and regulations at national and state level.

    Its leadership considers the right to own firearms an essential American freedom, spelled out in the second amendment of the US constitution and reinforced in a 2008 decision by the US Supreme Court.

    After the killing spree in Connecticut, the NRA has come under enormous pressure, some of it from pro-gun lawmakers allied with the association, including West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin, a Democrat and lifetime NRA member.

    The NRA’s statement was met with immediate scepticism from some advocates for gun control.

    “We’ll see,” said Mark Glaze, director of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a group of 750 US mayors co-led by New York City’s Michael Bloomberg.

    Josh Sugarmann, executive director of the Violence Policy Centre, said “unless this is a dramatic sea change in the way the NRA has done business, I have very little faith anything they will offer will help us take steps forward”.

    White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters on Monday gun rights groups did not have to be an obstacle to reducing gun violence.


  82. White Evangelicals would rather find a spiritual solution to school massacres than have stricter gun control

    A CBS News poll conducted from December 14 to 16, after the massacre in Newtown, showed that while 69 per cent of Catholics said they wanted stricter laws on gun control, only 37 per cent of white evangelical Christians agreed.
    The evangelical leaders expected at the cathedral event on Friday are relatively moderate: Richard Cizik, president of the New Evangelical Partnership for the Common Good, and Gabriel Salguero, president of the National Latino Evangelical Coalition.
    Mark DeMoss, a prominent evangelical who recently served as an adviser to the campaign of the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, told Politico.com that measures to address gun control, mental health treatment and violence in the media should all be on the table.
    But he said in an interview that evangelicals were unlikely to support gun control efforts because they do not want to break ranks with the Republican Party, and because they tend to see gun violence as a concern to be addressed spiritually, rather than through policy change.
    He said he also considered violence a spiritual problem, but that he saw a “double standard” at work.
    Evangelical clergy had boycotted the makers of violent video games and pornography, but on guns they say, “No, this is just a spiritual matter of the heart”, he said.

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/church-leaders-back-gun-control-reforms-20121220-2bopw.html#ixzz2Faom0Sbg

  83. Andrew Klavan finally speaks. And of course the shootings at Newtown weren’t about guns (surprise).

    “I avoided watching television this weekend. I didn’t think I’d be able to stand the stock phrases, the helpless tears, or the journalists losing track of themselves in order to grab useless interviews with traumatized 8 year olds. (I needn’t add “shame on them.” I suspect that, deep down, they’re already ashamed.)

    Most of all, I couldn’t tolerate the politicians, celebrities and commentators using the slaughter of innocents to promote their pet causes. It’s not about guns: Connecticut has very tough gun laws. It’s not about the culture: Hitler enjoyed watching Disney’s Snow White. Put your ever-so-urgent issues back in your pockets and let the mourning bury their children.

    When, prior to writing this, I checked on the commentators I respect, I found, with no surprise, that Charles Krauthammer, speaking on the Fox Special Report panel, had said best what little there is to say:

    The first thing I think we have to say is: in trying to look at this or analyze this requires a huge amount of humility. The true factors that we do not know often — even after these events are analyzed and thought through, we really don’t know. This is the problem of evil and it’s been struggled with forever.

    The problem of evil, right. Whenever my fellow Christians talk about Satan — the devil, the enemy, the adversary — I always get a little uncomfortable. Difficult enough for a cultural cove like myself to pierce the veil of sophistication in order to accept a personal God. Much harder to think of evil as having a will and consciousness of its own. But as I’ve said before, whether or not the devil exists, the world behaves exactly as if he does. And I know of only one valid response to that:

    Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself.

    Without those two commandments — and unless we see all our scriptures, all our philosophies, all our actions in the light of those commandments — our religions are worthless, our politics are meaningless, our laws are helpless, our good will means nothing.

    Without those two commandments, the world belongs to the enemy.”


  84. The point he and others have to think about is that there is evil everywhere. So it’s not just the old problem of “evil”.

    But why so many deaths by guns in the US?

    That’s what Americans need to ask themselves.

  85. There you go again, Bones, looking for the split rather than the join.

    “Ooh look, here’s a crack in the fabric of reason. Let’s exploit it. make it deeper.” “Shouldn’t we repair the breach by finding common ground?” “Nah! If we do that we have no one to accuse or crush so that we can bring in social justice on a liberal scale which withdraws the liberty of citizens and creates a government dependent populace and huge administration controlled by wealthy, exclusive, left-wing, unelected career bureaucrats.”

    Apparently the shooting in Newtown was the fault of the right, not the shooter, or the shooter’s mum’s doomsday indoctrination, or the killer’s game-driven lust for blood.

    The NRA states its abhorrence of the crime and preparedness to consider drastic changes, and not a peep from Mr Bones. But Klavan makes a statement which has a basic logic to it, which is still attuned to that of the NRA, but refuses to lay the blame at the feet of the majority of gun owners, who have no interest in shooting innocent children, but reserve the right to ownership without censure, and Mr Bones is all over it.

    No solution there. No hope. Nothing to see.

  86. At least our right wingers arent as nutty and can see the bleeding obvious. When they sort out the spiritual problem of evil like we must have then there wont be anymore school shootings.

  87. Well Bones, in a sense they are right. Canadians have lots of guns too but nowhere near the gun violence. Same with some other countries.

    What’s interesting is reading up on the histories of Canada and the US, right from the beginning.

    To me the very obvious thing is that in this day and age, with the culture and society being what it is, the last thing you want is for people to have access to assault rifles.

    And I live in a country where hardly anyone has guns – except the bad guys, and that’s the way I like it.

    With all due respect to my American friends, they just have to realize that it isn’t 1776.

  88. Connecticut Shooting: How Canada Views America’s School Massacre And Gun Culture

    The tragic mass murder of 27 people — including 20 small children — in an elementary school in Connecticut has shocked the world and again placed a harsh and unforgiving light on America’s gun culture.

    The motive for the horrific killings, committed by a 20-year-old man named Adam Lanza who shot himself to death, may never be known.

    Nonetheless, the slaughter of innocents has sparked widespread calls for tighter gun control measures and a ban on assault weapons from many quarters.

    However, not every country with a deep gun culture is addicted to mindless violence. Consider Canada, a nation, which – like its American neighbor – has a pioneer culture and a strong affinity for guns.

    Such massacres rarely occur north of the border.

    According to Statistics Canada, this country’s homicide-by-guns rate amounted to 0.5 per 100,000 in 2011. In contrast, the U.S. rate for 2010 was 3.6 per 100,000, or more than seven times the Canadian rate.

    But private gun ownership in Canada is widespread. With a ratio of 23.8 firearms per 100 people, Canada has the thirteenth highest rate in the world. (U.S. is at the very top)

    International Business Times spoke to an expert on Canada to discuss the country’s views on the Connecticut tragedy and on gun laws both in U.S. and Canada.

    Dr. George A. MacLean is Associate Dean, Faculty of Graduate Studies and Professor of Political Studies at the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg.

    IB TIMES: How have Canadian media and the public reacted to the horrific massacre of 28 people at an elementary school in Connecticut?

    MACLEAN: It was — and remains — front page news. A dreadful event like this one seems almost incomprehensible, until we think about other similar ones that have occurred in the past (the 1996 massacre at a school in Dunblane, Scotland, comes to mind).

    The response in Canada has been similar to what the reaction has been elsewhere (including the U.S.): disbelief, sadness, confusion, and shock.

    Locally, there is a connection. A former faculty member of my university recently moved his family to Newtown, Conn. His daughter was among those killed.

    IB TIMES: Are Canadians blaming America’s gun culture for the tragedy or do they think it’s the result of the killer’s likely mental illness?

    MACLEAN: Both appear in equal measures in the media. However, what is known about the killer is still in question; we do know, however, that the gun “culture” in the U.S. is undeniable. In the national papers on Tuesday, there were at least a half dozen stories and editorials about gun ownership in the U.S.

    One theme that keeps appearing is the small window of opportunity that President Barack Obama may have to create tighter regulation on guns in the U.S. Yet, there is the almost inescapable reality that this will not change the “culture” of guns in the U.S., nor the immense power of the gun lobby in Washington.

    IB TIMES: Like the U.S., Canada also has a pioneer history with a robust gun culture and a high rate of private gun ownership. So, why do such tragedies almost never occur in Canada?

    MACLEAN: That’s true to a degree, but the “Wild West” mentality was never as entrenched in Canada as it was in the U.S.

    There is a hunting culture in Canada, and of course firearms are used in remote parts of the country for livelihoods and sustenance, particularly in First Nations communities.

    The “robust” gun culture is actually very small, compared to the U.S. Gun ownership per capita in Canada is less than half that of the U.S. However, such events do occur in Canada – Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal in 1989, of course, and Concordia University (1992), Dawson College (2006), and Taber Alberta (1999).

    IB TIMES: How tough and restrictive are Canada’s gun control laws? Who can legally buy guns and how long is the process?

    MACLEAN: Laws had become more restrictive in Canada until earlier this year, when the Conservative government removed the long gun registry law that had been on the books since 1995. However, ownership and licensing is still very restrictive. Handguns and semi- and automatic weapons are the most difficult to buy or own. All gun owners must show evidence of firearms training, go through a security check, and apply for a license. Purchasing a gun can take up to a month to clear. Licenses are also required for the transport of certain restricted weapons, which can only be used in approved locations.

    Certainly, the number, types and classifications of weapons permitted for ownership in Canada is much more restrictive than the U.S.

    IB TIMES: As in the U.S., violent crime, including homicides, have been plunging in Canada for the past two decades. Does this not belie the assertion that more guns equals more crime?

    MACLEAN: Canada is a different case. The number of guns in Canada has been rising – but only marginally. And, the number of gun owners has gone down. Also, gun-related violence in Canada is far less prominent than in the U.S.

    IB TIMES: Toronto has a violent gang culture – do criminals buy guns illegally? Is there a large underground market for weapons in Canada?

    MACLEAN: According to the federal government, organized crime or gang-related homicides that involve firearms are actually down since the early 1990s, but there’s no question that there exists a link between firearms and organized crime and gangs. Not surprisingly, handguns are more prevalent in large urban areas, and long-gun violence is more likely in rural parts of the country.

    Smuggled firearms (from the U.S.) are a primary source for illegal weapons in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver, as well as other large cities.

    IB TIMES: As you mentioned, in 1989, a man named Marc Lépine killed 14 women at the École Polytechnique in Montreal. How did this tragedy impact Canada’s gun laws?

    MACLEAN: Organized efforts to curtail gun violence and ownership really began in earnest after 1989. One of the survivors of that attack helped create the Coalition for Gun Control, which is a major player in gun legislation efforts.

    To this day, the Montreal killings resonate across Canada – every Dec. 6 there are ceremonies commemorating the event, which brought to attention not just gun violence but also violence against women.

    IB TIMES: Does Canada have any organization like the National Rifle Association which has strong political influence?

    MACLEAN: Nothing on the same scale. The National Firearms Association lobbies the government, but there’s nothing like the NRA in Canada.


  89. It’s the Guns – But We All Know, It’s Not Really the Guns

    Michael Moore

    Since Cain went nuts and whacked Abel, there have always been those humans who, for one reason or another, go temporarily or permanently insane and commit unspeakable acts of violence. There was the Roman Emperor Tiberius, who during the first century A.D. enjoyed throwing victims off a cliff on the Mediterranean island of Capri. Gilles de Rais, a French knight and ally of Joan of Arc during the middle ages, went cuckoo-for-Cocoa Puffs one day and ended up murdering hundreds of children. Just a few decades later Vlad the Impaler, the inspiration for Dracula, was killing people in Transylvania in numberless horrifying ways.

    In modern times, nearly every nation has had a psychopath or two commit a mass murder, regardless of how strict their gun laws are – the crazed white supremacist in Norway one year ago Sunday, the schoolyard butcher in Dunblane, Scotland, the École Polytechnique killer in Montreal, the mass murderer in Erfurt, Germany … the list seems endless.

    And now the Aurora shooter last Friday. There have always been insane people, and there always will be.

    But here’s the difference between the rest of the world and us: We have two Auroras that take place every single day of every single year! At least 24 Americans every day (8-9,000 a year) are killed by people with guns – and that doesn’t count the ones accidentally killed by guns or who commit suicide with a gun. Count them and you can triple that number to over 25,000.

    That means the United States is responsible for over 80 percent of all the gun deaths in the 23 richest countries combined. Considering that the people of those countries, as human beings, are no better or worse than any of us, well, then, why us?

    Both conservatives and liberals in America operate with firmly held beliefs as to “the why” of this problem. And the reason neither can find their way out of the box toward a real solution is because, in fact, they’re both half right.

    The right believes that the Founding Fathers, through some sort of divine decree, have guaranteed them the absolute right to own as many guns as they desire. And they will ceaselessly remind you that a gun cannot fire itself – that “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.”

    Of course, they know they’re being intellectually dishonest (if I can use that word) when they say that about the Second Amendment because they know the men who wrote the constitution just wanted to make sure a militia could be quickly called up from amongst the farmers and merchants should the Brits decide to return and wreak some havoc.

    But they are half right when they say “Guns don’t kill people.” I would just alter that slogan slightly to speak the real truth: “Guns don’t kill people, Americans kill people.”

    Because we’re the only ones in the first world who do this en masse. And you’ll hear all stripes of Americans come up with a host of reasons so that they don’t have to deal with what’s really behind all this murder and mayhem.

    They’ll say it’s the violent movies and video games that are responsible. Last time I checked, the movies and video games in Japan are more violent than ours – and yet usually fewer than 20 people a year are killed there with guns – and in 2006 the number was two!

    Others will say it’s the number of broken homes that lead to all this killing. I hate to break this to you, but there are almost as many single-parent homes in the U.K. as there are here – and yet, in Great Britain, there are usually fewer than 40 gun murders a year.

    People like me will say this is all the result of the U.S. having a history and a culture of men with guns, “cowboys and Indians,” “shoot first and ask questions later.” And while it is true that the mass genocide of the Native Americans set a pretty ugly model to found a country on, I think it’s safe to say we’re not the only ones with a violent past or a penchant for genocide. Hello, Germany! That’s right I’m talking about you and your history, from the Huns to the Nazis, just loving a good slaughter (as did the Japanese, and the British who ruled the world for hundreds of years – and they didn’t achieve that through planting daisies). And yet in Germany, a nation of 80 million people, there are only around 200 gun murders a year.

    So those countries (and many others) are just like us – except for the fact that more people here believe in God and go to church than any other Western nation.

    My liberal compatriots will tell you if we just had less guns, there would be less gun deaths. And, mathematically, that would be true. If you have less arsenic in the water supply, it will kill less people. Less of anything bad – calories, smoking, reality TV – will kill far fewer people. And if we had strong gun laws that prohibited automatic and semi-automatic weapons and banned the sale of large magazines that can hold a gazillion bullets, well, then shooters like the man in Aurora would not be able to shoot so many people in just a few minutes.

    But this, too, has a problem. There are plenty of guns in Canada (mostly hunting rifles) – and yet the annual gun murder count in Canada is around 200 deaths. In fact, because of its proximity, Canada’s culture is very similar to ours – the kids play the same violent video games, watch the same movies and TV shows, and yet they don’t grow up wanting to kill each other. Switzerland has the third-highest number of guns per capita on earth, but still a low murder rate.

    So – why us?

    I posed this question a decade ago in my film Bowling for Columbine, and this week, I have had little to say because I feel I said what I had to say 10 years ago – and it doesn’t seem to have done a whole lot of good other than to now look like it was actually a crystal ball posing as a movie.

    This is what I said then, and it is what I will say again today:

    1. We Americans are incredibly good killers. We believe in killing as a way of accomplishing our goals. Three-quarters of our states execute criminals, even though the states with the lower murder rates are generally the states with no death penalty.

    Our killing is not just historical (the slaughter of Indians and slaves and each other in a “civil” war). It is our current way of resolving whatever it is we’re afraid of. It’s invasion as foreign policy. Sure there’s Iraq and Afghanistan – but we’ve been invaders since we “conquered the wild west” and now we’re hooked so bad we don’t even know where to invade (bin Laden wasn’t hiding in Afghanistan, he was in Pakistan) or what to invade for (Saddam had zero weapons of mass destruction and nothing to do with 9/11). We send our lower classes off to do the killing, and the rest of us who don’t have a loved one over there don’t spend a single minute of any given day thinking about the carnage. And now we send in remote pilotless planes to kill, planes that are being controlled by faceless men in a lush, air conditioned studio in suburban Las Vegas. It is madness.

    2. We are an easily frightened people and it is easy to manipulate us with fear. What are we so afraid of that we need to have 300 million guns in our homes? Who do we think is going to hurt us? Why are most of these guns in white suburban and rural homes? Maybe we should fix our race problem and our poverty problem (again, number one in the industrialized world) and then maybe there would be fewer frustrated, frightened, angry people reaching for the gun in the drawer. Maybe we would take better care of each other (here’s a good example of what I mean).

    Those are my thoughts about Aurora and the violent country I am a citizen of. Like I said, I spelled it all out here if you’d like to watch it or share it for free with others. All we’re lacking here, my friends, is the courage and the resolve. I’m in if you are.


  90. So, it seems it’s the combination.
    Some countries have lots of guns – but they don’t use them as much, and never throughout history – look at the longer history of Canada. No Revolutionary War, and a completely different history of dealing with Indians.

    Then look at the video games as Michael Moore said re Japan. The same amount of video games – but people don’t have guns. To get a gun takes a lot of procedure – and there is zero culture so people don’t even think of getting guns.

    Movies, the culture of guns, the individualistic macho culture, and the easy access to high powered weaponry.

    So there are many ways to approach the problem, but some won’t be possible to implement.

    Did anyone notice the hidden statistic in there? Suicides by guns.
    If it were up to me, I’d just ban guns completely.

    Not only accidents with kids, but men (mostly men) who are depressed, get drunk, can suicide a lot easier if they have a gun handy.

    Giving teachers guns is ridiculous. Letting more people have guns is ridiculous.

    I think you can ban guns and still be a good Christian.
    How’s that for an interesting thought.

  91. One comment about the arming of teachers solution.

    Yes, that is seriously being suggested,

    Someone with an assault rifle can kill several people in a minute.
    So in the time a teacher has loads her gun and goes looking for the shooter, he’s already been able to kill many.

    So, should a teacher keep a loaded gun in the desk??? Would that make the teacher or the students feel safe? All you need is one student go crazy and they can get a gun while the teacher’s back is turned.

    So, what’s left? Teachers having loaded guns on their hips like the Wild West?

  92. Actually Canada had a history of revolutionary war with France and Britain.

    Japan has a whole Bushido and WWII history behind it.

    I used to play with a mate as a little tike. I had a real 303 from WWII and he had a .22. Both barrels were welded but they still had the bolts. we enacted nearly every battle from WWII. We had helmets and such from WWII as well.

    We also had an air rifle which we used to lay around shooting at targets and sparrows. We used to get money for them. I even shot some mice. We sold all the guns after Dad died. I think the cops took his .22.

    My wife’s family are all military, shooters and farmers.

    Her Dad has been getting my oldest son to learn how to clean guns.

    However he keeps his in a gun safe.

    I’d be interested in being a gun collector. Would love to have a bren, BAR or MG42 hanging in the house.

    But i’d rather haver a safer country.

  93. But Canada’s history is still totally different.
    They never rebelled against the British. And thousands of people went to Canada instead of fighting against the British.

    They also never had all the wars against the Indians, nor did people go west and had that whole Wild West thing. Neither was there a civil war.

    As for Japan, the Bushido was only the samurai class. The rest never had guns, and certainly after WW2, the populace has been gunless. And extremely peaceful. Note the absence of riots after the earthquake.

    That’s funny about you replaying all the battles. So you were a war history nut from way back. 🙂

    My grandad always had a gun too.

    But here’s the thing. Maybe people, the culture, society etc has just changed too much.

    Back in those days people seemed to be able to have a fight over a girl without stomping on peoples heads either or three men kicking someone on the ground.

    Well – who knows -maybe it was always different in Sydney and Melbourne….

  94. The statistics are the most telling evidence in this debate. Comparatively, Australia and Most European nations are at 0.1 gun homicides per 100,000 people, and Japan at 0.0, whilst the US is at 3.2 homicides per 100,000.

    The main difference is gun ownership, with 88.8 guns per 100 people in the US, which is a staggering figure.

    They would argue that the amount of guns compared to the homicides tells a story of reasonable control by owners, but the sheer volume increases the likelihood of a homicide 3,200%!

    Overall homicide rates un the US are generally higher than Europe or Australia to a similar degree, but the US is not the unsafest place to live, by a long chalk! Most African nations are more dangerous, and South American nations comparatively lethal.

    Some interesting figures here:


  95. The NRA has spoken.

    Sounds like the days of the Wild West with John Wayne shootin up the bad guys. Yippeekyyay.

    “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” LaPierre told a news briefing, calling on lawmakers to station armed police officers in all schools by the time children return from the Christmas break in January.

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/nra-calls-for-armed-guards-in-schools-20121222-2bs8t.html#ixzz2FjqZ4sOj

    Its not about guns.

  96. but the US is not the unsafest place to live…

    Unless you’re a teacher.

    How many schools get shot up in Colombia?

  97. In Colombia you’d be almost ten times more likely to be the victim of a homicide, teacher or not!

    I don’t think they discriminate between professions or vocations!

    33.4% compared to 4.3% in the US!

  98. The NRA points their fingers at Australia’s evil gun laws leaving it’s citizens powerless.

    See if you ban guns we’ll become like Australia.

    Heck after watching that I want a gun!

    And I didn’t realise there was such a groundswell of protest.

    But then again is this comment

    gee wonder who financed this ??? NONE of those stats change the facts, there has not been a mass shooting with a semi auto rifle since the ban in 1996 & Australian kids dont get their brains blown out at school.

    That fact is irrelevant to the gun lobby.

  99. In Colombia you’d be almost ten times more likely to be the victim of a homicide, teacher or not!

    I don’t think they discriminate between professions or vocations!

    33.4% compared to 4.3% in the US!

    … and the US is not independent of this violence.

    The so called “war on drugs” by the US in Columbia is actually a war on left-wing groups and others not favourable to US interests in the country. Although they have arrested some people, they have made alliances with other groups and the flow of cocaine has actually increased. They have contributed to the rise of urban cartel violence.

    Dan Kovalic in the Huff Post quotes from a new book “Cocaine, Death Squads and the War on Terror (U.S. Imperialism and Class Struggle in Colombia).”

    The book, citing Colombian investigative journalist Azalea Robles, claims that 250,000 Colombian civilians have been “disappeared” in the last two decades in Colombia, dwarfing the “disappearances” carried out (also with U.S. support by the way) by the fascist juntas of Argentina, Chile and Uruguay in the 1970’s. According to Robles, these numbers have been “systematically reduced” (that is, hidden) by mass graves, like the one discovered in Meta in 2009, and even crematory ovens.

    The murder and “disappearance” of such vast numbers of people is part and parcel of the U.S.’s policy — used most famously by the U.S. in Vietnam, El Salvador and Guatemala – to “drain the sea [the civilian population] to kill the fish [the insurgents]” which represent a continued impediment to the U.S.’s designs of super-exploitation of Colombia’s vast natural resources. And, the U.S. view is that, if this policy also forces us to collaborate and even protect forces which are deeply involved in the drug trade, then that is acceptable as well.


  100. The danger of the guns in every home is not just limited to their immediate effect on safety.

    Its also that they reinforce the view that violence is necessary and acceptable as a last resort to resolve problems. The US has a big cultural problem in that it thinks that it can be the judge and executioner of the world. Whether religious or not, the US population is affected by the notion that they are the “shining light on the hill” – the nation established by God to bring liberty to the world.

    A president who personally authorises extra-judicial killings and drone strikes to resolve issues with individuals is hardly in a position to lead the country away from its addiction to guns and violence.

  101. US Teachers line up for Gun Training

    Several US states are considering allowing school teachers to carry weapons, and educators, determined not to allow a repeat of the Newtown massacre, are flocking to training sessions.

    Gun control advocates are trying to outlaw military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, while Los Angeles yesterday held a no-questions-asked gun buyback.

    But gun enthusiasts, backed by the powerful National Rifle Association (NRA), are taking a different approach.

    The gun lobby argues there is no way to stop some people doing bad things, and so the only sure-fire way to prevent mass shootings like the one at Sandy Hook elementary school is to take down the shooter.

    In a rare press conference a week after the Connecticut shooting in which 20 children and six adults were killed with a Bushmaster AR-15 assault rifle, the NRA called for armed guards in every school in the country.

    But in Utah, one of the handful of states that currently allows people to carry licensed concealed weapons into public schools, many teachers are unwilling to wait and see which political argument wins out.

    In response to Newtown, the Utah Shooting Sports Council (USSC) waived its fee on for educators wanting to participate in training sessions to gain permits to carry concealed weapons.

    More than half of the roughly 400 education professionals that showed an interest had to be turned away because there was not enough room on the course.

    “We had about 400 that wanted to do it and we only had seating for about 180,” USSC board member Bill Scott said.

    The surge in interest was seen by organisers as a direct response to the shooting in Newtown, with teachers showing a heightened awareness that people are responsible for their own safety and wanted their own permits.

    “A lot of these people may have shot all their lives and some of them may have never touched a gun,” Mr Scott said.

    “We’re not advocating that all teachers should be armed.

    “We’re just saying that those that choose to be armed, that want to get the training, they have the right to do that in Utah, we’d like to facilitate that.”

    ‘Huge deterrent’

    While teachers train themselves to try to stop the next Newtown, state officials like Arizona attorney-general Tom Horne are busily crafting legislation to make sure they can legally do so.

    “The proposal is that any school that wishes to do so may designate the principal or another designee to receive training in the use of firearms and how to handle emergencies such as that which occurred in Newtown,” he said.

    Ideally there would be an armed police officer in every school, but due to budget considerations this may not be possible, so training a designated teacher to handle firearms was “the next best solution”, Mr Horne said.

    Pro-gun politicians in Florida, Minnesota, Oregon, South Dakota and Tennessee have also vowed to propose legislation in the coming months that would allow for armed teachers in schools.

    “Hopefully, these monsters, these animals that are doing this stuff will stay away from the schools,” Mr Scott said.

    “Our view also is that it’s not just that you would actively engage the shooter, just the fact that the bad guys know that teachers are armed in Utah is a huge deterrent.

    “They tend to pick targets where they know there will be lots of innocent victims and they’re not going to encounter any resistance.”

    As teachers stripped semi-automatic pistols on tables at the USSC gathering, Democratic senator Dianne Feinstein was putting the final touches to a bill that would ban weapons like the one 20-year-old Adam Lanza used in Newtown.

    Gun rights advocates, led by the NRA, are stringently against such measures.

    “The thing about them being assault weapons, it’s a misnomer,” Mr Scott said.

    “These weapons are no different than a standard sporting weapon.

    “We don’t support any bans on those because true military weapons are already banned in the United States.”


  102. Give me a .44 Magnum. I’d walk around my maths class.

    “I know what you’re thinking. “Is the answer 4 or 5?” Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you’ve got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?”

  103. Btw the NRA doesn’t represent gun owners.

    It is a trade association largely funded by gun manufacturers and its sole mission is to promote gun sales and increase profits for those manufacturers.

    It also receives donations from gun companies for every gun and piece of ammunition sold.

    Bit like beid held for ransom by the tobacco industry.

  104. Why Does the NRA Fear the Truth About Gun Violence?

    A week after the gun massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, the National Rifle Association is speaking out. As well it should. If only the NRA believed in the right to free speech as fervently as it believes in the right to bear arms.
    Faced with government-funded research that contradicts NRA claims on gun safety, the gun lobby moved to defund the research and silence the researchers. When news reporters tried to learn which gun shops repeatedly supply violent criminals with firearms, the NRA lobbied to have gun-trace data exempted from the Freedom of Information Act. When advocates of transparency in campaign finance proposed the Disclose Act in Congress to require disclosure of top donors to political advertising campaigns, the NRA once again marched to the beat of its own 100-round drum: The organization obtained an exemption to keep its information secret.
    The list goes on. The NRA-backed Tiahrt Amendment requires the Justice Department to destroy records after gun-purchase background checks, making it harder to identify and catch straw buyers who work for criminals. As part of its war on information, the gun lobby has blocked efforts to put sales records into an integrated database, making the data more difficult for law enforcement officers to retrieve and organize, and complicating efforts to analyze gun trafficking patterns. After visiting the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ National Tracing Center in West Virginia, which is the nation’s sole facility tracing guns used in crimes, Washington Post reporter James Grimaldi described the place as “something like out of the movie ‘Brazil,’ where you could literally see boxes and boxes of documents that pile up.”
    You might think, as we do, that the gun lobby’s aversion to information, and its success in securing congressional support for secrecy, poses a threat to public health and law enforcement (not to mention democracy). There is surely a case to be made to that effect. Yet it’s harder to document that argument thanks to the successful suppression of information.
    That, of course, is the point. In a study published in 1993 in the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers found that the presence of a gun in a home significantly increased the risks of homicide and suicide. (A finding seemingly borne out in the case of Nancy Lanza, the mother of the Newtown killer, who was murdered with her own gun.) The study was compelling, thought-provoking and attention-grabbing. Was it conclusive? Hardly. But rather than trust in scientific principle and a free marketplace of ideas to sort through the data, the gun lobby mobilized to snuff out such research altogether.
    The effort was remarkably successful. In 1996, Republican Representative Jay Dickey of Arkansas pushed an amendment cutting $2.6 million from the budget of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The import of the amendment was lost on no one. The CDC had spent $2.6 million on gun research the year before. Thereafter, the CDC was expressly prohibited from using funds to “advocate or promote gun control.” A subsequent effort, by Republican Representative Denny Rehberg of Montana, applied similar restrictions to the National Institutes of Health.
    These are the results of the gun lobby’s storied political muscle. They are not, however, the actions of a political movement confident that history, data or reason itself can support its agenda. Truth doesn’t fear information.
    The Newtown massacre may mark a turning point in America’s tragic gun politics. Yet even under the most optimistic scenario, the quest for reasonable gun laws will be a lengthy, difficult battle. It’s best if all sides are well-armed with facts.


  105. The US has a history, going back before Independence, of carrying arms, which is so entrenched it was a included in their constitution as the second amendment.

    Their beginnings as a nation coincided with the rapid development of firearms an the pioneering spread of colonisers across the continent. The gun became the weapon of choice for settlers and outlaws alike.

    It is so deeply engrained that it will take generations to remove the link with their past, even if it could happen at all.

    Australian colonists, by comparison, never faced the same opposition or needed the same level of personal armament, and were, for the large part, protected by an official armed force.

    So the notion of removing all guns is the one obvious, sensible solution, especially when viewed from outside the US, but, in view of the history and dependence on firearms as defence and to provide a ready made militia, it is inconceivable that, in the short term, any Washington leader will even attempt to legally remove firearms from the populace.

    Therefore, regardless of the stance of the NRA, which is clearly blind-sided by the history of the development of the US, there must be found another solution to the protection of innocent and vulnerable children on schools, which are a clear target for deranged, gun-toting maniacs.

    To declare a school a gun-free zone is noble and absolutely the right thing to do in a politically correct and social sense, but completely impractical in terms of the menace from without, which is not impressed or hindered by the boundaries of common sense or liberal expedience.

    Once an attacker has entered the gun-free zone with a cache of firearms, intent on maximum mayhem and slaughter, the ability to halt such an offensive is completely removed by the powerlessness of those who are chartered to defend the livelihood of the children within.

    A sign declaring a school a gun-free zone is never enough to combat the madness of some individuals, especially in a culture which has a long held belief that the terminator is the solution to many ills.

    I am not supporting the use of firearms, but attempting some kind of pragmatic solution to the murder of vulnerable innocents. If teachers are willing to be armed and trained then that is one avenue, given the status quo, and another is a fortress school protected by legally instituted armed guards.

    But leaving school-children at the mercy of deadly maniacs is culpably irrational given the amount of weaponry available to the citizenry.

  106. Interestingly enough I was reading about the Anglican Church today.
    Evidently there were thousands of Anglicans who went to Canada instead of fighting the British in the revolutionary war.And that’s when the Episcopalian church was born.

    Makes me wonder what I would have done if I lived in America at the time.

    How about you guys?

  107. I think all citizens were armed in some way 200 years ago. It seems to have been a far less safe environment.

    One solution to present to the US would be to say, if you want to keep the guns, you need to pay higher taxes to provide better protection for children in schools. Let them vote through their wallet.

  108. It’s interesting that all these supposed pro-Life Christians are pro-gun.

    They are a nation and a people who live in fear and mistrust. I need a gun in case I get raped, I get mugged, my home gets invaded, the blacks riot, the government comes to take me away.

    In no sense at all could you say America is a Christian country.

    Btw there was a ban on assault rifles which Clinton signed off on until George W lifted it.

  109. “I think all citizens were armed in some way 200 years ago.”

    The revolutionary forces were made up of voluntary militia and were involved in a few wars with the Brits including the War of Independence, the War of 1812 and the Indian wars.

    Militia had to have their own weapons.

    “It seems to have been a far less safe environment.”

    The native Americans would certainly agree.

  110. “It seems to have been a far less safe environment.”

    The native Americans would certainly agree.


    You’ve still got it Bones!

  111. I was referring to universal trends, in fact, not just the US. Many carried swords.

    The native Americans apparently transferred from bows, arrows and spears once the NRA of the day opened up the market.

    But, as you point out, the US has been built on revolution, much like modern France. Well, you could add the whole of Europe, really.

    If it hadn’t been for Wesley and Whitfield England may have gone down the same road to a republic.

    Democracy has its good points, but it was the vote which put Jesus on the cross.

  112. You mean John Wesley the crypto Jewish hell hound? Believe or burn boys, believe or burn…by their fruit you shall know them.

    Actually dumbocracy has always favored the wealthy and willful – it was invented by the Greeks (who were largely diaspora Jews) and the vote was limited to about 10% of the community, the same 10% who pretty much run things to this day in dumbocracies the world over..

    America was a Jewish British Crown social experiment, as was OZ, and NZ and Canada – the revolution was a sham – Washington was a Jewish change agent and while America is in essence the land of fatness of Esau, it solidly serves Jacob and always has done, just as Great Britain and the Commonwealth is at heart a Jewish colonial construct.

    Until you get what the Masonic Crown is about and how the Vatican, The City and District of Columbia run the show you have not got a show. Now the Crown wants to eradicate the Lion’s share of the world population and leave only those who will serve satan and hand the planet back to their god. Of course God will have something to say about that…but it might do to bone up on what it is like to be a useless eater or an indigenous person…this time WE are going to be as the Indians and Abo’s and natives…

    If it was the vote which put Jesus on the Cross then who put the Crown on the Kings and Queens? Actually, it was (the will of) GOD who put the King of Kings on the cross – but it was the vote (will of the people) which gave us kings…for it pleased God to offer up His Son one time, a sacrifice for all.

    The cross was God’s idea, not Man’s, just as Kings were Man’s idea and not God’s, and that is why He gives you leaders after your own hearts until you get sick of it and seek to sit at the right of majesty on high…

    As for the right to have weapons, we have all the weaponry we need in Christ. Maybe God is wanting to take away their weapons and give them some old fashioned affliction and persecution for the Word’s sake…

    And as for Episcopalians and Methodists in Canada, their treatment of the Native Americans was even worse in many ways than that which happened in America.

    Canada is kind of America’s head or ‘conscience’ – the border is really illusory as will soon become evident as Canadian troops along with various UN troops will be used to help disarm ‘patriotic’ Americans. Hitler would be proud, and the Queen of Nazis will smile wryly…

    If you want to know who really rules Amerika, simply take a look at the way Obama bows and scrapes to Royalty. Or as Nelson Rockefeller once said, “It is not about who owns a business but who controls it – all we need is enough shares to give us a seat on the board…”

  113. He’s basically right though ..

    God’s plan was for Jesus to be crucified
    The vote put Jesus on the Cross
    Therefore democracy is a good thing.

Comments are closed.