LDS Perspective on Warren Jeffs: Is Polygamy That Bad?

I have split feelings on this. It's easy to say that they (polygamists) should be allowed to practice their religion anyway they want - provided it doesn't involve children under the legal age of consent. This is an argument I have heard many times. On the other hand, it's also easy to say (based on that logic) that any type of marriage should therefore be permitted - homosexual or otherwise. So, can polygamy really be such a bad thing?

When it comes to determining which familial "choice" is right, the church has made itself very clear:

"We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God."

It's hard for some of us to accept restrictions based on marriage when it comes to polygamy. After all, our own church supported plural marriage at one time, and still holds the principle to be an eternal one. However, that principle was applicable to a select period in time, and has since been abandoned. Now, people can debate all day long whether the church abandoned it based on political pressure or divine revelation. But as members, we believe in the latter if in fact we truly sustain our leaders and have received our own testimony as to the divinity of the Gospel. Therefore, despite our history, we should continue to sustain our leaders when they tell us that today, polygamy is wrong.

Looking at some of the so-called "consensual" polygamous relationships, it's easy to sympathize and say, "They're not harming anyone. Let them be. After all, they are a family." We must look past such feelings of sympathy and recognize that these people entered into a relationship that is against the law. They may be a family, but that family was created by people who willingly broke law, or thought that they were somehow above it. In such cases, the grave responsibility lies with the father and mother when that family is ultimately broken up by the law. It is tragic, but we believe in upholding the law of the land.

You will see many people sympathize with Warren Jeffs in the coming weeks and months. You will hear many debate the reasoning behind anti-polygamy laws. Keep in mind, that these arguments will be co-opted by Satan. He will use this as a means by which to destroy the family. He'll say, "If you Mormons say you're for the family, then why would you want to break up such a peaceful (yet polygamous) relationship?." Don't be fooled. If we listen to such arguments, and fall under their sway, we open up the family to destruction on a far greater scale than we might realize. Remember, if we legalize one type of "alternate" marriage then we will legalize all types, and this is what Satan wants. It will cheapen the family, and it will cheapen the sanctity of marriage.

Ultimately, we must ask ourselves if we truly believe marriage to be "between a man and a woman." If we do, then we must fight any attempt to change that, no matter how much we may sympathize with the enemy.

Official Church Policy on Polygamy

The Gathering Nuclear Storm

If you were Iran, and you wanted to put yourself into a place that would give you power beyond compare in the Muslim world, how would you go about doing it?

First, you would neutralize the United States military by reducing its morale, and weakening its support at home. You would accomplish this by turning Iraq into a trap for America. You would cause Americans to be divided, thus taking away their greatest natural strength. And by sending your elite troops into Iraq to ferment instability, you would increase American pressure to withdraw from the region. This is exactly what is taking place now.

Second, you would have to neutralize the Israeli military. By using the techniques you learned in Iraq, you could also drag Israel into a war for which it was unprepared to fight. You would use every resource in the West to show how Muslims were being victimized. You would use your political connections gained through oil sales to pander to the anti-Semitic European countries, thus eliminating any support that might be given Israel. You would, through your propaganda, encourage the West to pressure Israel into accepting a ceasefire - knowing this would be seen as a victory for Hezbollah (your agents of destruction). This is what is happening now.

Finally, and again, through your oil connections, you would ensure that Russia and China - America's most powerful potential enemies - would not support a western economic embargo. This would allow you to pursue your nuclear program without pressure. And, because of their involvement in other wars and low support at home, the American and Israeli military would be unable to stop you. Again, we have now reached exactly this point.

If I didn't think Iran had a form of outside help (and by outside, I mean outside of this world), I would be missing something that should be plainly obvious. Iran has executed control of world affairs for its own purposes with near-perfection. Their obectives are not peace, love and respect for their neighbors. On the contrary, their objectives are the destruction of a nation (Israel), the dominance of other religions (see Sharia law) and the physical expansion of their empire (Iraqi and Syrian Shia interests are making this happen now). All of their goals are rooted in evil. The master of this deception should be plain.

On top of all of this, you have a leader of Iran who believes it is his religious duty to bring about the cataclysmic "end times" so that his Mahdi can return. And in the western corner, you have a US President who believes with all of his heart that God wants him to stop Iran from attaining those goals. The game pieces are nuclear weapons. The stakes are high.

While the world may be uncomfortable with Bush's faith in God during times of crisis, I am not. Even though our application of Christian beliefs may differ, and even though I believe that he has made a few mistakes along the way, I still believe Bush to be a just man. I also believe that while our nation may be wicked, we still have a role to play in bringing peace to parts of the world where there is now only murder and religious oppression. God will sort out the indivduals who are to be punished. But for now, the goals of our nation are consistent with the Lord's will, that is, that His Kingdom will roll forward. And right now, Iran's vision is definitely not the tools by which that divine plan will be accomplished.

For the article that inspired me to write the above, click here.

Beware the 15 of Shaban (September 9th)

Since we all know that Iranian President Ahmadinejad is a "Twelver," and that he is also big on special dates, perhaps this "Mid of Shaban," which happens to be September 9-10 on our calendar, will be the day Iran makes it's move.

Mid of Shaban is the birth date of the 12th and final imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi. It is celebrated by Twelvers on the 15th of Shaban. Many Shi'a fast on this day to show gratitude.

I know I'm borderlined obsessed over this... but I just can't shake the feeling that Iran is really up to something terrible. Since nothing happened on the 22nd of August, the date Ahmadinejad predicted his "day of happiness," except for their lame excuse for a diplomatic response to the carrots and sticks offered them in exchange for giving up their nuke program, I am guessing at another date.

Never hurts to prepare for the worst.

French Seduction and Betrayal

This just boils my blood. Also, you notice how the only thing France did do with any urgency was evacuate their citizens from Lebanon? When it comes to tucking their tails and running, no one does it better than the French.

Seduce and Betray
By NIDRA POLLER
August 24, 2006

Jacques Chirac, like Hassan Nasrallah, is always victorious. France is always first and foremost: first to promise to send troops, first to back down on the promise. Triumphant newscasters announce: Fifty French combat engineers have been dispatched on an urgent mission to Lebanon! One hundred fifty more are on the way! While the rest of the world dithers, France springs into action!

The French, who were supposed to be the backbone of the beefed-up United Nations contingent, announced from the get-go that their troops wouldn't step in until Hezbollah was disarmed. At the same time, France mustered all its diplomatic power to stop the only army, the Israeli Defense Forces, that could actually achieve this. Paris knew that the Lebanese government couldn't disarm Hezbollah, and that Hezbollah wouldn't do so voluntarily. In a smashing non sequitur, France reduced its promise from 3,000 battle-ready soldiers to 200 engineers. Some backbone! Now, probably embarrassed by the waves of ridicule this deflation provoked, they are denying they ever promised thousands, while pledging to do better than 200, surely emboldened by the U.N. promise that these troops will not, heaven forbid, be asked to disarm Hezbullah.

Clear-minded people recognized the global threat forecast by Hezbollah's aggression against Israel. U.S. President George W. Bush supported Israel's right to self-defense; Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice resisted pressure to impose a hasty cease-fire; it looked like the West was standing firm.

And then that 21st-century fetish, the "international community," led by France, drowned that resolve in the cheap perfume of multilateral diplomacy. U.N. Resolution 1701 is a lace handkerchief fluttered in the face of reality. As soon as the resolution took effect, the instigators and perpetrators of the attack celebrated. The resolution tightens Hezbollah's stranglehold by handing it a victory it could not earn on the battlefield; Iran warmed up its exterminating engines; Syria decided that Hezbollah-type action was more promising than diplomatic acrobatics; Hamas swore it would not be outdone by the brave fighting brothers. In other words, jihad.

Yes, the U.S. was fooled by a slick French seduce-and-betray operation. Paris isn't having second thoughts about its troop commitments -- it probably never intended to send a robust force that would have taken on Hezbollah in the first place. On July 24, in separate interviews, French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy, Lebanon's pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud and Hezbollah leader Nasrallah himself set forth virtually the same conditions for a political solution to the conflict: an immediate cease fire without any real pressure on Hezbollah to disarm until an endless list of alleged gripes against Israel have been solved.

Mr. Douste-Blazy's obsequious pledge of allegiance to the great civilized state of Iran, "factor of stabilization in the region," was not a fluke; it was the tip-off. Far too much has been made of President Chirac's personal gripe with Syrian President Bashar Assad, and far too little attention is paid to France's troubling complicity with Iran and its merciless Hezbollah arm. The charming French minister of defense, Michèle Alliot-Marie, says she is not sending troops unless and until the U.N. can guarantee their safety. An anonymous source cited by Le Monde journalist Mouna Naïm claims that a French diplomat went directly to the Iranians to obtain a promise of mutual nonbelligerency. Barah Mikhail, a fellow of the French government-friendly IRIS think tank, spelled it out in an Aug. 19 radio interview: France doesn't want to be put in a situation where its soldiers would have to side with Israel against Hezbollah. To choose between a Western democratic ally and a terrorist organization seems too morally troubling for Paris.

Did I say terrorist organization? Quel faux pas. In an interview with Le Monde on July 26, Mr. Chirac reiterated that it would be counterproductive to brand Hezbollah a terrorist organization just "now, when we want, if possible, to try to bring Hezbollah back into the fold of the Lebanese community and help it become a political party." And so Paris remains the main opponent of putting Hezbollah on the European Union terror list.

France had been aching to grab a piece of the honest-broker action in an increasingly turbulent Middle East and impose its politique arabe on the hyperpuissant American rival. Co-sponsorship of U.N. Resolution 1559 was interpreted as evidence of a new Franco-American entente. Having more or less chased Syria out of Lebanon, the newfound chums joined forces to micromanage the current conflict -- which in fact ignited on the smoldering ashes of 1559.

France signed on to a joint resolution consistent with the American-Israeli position and then flip-flopped on every issue. The conditions that France somehow managed to impose on U.S. negotiators did not develop in the course of negotiations. They were enunciated, domestically, from the very beginning and sustained to the last minute. The French public was indoctrinated to swallow every point of the Chirac doctrine, illustrated line by line in the media. For the French, this was not a war against a terror organization acting on behalf of a genocidal and soon nuclear Iran. From the very start, the conflict was portrayed simply as a Lebanese humanitarian crisis, and the only "moral" solution was to declare solve it required an immediate cease-fire to get the evil Israeli army off their backs.

But if diplomacy is more moral than war and better protects us against jihad, how did it lead to a U.N. resolution that is the exact opposite of the original intentions to deprive Hezbollah of ill-earned gains, assert the sovereignty of the Lebanese government, offer Israel through diplomacy the security it was fighting to achieve through military action, and put Iran and Syria on notice that the international community will not be cowered by their heinous projects? Not to mention the kidnapped soldiers, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, who remain in Hezbollah's hands. U.S. officials had backed Israel's demand for their unconditional liberation: no dirty bargains, no disproportionate prisoner exchanges. Their names didn't even make it into the body of the resolution.

As the loose-knit promises of 1701 unravel, France insists that Israel release the blockade to allow the free flow of goods -- returning refugees and, inevitably, combatants and arms. Paris is also pushing for the payoff resolution, which will demand mass release of Lebanese criminals held in Israeli jails, and evacuation of the tiny Syrian territory known as the Shebaa Farms, thereby justifying Hezbollah's lie to be a resistance movement against Israeli occupation. This misconceived exercise in multilateral diplomacy under the aegis of the U.N. unfolds as the West totters on the brink of a showdown with Iran. It reads like a fatal error.

Ms. Poller, an American novelist, has lived in Paris since 1972.

Iran Scores in World War

As much as I have been trying to resist it, the outline of what is to come has becoming increasingly clear to me - we are at war with Islam. Or at least, we will be at war with Islam.

The way I see things now, we're only at war with the radical fringe within Islam. Those fundamentalists, or Islamo-fascists if you will, are the ones who demand nothing short of the complete submission of the West to Allah, or barring that, total annihilation of the West. But with Europe cowering away from calling a fire a fire, and Israel failing to complete it's objectives based on pressure from Europe (and the US, unbelievably), the radical Islamo-fascists are now being seen as the saviors of their people!

Those who were once regarded as terrorists and thugs among their own people, are now starting to look a lot more effective and thus, become respected. This is not good. It now means that governments in the Middle-East must protect this radical element to satisfy the will of their increasingly beligerent populations. This is how HAMAS won in Gaza and is what is likely to cause Hezbollah to rally during the next Lebanese elections.

This op-ed in the Washington Times explains with further clarity:

BERN, Switzerland. -- Those who gazed into their crystal balls at the end of the 20th century to get a glimpse of coming attractions missed the main event. Islam, whether in the form of young jihadis who live to die killing those who live to live in freedom, or conservative oil sheiks and emirs clinging to divine-right-of-kings privileges by heaping praise on Hezbollah guerrillas, dominates our fear of what the future may bring.

Perception is reality in most parts of the world but nowhere as much as in the Arab world and in the Muslim world beyond. Hezbollah ("Party of God"), listed as a terrorist organization by the U.S., is now seen as the clear victor over Israel, the Middle East's only democracy. For Israel to lose 116 soldiers is comparable to the U.S. losing 5,800 in 34 days of warfare (multiply by 50 to get the equivalent population ratio). So far, the U.S. has lost 2,600 in 3-1/2 years in Iraq).

Continue reading...

Our Reluctance to "Be Prepared"

Boy Scouts have been familiar with the motto, "Be Prepared" for darn near a century. Americans have been told to be prepared for twice as long. Basic survival necessitates that we be prepared, yet shockingly (but not surprisingly) - most Americans are not.

We spend money on houses we can't afford, more cars than we need, junk food, expensive electronics, pedicures, entertainment, pharmaceuticals, self-help and cable TV pay-per-view movies. So, why can't we spend a few hundred bucks (over time) to set aside basic food supplies and water?

We have been warned, and warned again. There have been massive tsunamis, earthquakes and floods everywhere in the world. Then, last year, we got a serious warning as one of our great cities was utterly destroyed by a hurricane. Yet, we still say, "all is well!" No one thinks it can happen to them.

From a spiritual perspective, we have been warned by a Prophet of God. From a literal perspective, God Himself has warned us in the form of these calamities. If we continue to ignore all of these warnings we have witnessed - we only sow the seeds of our own destruction. PREPARE NOW!!

For a sad commentary on our laziness in being prepared, here are some excerpts from a TIME article that was released today:

Historically, humans get serious about avoiding disasters only after one has just smacked them across the face. Well, then, by that logic, 2006 should have been a breakthrough year for rational behavior. With the memory of 9/11, the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, still fresh in their minds, Americans watched Katrina, the most expensive disaster in U.S. history, on live TV. Anyone who didn't know it before should have learned that bad things can happen. And they are made much worse by our own lack of ambition--our willful blindness to risk as much as our reluctance to work together before everything goes to hell.

[...]

In the 12 months since Katrina, the rest of the U.S. has not proved to be a quicker study than the Gulf Coast. There is still no federal law requiring state and local officials to plan for the evacuation of the sick, elderly, disabled or poor. But in the past few months, both houses of Congress triumphantly passed bills that require locals to plan for the evacuation of pets.

[...]

But it's not just bureaucrats who are unprepared for calamity. Regular people are even less likely to plan ahead. In this month's TIME poll, about half of those surveyed said they had personally experienced a natural disaster or public emergency. But only 16% said they were "very well prepared" for the next one. Of the rest, about half explained their lack of preparedness by saying they don't live in a high-risk area.

In fact, 91% of Americans live in places at a moderate-to-high risk of earthquakes, volcanoes, tornadoes, wildfires, hurricanes, flooding, high-wind damage or terrorism, according to an estimate calculated for TIME by the Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute at the University of South Carolina. But Americans have a tendency to be die-hard optimists, literally. It is part of what makes the country great--and vincible. "There are four stages of denial," says Eric Holdeman, director of emergency management for Seattle's King County, which faces a significant earthquake threat. "One is, it won't happen. Two is, if it does happen, it won't happen to me. Three: if it does happen to me, it won't be that bad. And four: if it happens to me and it's bad, there's nothing I can do to stop it anyway."

This time, they're serious.

So, no armageddon after all. Instead, Iran say's they're ready for "serious" talks. What in the world does that mean? The statement alone proves their complete indifference to international law. Obviously, nothing was taken seriously in Iran before today. But you know what, the UN and the international community has brought this kind of response on their own heads. If we're not gonna get serious with Iran, then why bother threatening them at all?

The AP reports:

TEHRAN, Iran. Iran's top nuclear negotiator said Tuesday that Tehran was ready to enter "serious negotiations" over its disputed nuclear program but did not say whether it was willing to suspend uranium enrichment _ the West's key demand.

The negotiator, Ali Larijani, hand-delivered Iran's response to a six- nation package of nuclear incentives aimed at persuading it to suspend enrichment. He gave the reply to ambassadors from Britain, China, Russia, France, Germany and Switzerland, state-run television said, without disclosing details.

"Iran is prepared as of Aug. 23 to enter serious negotiations" with the countries that proposed the package, state-run television quoted Larijani as telling the envoys.

Iranian officials close to the meeting said Iran offered a "new formula" to resolve the dispute as part of its formal response to the incentive package. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information.

"Iran has provided a comprehensive response to everything said in the Western package. In addition, Iran, in its formal response, has asked some questions to be answered," one official said, without elaborating.

European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana said Iran's response needs a "detailed and careful analysis," EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana said.

In a statement, Solana said he would remain "in open contact" with Larijani.

Today is the Day

Will Iran bring us terror and war, or will it simply give the West more of the same doublespeak we've been hearing for years? Will Iran, after having raised worldwide alarm over it's ambiguous statements regarding 8/22, simply respond to the world by saying: We are open to negotiation but we will not negotiate on our nuclear enrichment? After the perceived threats, this would come as a relief to many - taking the spotlight (once again) off their nuclear ambitions. We will see.

From CNN:

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iran has given its formal answer to a package of incentives offered by the U.N. Security Council's five permanent members plus Germany in exchange for halting its uranium enrichment program, according to Iranian media.

It said Ali Larijani, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, handed the response to ambassadors from Germany, France, Britain, Russia, China and Switzerland in Tehran on Tuesday afternoon, according to Iran's state-run Arabic-language Al-Alam television, Reuters reported. It did not give details of the reply.

Switzerland, which is not a member of the U.N. Security Council, is representing the interests of the United States because Washington does not have diplomatic relations with Iran.

Iran still has until the end of the month to formally respond to a U.N. resolution demanding it stop its nuclear program and allow full inspections, or face economic sanctions.

Iranian officials in recent days have already rejected the U.N. resolution, saying they are within their rights to build a nuclear energy program despite fears from the West that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons.

The Final Hours

Let's hope Ahmadinejad's "answer to the world" doesn't amount to anything. But if he is as crazy as some people believe, then tonight, on the eve of August 22, things could turn very ugly, very fast.

ABC News:

While no extra safeguards are in place, U.S. law enforcement are not ignoring the possible significance of tomorrow's date, August 22, a date that marks an important historic event on the Islamic calendar.

Internet websites have been full of speculation that it could be a target date for terrorists in commemoration of the return of the 12th imam, a supposed day of reckoning for Shiites.

August 22 was rumored by intelligence experts to be a possible date that the London plotters would blow-up passenger planes headed towards the United States, though it is not known if the suspects were Shiite extremists.

This year, August 22 marks the holy day on the Islamic calendar that is the day of reckoning for Shiites. Some Shiite sects believe that August 22 could correspond to the end of the world. And just today, after much hype, Iran has announced that it will continue to develop its nuclear program. To followers of Iranian President Ahmadinejad, this is a well-timed affront to Israel, the United States and the world. The United Nations had given Iran until the end of the month to respond, but Ahmadinejad had made it clear to all Iranians and the world that he intended to respond on the eve of August 22.

Whether or not this announcement is the end of Ahmadinejad's plans for August 22, one expert says we will have to wait and watch.

"The only thing we can know is that the date was not chosen by accident," said Robert Spencer, Director of Jihadwatch.org and an adjunct fellow at the Free Congress Foundation, a conservative think tank. "It does seem very likely, very probable, that he has something major in mind, whether only a major announcement or a major attack, we will soon see."

Watch and Be Ready

We're getting closer to Iran's "Day of Happiness" on August 22. I have discussed the significance of that date on this blog for several weeks, and now it is upon us. And what's more, many people around the world (including prominent experts and news organizations) are seeing this Tuesday as the possible starting point for WWIII. Hopefully, it will amount to something far less dramatic and I will be proved wrong. For once, I would welcome looking like a fool.

However, the evidence is pointing to something big on the horizon, something that will change the way in which we view the world. Let's look at some of the hard facts:

• Iran is currently engaging in large military exercises. In the past, military "excersises" have been used as cover for war preparations.
• North Korea is preparing for a possible missile launch, and/or a nuclear test. Iran and North Korea have been working on nuclear technology and missiles for years.
• Israel's military has been weakened by the recent struggle with Hezbollah (backed by Iran). Israel is typically seen as a natural military check to any Iranian agression in the region.

There are a lot of things in place that are very favorable to Iran doing something very stupid. I'll post more tomorrow as I get additional information.

Bush: North Korea Poses a Threat

More on the possible North Korean nuclear tests:

CAMP DAVID, Md (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Friday warned that North Korea would pose a threat to the world if it tested a nuclear bomb for the first time, following reports that the reclusive government was considering such a move.

Bush also pressed participants in six-party talks to persuade North Korea to give up its nuclear-weapons program, while a senior U.S. official played down the chances of an early nuclear test.

"If North Korea were to conduct a test, it's just a constant reminder for people in the neighborhood, in particular, that North Korea poses a threat," Bush said at the Camp David presidential retreat. "We expect our friends and those sitting around the table with us to act in such a manner as to help rid the world of the threat."

View Entire Article

North Korea Appears to Be Preparing for Nuclear Test

This is a BIG deal. It also ties in with what I've been saying about Iran (since the two are cooperating on nuclear programs). I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a nuclear test in both North Korea and Iran on August 22.

Aug. 17, 2006 — There is new evidence that North Korea may be preparing to for an underground test of nuclear bomb, U.S. officials tell ABC News.

"It is the view of the intelligence community that a test is real possibility," says a senior State Department official.

A senior military official tells ABC News that a U.S. intelligence agency has recently observed "suspicious vehicle movement" at a suspected North Korean test site.

Continue reading the ABC News Article.

Iran to Launch Major Military Exercise

In what many (including me) see as a parallel to Hitler's summer of 1939, Iran has announced major military exercises that will begin on Saturday, August 19th, and have no forseeable ending in sight, the AP reports. All signs in my eyes point to something big on August 22nd, as I have been warning all along. I hope I'm wrong.

Iran will launch a series of large-scale military maneuvers across the country and has not made plans for an end to the ongoing war games, the army said Thursday.

"The maneuvers are aimed at introducing Iran's new defensive doctrine," military spokesman Gen. Mohammad Reza Ashtiani was quoted as saying by state-run television.

He said the exercises would begin on Saturday in the south east of the country. "It will continue in the whole of Iran, stage by stage for an unspecified period," Ashtiani said.

The announcement came as Iran faces heightened international scrutiny because of its contentious nuclear program and for supporting the Lebanese Hizbullah guerrillas.

Iran denies Israeli accusations it is arming and training Hizbullah fighters.

Ashtiani praised Hizbullah for its month-long fight against Israel. "Human forces can decide fate of a war. We saw it in Lebanon," the general said, echoing Hizbullah claims it won the war by resisting a massive bombing and ground offensive for more than a month before a UN-brokered cease-fire came into place earlier this week.

The military spokesman said Iran's maneuvers reflected the current level of tension in the Middle East. "We have to be prepared against any threat and we should be a role model for other countries," local newspapers quoted Gen. Ashtiani, as saying. "Our army is ready to defuse all plots against Islamic Republic of Iran."

The military exercise, involving 12 infantry regiments, is called "The Blow of Zolfaghar," in reference to a sword that belonged to Imam Ali, one of the most revered figures of Islam for Shi'ite Muslims. A majority of Iran's 70 million people are Shi'ite.

On Wednesday, the Interior Ministry said that Iran also plans to boost security patrols on its borders.

Ministry spokesman Mostafa Pourmohammadi said the move targeted smugglers. Drug traffickers killed 8 police officers during a firefight in southeastern Iran last week.

Iran has routinely held war games over the past two decades to improve its combat readiness and test locally made equipment such as missiles, tanks and armored personnel carriers. In April, Teheran launched its biggest military maneuvers so far, during which it said it tested several advanced weaponry including missiles.

Nukes at Our Ports

I hate to say it because it's been said so many times before... But, this situation is not a matter of if - it's a matter of when. And now we have a better picture of the devastation that would result if a nuclear bomb was detonated at the Port of Long Beach, one of the busiest in the country.

Here is the news article:

Rand: Port Blast Would Be Devastating

A nuclear explosion at the Port of Long Beach could kill 60,000 people immediately, expose 150,000 more to hazardous radiation and cause 10 times the economic loss of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, according to a new Rand Corp. study.

The study released Tuesday by the Santa Monica-based think tank was the latest to address concerns about the possible vulnerability of the nation's ports.

It analyzed the possible effects of terrorists detonating a 10-kiloton nuclear bomb in a shipping container unloaded onto a Long Beach pier.

In addition to the human casualties, such a blast might destroy the infrastructure and every ship at the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, which together handle about one-third of the nation's imports, the study said. Damage at port-area refineries could create critical shortages.

The two ports have taken steps to tighten security.

Last September, the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles received the second- and third-largest security grants from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, $12.7 million and $11.4 million, respectively. The money is to go for protecting ports from small craft and underwater attacks and enhance explosive detection capabilities.

Efforts are also under way to design a facility within the Port of Los Angeles where agents could thoroughly inspect suspicious cargo.

Currently, customs officials screen cargo with radiation monitors and X-ray machines at the docks then truck suspicious containers to a warehouse six miles away for closer inspections.

Click HERE for link.

Iran, August 22 and the Apocalypse

I believe that Iran's President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is a radical with apocalyptic visions of grandeur.

For starters, Ahmadinejad has expressed on more than one occasion his devout belief that he is in direct communication with heaven about his policies. Now normally, I would write this off as pandering to a pious audience. However, there are many interests at work in Iran besides fanaticism, so it would profit Ahmadinejad little to cater to the zealots.

Also, the crazy remarks attributed to Ahmadinejad go back to his days as a mayor, and even further to his radical youth - where he participated (albeit in a minor role) in the American Embassy hostage taking in 1979. So, to say he is only doing this to appear tough is misleading. He's been walking the walk and talking the talk all of his adult life.

On top of all of this, Ahmadinejad belongs to a small subset of Shiite Muslims who believe in the return of the Hidden Imam. Even the ultra-radical Ayatollah has had to rein in some of Ahmandinejad's comments regarding this particular faith. An interesting note about this Hidden Imam - believers view his return to the way Christians view the return of Christ. That is, that he will return amid a great world struggle to fight on behalf of the righteous and hasten a day of eternal happiness. The big difference (well, one of many really) between this and Christianity is that the Hidden Imam's believers follow the belief that they can actually bring about his return by spinning the world into chaos. In fact, believers claim it to be their duty. So, that Ahmadinejad is one of these believers should be of great concern to the western world.

Does Iran have nukes? That is the million dollar question. The Israelis predicted he would be armed in 6 months - about 6 months ago. While this is open to debate, that Iran has formed close ties with North Korea is not. And there is general consensus that Kim Jong Il does, in fact, possess nuclear weapons. So, does Iran have some of that North Korean sweet stuff? If they do, I would expect an announcement to such effect on August 22nd.

Finally, the real proof about Ahmadinejad's intentions are in his actions. He's funding Hezbollah, forging defense compacts with Syria and calling for the destruction of Israel. Given his personal make-up, I'm inclined to believe that he is serious about doing something to back up his words.

August 22 approaches ominously, indeeed.

Iran's Armageddon May Have a Date

This is copied from www.drudgereport.com, which paraphrases an article in today's Wall Street Journal. I am posting it here because I think there may be some truth to this, as I mentioned in a previous post.

Here's the article:

WSJ: Scholar Warns Iran's Ahmadinejad May Have 'Cataclysmic Events' In Mind For August 22
Tue Aug 08 2006 10:22:35 ET

In a WALL STREET JOURNAL op-ed Tuesday, Princeton's Bernard Lewis writes: "There is a radical difference between the Islamic Republic of Iran and other governments with nuclear weapons. This difference is expressed in what can only be described as the apocalyptic worldview of Iran's present rulers."

"In Islam as in Judaism and Christianity, there are certain beliefs concerning the cosmic struggle at the end of time -- Gog and Magog, anti-Christ, Armageddon, and for Shiite Muslims, the long awaited return of the Hidden Imam, ending in the final victory of the forces of good over evil, however these may be defined."

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad "and his followers clearly believe that this time is now, and that the terminal struggle has already begun and is indeed well advanced. It may even have a date, indicated by several references by the Iranian president to giving his final answer to the US about nuclear development by Aug. 22," which this year corresponds "to the 27th day of the month of Rajab of the year 1427. This, by tradition, is the night when many Muslims commemorate the night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq, first to 'the farthest mosque,' usually identified with Jerusalem, and then to heaven and back (c.f., Koran XVII.1).

"This might well be deemed an appropriate date for the apocalyptic ending of Israel and if necessary of the world. It is far from certain that Mr. Ahmadinejad plans any such cataclysmic events precisely for Aug. 22. But it would be wise to bear the possibility in mind."

A Study into the Obvious

It's amazing that it takes a 3-year study to point out the blatantly obvious - that listening to sexually explicit music/lyrics at a young age can lead to increased sexual behavior.

The STUDY finds that "among heavy listeners, 51 percent started having sex within two years, versus 29 percent of those who said they listened to little or no sexually degrading music." The results were obtained by a phone survey which followed a group of teens over the course of several years.

Now, I am not blind to the fact that other factors can contribute to increased sexual activity among American children. Additionally, I am not claiming that this study constitutes rock solid proof that any teen who listens to such will become another Walt Whitman, either (studies are often open to many interpretations). However, it doesn't take rocket science to see the damage being done to our youth as a result of the MTVs of the world and their messages of sexual liberation (even for pre-teens). And, having once been a hormone-filled teen myself, I can say with authority that the more sexual information I was fed - the more I became interested in it.

Even without a study it is reasonable to assume that listening to music with erotic beats and sensual rhythms (mixed with graphic lyrics) will only add to increase this stimulation that might otherwise be put off until someone is a little more sexually mature. If this wasn't the case, then why not just play bandstand music in clubs and discos?

There will be some who will demand that I "step down from my morale high-horse" when citing reports like this one. To them, these studies fly in the face of their liberal philosophies of "freedom without responsibility." They say that kids will always be sexual creatures so why try to stifle that impulse under some outdated, draconian religious ideal of morality? They look the other way when lives are destroyed by the emotional trauma, depression, disease and broken familes that often follow teenage sexual relationships.

To those people I ask: is your life so much better now that you have sex, abortions, antibiotics and antidepressents on demand? You think maybe, just maybe we'd have a little less use for these dramatic and life-altering (and life-killing) crutches if we had acted more responsibily as teens, or had parents who enforced a little morality? At the very least, maybe if we controlled the content of what went into our kid's ears (instead of acting like destroying their life is an acceptable option) by cutting the demand for such disgusting music, we could actually make a difference. Rather than pretending to make a difference by subscribing to the popular liberal sexual ideals of the 21st century.