Trump Launches Attack on Syria, Seeking God's Wisdom to Stop the 'Horror' - http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2017/april/trump-launches-attack-on-syria-seeking-gods-wisdom-to-stop-the-horror
The United States blasted a Syrian air base with 59 cruise missiles Thursday night in retaliation for this week's horrific chemical weapons attack that killed at least 87 civilians, including 31 children.
It was the first direct American assault on the Syrian government and Trump's most dramatic military order since becoming president.
"Assad choked out the lives of helpless men, women, and children," Trump said in a statement following the attack. "No child of God should ever suffer such horror."
The president wants the surprise attack to send a strong message to the Syrian government that the United States will not allow it to use banned chemical weapons.
"There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons," he said. "Numerous previous attempts at changing Assad's behavior have all found and failed very dramatically. As a result, the refugee crisis continues to deepen and the region continues to destabilize, threatening the United States and its allies."
President Trump then called on the world to pray for Syria and to ask God for wisdom in dealing with a nation broken by civil war.
"Tonight I call on all civilized nations to join us in seeking to end the slaughter and bloodshed in Syrian and also to end terrorism of all kinds and all types. We asked for God's wisdom as we face the challenge of our very troubled world. We pray for the lives of the wounded and for the souls of those who passed."
The strikes hit the government-controlled Shayrat air base in central Syria, where U.S. officials say the Syrian military planes that dropped the chemicals had taken off. The missiles targeted the base's airstrips, hangars, control tower, and ammunition areas, officials said.
Syrian state TV reported a U.S. missile attack on a number of military targets and called the attack an "aggression." Many wonder if war could be looming in the future.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says the airstrikes will send a strong message beyond Syria.
"President Trump sent a strong and clear message today that the use and spread of chemical weapons will not be tolerated," Netanyahu said. "Israel fully supports President Trump's decision and hopes that this message of resolve in the face of the Assad regime's horrific actions will resonate not only in Damascus, but in Tehran, Pyongyang and elsewhere."
The attack sparked mixed responses on Capitol Hill.
Senator Rand Paul criticized Trump for acting without getting congressional approval.
"While we all condemn the atrocities in Syria, the United States was not attacked. The President needs congressional authorization for military action as required by the Constitution, and I call on him to come to Congress for a proper debate," he said.
Meanwhile, Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham applauded the strikes.
"We salute the skill and professionalism of the U.S. Armed Forces who carried out tonight's strikes in Syria. Acting on the orders of their commander-in-chief, they have sent an important message the United States will no longer stand idly by as Assad, aided and abetted by Putin's Russia, slaughters innocent Syrians with chemical weapons and barrel bombs," the senators said.
Some Democrats even applauded the president's move, while others said he needs to consult with Congress on future military actions.
Pentagon officials say Russia was informed before the attack, to avoid any military conflict with them and prevent Russian casualties on the ground in Syria.
But Russia and Iran strongly condemned the attack with threatening language.
The Kremlin said President Vladimir Putin believes the U.S. strike is an "aggression against a sovereign state in violation of international law."
The head of an Iranian parliamentary committee on national security and foreign policy was quoted as saying "Russia and Iran won't be quiet against such acts which violate interests of the region."
He said serious consequences would follow the U.S. action.
Iran Is the Wild Card Following U.S. Air Strikes In Syria - by Aaron Klein - http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2017/04/07/klein-iran-wild-card-following-u-s-air-strikes-syria/
Following the U.S. launch of Tomahawk missiles targeting a strategic Syrian airfield on Thursday night, Iran must be monitored carefully for the possibility that it may use its proxies for retaliation, especially against Israel's northern border.
Following eight years of inaction on Syria under the Obama administration, President Donald Trump demonstrated last night that he is willing to hold Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to account, this time by striking the Shayrat Airfield near the Syrian city of Homs that was believed to have been utilized to carry out a chemical weapons attack that killed scores of civilians.
The U.S. airstrikes signaled to Assad and his Russian and Iranian backers that Trump will act in Syria and the administration strongly supports the removal of the Syrian president - an important strategic ally of Moscow and Tehran. The U.S. military move demonstrates to Israel and the Sunni Arab bloc cast aside by Obama's nuclear deal with the mullahs that American leadership has officially returned to the region.
Assad himself is unlikely to retaliate since the last thing he wants amidst a years-long insurgency attempting to topple his regime is to go to war with Trump or expand the battlefield to U.S. ally Israel.
Trump's bold authority in Syria directly threatens Russian interests since it was Moscow that largely filled the security vacuum in that country when Obama repeatedly failed to take any meaningful action against Assad. However, Russia's direct response will most likely be confined to vocal protestation, such as Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov calling the U.S. strikes "aggression against a sovereign nation" carried out on a "made-up pretext."
President Vladimir Putin cannot risk a military confrontation with Trump and Russia is already signaling willingness to abandon Assad to come to a larger regional accommodation.
Still, there is the possibility that Russia may quietly support action by others, especially agents of a very nervous Iranian regime that has been preparing proxies for years who can heat up Israel's northern border and beyond. Both Moscow and Tehran have reason for wanting Trump to pay a price for acting in their Syrian playground. The question is whether they will dare to respond, even tacitly.
And that brings us to Iran. Trump's embrace of America's traditional Sunni Arab partners at the expense of Tehran and his strong positions against the disastrous international nuclear agreement have been deeply concerning to the expansionist, terrorist-supporting Twelvers in Tehran. And while the removal of Assad from power would be a blow to Russia, depending on the ultimate outcome such a move could be disastrous for Iran's position in Syria. Iranian Revolutionary Guard units have been fighting the anti-Assad insurgents alongside the Syrian military and the Iran-backed Hezbollah militia. Syria represents a key pawn in Iran's geopolitical chessboard that stretches across the vital region.
In recent weeks, there have been strong indications that Iran has been seeking to arm its Hezbollah proxy with even more advanced weapons that can target the Jewish state. Last month, Israel took the unusual step of striking a Hezbollah weapons convoy near the city of Palmyra that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said was transporting advanced weapons to the Iran-backed militia.
Israeli leaders and Hezbollah terrorists have in recent weeks ratcheted up war rhetoric, with Israeli officials warning that Hezbollah, which can only act at the direction of Iran, has been preparing for conflict.
Last Sunday, IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot warned the IDF would not hold back from striking Lebanese state institutions in a future conflict with Hezbollah. "The recent declarations from Beirut make it clear that in a future war, the targets will be clear: Lebanon and the organizations operating under its authority and its approval," Eisenkot stated.
Hezbollah is not Iran's only option. Breitbart Jerusalem has been reporting on the formation of a "Golan Liberation Brigade," which was announced last month by the secretary-general of the Iraqi Harakat al Nujaba Shiite militia and is reportedly being trained by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. The so-called militia is another Iranian front that could be used to target Israel's Golan Heights at the behest of Tehran.
The next few days and weeks will be critical in determining Iran and Russia's resolve in the face of an awakened America that has returned from its eight-year slumber.
Deny, deny, deny, lie, lie, lie - Bill Wilson - www.dailyjot.com
National Security Advisor for the ex "president" Susan Rice denied seeking the names of, spying on and releasing the names of President-elect Donald Trump's transition team to various intelligence agencies. Rice told MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell, "Let me be absolutely clear. Absolutely not for any political purposes, to spy, to expose, for anything." She also denied ordering intelligence officers to produce detailed spreadsheets involving Trump and his aides, saying, "Absolutely false. No spreadsheet, nothing of the sort." But then she said, "The notion that which some people are trying to suggest that by asking for identity of an American person is the same as leaking it is totally false." A little nuance goes a long way.
She also said, "I leaked nothing, to nobody, and never have and never would. The allegation is that somehow [sic] the ex "president's" Administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes. Absolutely false." Rice denies spying on the Trump transition team, but seems to admit that she asked for an identity of an "American person," in this case, several members of the President-elect's team. She also said that the ex "president's" Administration officials would not have utilized such intelligence for political purposes. However, the information in question showed no relevance to any of the investigations being conducted by FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. Is Rice therefore saying that any American citizen can be spied on and then revealed to the public as if they did something wrong? Or was it just the Trump Team. Not political, right?
The Daily Caller, Fox News, and Bloomberg cited multiple intelligence sources that Rice had specifically ordered the intelligence on the Trump team and that the names of Trump aides were given to the ex "president's" officials at the NSA, Department of Defense, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and CIA Director John Brennan. Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Evelyn Farkas admitted March 2, "I was urging my former colleagues and, frankly speaking, the people on the Hill - it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can, get as much intelligence as you can, before [sic] the "president" leaves the administration." At the same time The Daily Caller, Fox News and Bloomberg are raising questions, MSNBC, CNN and the Washington Post are reporting Rice denials.
Rice's reputation precedes her. She was the one who said that climate change was responsible for the war in Syria; She said that Bowe Bergdahl, who was charged with treason after deserting his post in Afghanistan causing the deaths of six US soldiers, "served the United States with honor and distinction"; She also drove the false narrative that the deaths in Benghazi were caused by a spontaneous reaction to an anti-Islamic movie. An inventory of facts at this point shows that the ex "president" and his people spied on Trump and his team as they transitioned into the presidency. So far there is no evidence of any wrong-doing on the part of Trump, leaving only that the ex "president" wanted to politically undermine the President-elect and his ability to govern.
On February 11, Paul Sperry wrote in the New York Post that the ex "president" was using his Organizing For Action group as an army of agitators 30,000 strong who will fight President Donald Trump at every turn of his presidency. A check of the OFA website and other nonprofits that are working with it backs up Sperry's position. We are also seeing how the media and spy agencies are being used to undermine our government. Speaking of the end times, the Apostle Paul wrote in 2 Timothy 3:1-3, "This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be...without natural affection, truce-breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good." Indeed, perilous times are upon us and our nation.
The Susan Rice reruns - Bill Wilson - www.dailyjot.com
Why Rice is a Constitutional crisis - Bill Wilson - www.dailyjot.com
No matter what is going on behind the scenes, the illegal, unethical, immoral dealings of politics, the ex "president" and his minions have been air-tight for years in never giving up the scam. They never admitted to exactly what they were doing, and as part of that, blamed their actions on their detractors. Such is the case with spying on then President-elect Donald Trump and spreading misinformation among intelligence agencies to make it look like Trump conspired with Russia to win the election. When caught, the ex "president" and his henchmen denied everything and continued to insinuate that it was Trump all along doing the dirty deeds. Richard Nixon's presidency ended over spying on Democrats.
In response to accusations of spying on Trump, the former "president's" spokesman Kevin Lewis said, "A cardinal rule of the [sic] Administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice. As part of that practice, neither the [sic] "president" nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any US citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false." Now, Fox News is reporting that it was former National Security Advisor Susan Rice-a direct report of the ex "president"-who "unmasked" those on the Trump transition team that the White House was spying on and spread their names among the various intelligence agencies.
Rice seems to have been working with former Deputy Secretary of Defense Evelyn Farkas, who purposely spread the misinformation among the spy agencies. She admitted last month, "I was urging my former colleagues and, frankly speaking, the people on the Hill - it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can, get as much intelligence as you can, before [sic] the "president" leaves the administration." She was afraid that the narrative that Russia and Trump collaborated to influence the election would be lost if the information wasn't spread far and wide. An interesting twist to the story is that Republicans knew about the spying on Trump even before the election.
Rice appears to be the "go-to" girl when the ex "president" needs some dirty work done. Remember Rice and Benghazi? In May 2013, ABC News obtained 12 different versions of the talking points with extensive edits by the CIA before then UN Ambassador UN Susan Rice appeared on five talk shows the Sunday after that attack saying the attacks were inspired by a movie critical of Islam. Rice was also the one who in June 2014 called deserter Bowe Bergadahl not "simply a hostage; he was an American prisoner of war captured on the battlefield." Psalm 37:12 says, "The wicked plots against the just, and gnashes upon him with his teeth." Rice, the ex "president" and his cronies have been in the "plotting" and "blame-shifting" business a long time. They are good at it. Many of Nixon's minions went to prison for far less.
Trump: Assad regime 'crossed many lines' with chemical attack - http://www.timesofisrael.com/trump-assad-regime-crossed-many-lines-with-chemical-attack/
US president calls Syria incident 'an affront to humanity'; UN envoy says US may be 'compelled to take our own action'
US President Donald Trump on Wednesday denounced the Syrian regime's latest alleged chemical weapons attack as an "affront to humanity" and warned it would not be tolerated.
Speaking alongside Jordan's King Abdullah II at a White House news conference, Trump did not lay out in any detail as to how the United States would respond to the killings.
While continuing to fault predecessor Barack Obama for much of the current situation in Syria, he acknowledged that dealing with the crisis is now his own responsibility and vowed to "carry it very proudly."
Only days earlier multiple members of Trump's administration had said Assad's ouster was no longer a US priority, drawing outrage from Assad critics in the US and abroad. But Trump said Tuesday's attack "had a big impact on me - big impact."
"My attitude towards Syria and Assad has changed very much," he said.
Trump said of this week's attack that "it crossed a lot of lines for me. "When you kill innocent children, innocent babies - babies, little babies - with a chemical gas that is so lethal, people were shocked to hear what gas it was, that crosses many, many lines." US officials said the gas was likely chlorine, with traces of a nerve agent like sarin.
Since the attack Tuesday in rebel-held territory in northern Syria, Trump has been under increasing pressure to explain whether the attack would bring a US response. After all, Trump's first reaction was merely to blame Obama's "weakness" in earlier years for enabling Assad.
Obama had put Assad on notice in 2013 that using chemical weapons would cross a "red line" necessitating a US response, but then failed to follow through, pulling back from planned airstrikes after Congress wouldn't vote to approve them. Trump and other critics have cited that as a key moment the US lost much global credibility.
"I now have responsibility," Trump said. "That responsibility could be made a lot easier if it was handled years ago."
Yet he was adamant that he would not telegraph any potential US military retaliation, saying anew that that was a mistake the Obama administration had repeatedly made.
"These heinous actions by the Assad regime cannot be tolerated," he said. "The United States stands with our allies across the globe to condemn this horrific attack."
Asked whether the attack, which Washington has squarely blamed on Assad, could trigger a change of policy on the Syrian conflict, Trump replied: "We'll see."
"I'm not saying I'm doing anything one way or another, but I'm certainly not going to be telling you," he told reporters.
US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley was more explicit, threatening direct action.
"When the United Nations consistently fails in its duty to act collectively, there are times in the life of states that we are compelled to take our own action," she told a Security Council emergency meeting.
At least 72 people, among them 20 children, were killed in the strike on Khan Sheikhun, and dozens more were left gasping for air, convulsing, and foaming at the mouth, doctors said.
It is thought to be the worst chemical weapons attack in Syria since 2013, when sarin gas was used.
"If we are not prepared to act, then this council will keep meeting, month after month to express outrage at the continuing use of chemical weapons and it will not end," Haley said. "We will see more conflict in Syria. We will see more pictures that we can never unsee."
She also lashed out at Russia for failing to rein in its ally Syria.
"How many more children have to die before Russia cares?" she said.
"If Russia has the influence in Syria that it claims to have, we need to see them use it," she said. "We need to see them put an end to these horrific acts."
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said Russia needed to "think carefully about their continued support for the Assad regime."
"There's no doubt in our mind that the Syrian regime under the leadership of Bashar al Assad is responsible for this horrific attack," Tillerson said.
Early US assessments show the attack most likely involved chlorine and traces of the nerve agent sarin, according to two US officials, who weren't authorized to speak publicly about intelligence assessments and demanded anonymity. Use of sarin would be especially troubling because it would suggest Syria may have cheated on its previous deal to give up chemical weapons.
After a 2013 attack, the US and Russia brokered a deal in which Syria declared its chemical weapons arsenal and agreed to destroy it. Chlorine, which has legitimate uses as well, isn't banned except when used in a weapon. But nerve agents like sarin are banned in all circumstances.
As Trump and other world leaders scrambled for a response, the US was working to lock down details proving Assad's culpability. Russia's military, insisting Assad wasn't responsible, has said the chemicals were dispersed when a Syrian military strike hit a facility where the rebels were manufacturing weapons for use in Iraq.
An American review of radar and other assessments showed Syrian aircraft flying in the area at the time of the attack, a US official said. Russian and US coalition aircraft were not there, the official said.
Britain, France and the United States presented a draft resolution demanding a full investigation of the attack, but Russia said the text was "categorically unacceptable."
The draft resolution backs a probe by the Organization of the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and demands that Syria cooperate to provide information on its military operations on the day of the assault.
Russia's Deputy Ambassador Vladimir Safronkov told the council that the proposed resolution was hastily prepared and unnecessary, but voiced support for an inquiry.
"The main task now is to have an objective inquiry into what happened," he said.
Negotiations were continuing on the draft text after Russia's foreign ministry said in Moscow that "the text as presented is categorically unacceptable."
Will Trump Turn Damascus Into A 'Ruinous Heap'? - By Michael Snyder - http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/article.cfm?recent_news_id=1139
Rumors of war are percolating in Washington D.C., and if the Trump administration is not extremely careful it may find itself fighting several disastrous wars simultaneously.
Just one day after threatening North Korea with war, Donald Trump has committed to taking military action against the Assad regime in Syria.
Trump is blaming the chemical attack in Syria's Idlib province on Tuesday on the Syrian government, and he is pledging that the United States will not just sit by and do nothing in response.
Trump has called the attack a "terrible affront to humanity", and he is placing all of the blame on the shoulders of the Assad regime.
But now that Trump has committed the U.S. to take military action in Syria, what is that actually going to look like?
According to the Daily Mail, at this point Trump is not giving any hints as to when or where he will strike Syria...
He did not want to say in front of the cameras how he plans to respond to the crisis.
'I don't like to say where I'm going and what I'm doing,' Trump reminded. 'I watched past administrations say, "We will attack at such-and- such a day, at such-and-such an hour.'
But it isn't difficult to imagine what Trump may decide to do. Past presidents have always favored using airstrikes to make a point, and that is what many of the "analysts" on television are recommending.
Unfortunately, there would be great risk in targeting Syrian forces, because contingents from Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and elsewhere are mixed in among the Syrian military.
So could you imagine what it would do to our relations with Russia if airstrikes against the Syrian military resulted in Russian deaths?...
President Trump has several options in Syria, none without great risk.
One is military action against Syria's air force - grounding the helicopters and fixed wing aircraft that are believed to have dropped the deadly agent - and the runways from which they operate.
Yes, such strikes risk Russian casualties. But Moscow has consistently blocked U.N. action on Syria but proven unable to contain Mr. Assad's bad behavior. And President Vladimir Putin would be forewarned.
Grounding Syria's air force, moreover, would help distance Mr. Trump from Mr. Putin, a politically useful benefit at this time.
And even if Trump did conduct airstrikes, there would be a limit as to what they could accomplish. President Assad would still be in power in Syria, and the Syrian government would still be winning the civil war.
Trump could potentially send in special forces with the intention of assassinating Assad, but that would not necessarily topple the entire regime.
The truth is that the only way to change the outcome of the war and to guarantee regime change would be to send in U.S. ground forces on a large scale.
And just introducing them into the country would not nearly be enough. In order to end the war, Trump would have to commit to taking and holding Damascus.
In Isaiah 17, we are told that someday Damascus will be "taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap."
Much of the city is already a heap of rubble, but if the U.S. were to start conducting a concentrated bombing campaign against the city it is easy to imagine how the entire city could soon come to resemble a "ruinous heap".
Of course the toppling of the Assad regime has been the goal all along. Back in 2011, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hatched a plan along with Saudi Arabia and Turkey to use the "Arab Spring" as an excuse to try to remove Assad from power.
Since 74 percent of the population of Syria is Sunni Muslim, Saudi Arabia and Turkey were very excited about the prospect of dealing Iran a major blow by transforming Syria into a full-fledged Sunni nation.
So Saudi Arabia, Turkey and other Arab countries spent billions of dollars supporting and arming the "rebels", and at first everything was going great.
But then Russia, Iran and Hezbollah all intervened, and now the tide of the war has completely turned.
The only way that the original plan can succeed now is for the United States to enter the war, but with Trump as president nobody thought that was going to happen.
But now this latest chemical attack has changed everything, and Trump appears poised to take military action in Syria.
And I have a feeling that this new attack is another false flag, because it wouldn't make any sense for the Assad regime to use chemical weapons at this point.
Thanks to the assistance of Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, the Assad regime is winning the civil war, and the only thing that could possibly turn the tide now would be military intervention by the United States.
So if Assad did actually use chemical weapons against a bunch of defenseless citizens on Tuesday, it would have been the stupidest strategic move that he possibly could have made.
In any controversy such as this, you always want to ask one key question: Who benefits?
Of course the answer to that question in this case is exceedingly clear. The radical Islamic rebels that are being backed by Saudi Arabia and Turkey will greatly benefit if they are able to draw the western powers into the war on their side.
But what would the U.S. have to gain by getting involved in such a war?
I don't know if most Americans understand how dangerous such a move could be.
The Russians are not going to just sit there while U.S. bombs are dropping and their personnel are being killed. And of course the same thing could be said about Iran and Hezbollah.
Do we really want to risk a potential military confrontation with Russia, Iran and Hezbollah just to make a point in Syria?
To me, that would be exceedingly foolish.
And even more disastrous would be a decision to fully commit the U.S. military to toppling the Assad regime.
That would require going all the way to Damascus, and it is very, very doubtful that the Russians, the Iranians and Hezbollah would just willingly stand aside and allow that to happen.
For quite a while I have been warning that the situation in Syria could potentially spark World War 3 if everyone was not very, very careful.
If U.S. warplanes try to strike Syrian military positions, the Russians could easily decide to start firing back.
And considering the anti-Russian hysteria that we are already witnessing in Washington D.C., how will our leaders respond when CNN starts showing U.S. aircraft being blown out of the sky by Russian missiles?
As I discussed in Part I, there is very little for the U.S. to gain by going to war in Syria.
Unless it can be shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Assad regime is actually using chemical weapons, the Trump administration should not even be thinking about military action, because getting the U.S. military involved in the Syrian civil war would be absolutely disastrous.
So let us pray for peace, and let us hope that cooler heads will prevail.
In response to a reporter's question about how President Donald Trump feels about the Rice spying scandal, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said, "I am somewhat surprised in terms of the level of interest that I've seen from the press corps at one set of developments versus another set of developments." He repeated after another question: "I'm -- somewhat more from a media standpoint -- somewhat intrigued by the lack of interest that we've seen in some of these public revelations..." In this briefing, the reporters went on to what they must have considered more important questions about Trump drawing money from his own blind trust. They are abrogating their duty as a free press.
In reality, it is very curious that the news media doesn't blow up on Susan Rice. In a day where every scandal becomes a throwback to Watergate, there appears to be very little written about the latest "Spygate." In fact, several news outlets such as CNN, refuse to cover it. CNN Tonight's Don Lemon announced he would ignore the Rice story at all costs. CNN's Chris Cuomo claimed the story was "demonstrably untrue" and called it a "fake scandal." New Day anchor Alisyn Camerota called on Senator John McCain (R-AZ) to write-off the scandal as "unimportant." CNN's chief national security correspondent Jim Sciutto, a former White House political appointee of the ex "president," said the story is "ginned up."
Charles Hurt, who covers politics for the Washington Times, Fox News and Breitbart, points out that "Most of the media, of course, is so desperate to destroy Mr. Trump and cover up anything that might reflect poorly on [sic] the ex "president" that they would rather talk about phantom "Russia" connections instead." He further wrote, "But an administration actively spying on political opponents during a presidential election, unmasking US citizens and then punishing them with selective leaks to the press? That is a real scandal. And a constitution crisis that raises dire questions about whether any American citizen is safe from the espionage thuggery of the politically powerful."
The right to privacy is guaranteed by the Constitution's 4th Amendment, stating: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." A president spying on citizens and an incoming president is unconstitutional. The free press ignoring it is a sign of a coup or shadow government. Ecclesiastes 8:11 says, "Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil." This is a Constitutional crisis and the evil is aimed at all American citizens. It's the seedling of dictatorship trying to choke out the tree of Liberty.
Toward one another - Bill Wilson - www.dailyjot.com
The vitriol being expressed in our nation against one another is tasteless and vile. Against the backdrop of Senate approval of a new Supreme Court Justice, we have heard terrible things said about a fellow American, the same theme about anybody who disagrees with the vocal left. It is very difficult to discuss these matters of disagreement with business associates, friends and even family members because they usually end up in heated debates and things are said that shouldn't be said. We, as Christians, need to keep in mind the tenets of our faith when standing up for our principles-especially when we are doing so with family and fellow believers. Civility seems to be a lost art these days.
Often, I exhort you through The Daily Jot to pray and act, to speak up for what is right, and to hold accountability by speaking boldly as you ought to speak. But this can be a balancing act in these days. Speaking boldly, doesn't mean being offensive or trying to invoke anger. It doesn't mean reducing the argument to personal attacks. It takes wisdom, compassion, empathy, and the ability to express right in a dignified and effective manner. As the Apostle Paul writes in Ephesians 5:15-17, "See then that you walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, redeeming the time, because the days are evil. Wherefore be not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is."
In short, we need to remember who we are when we are discussing issues of right vs wrong. We need to be armed with the facts and stick to them. Keep bringing the discussion back to the facts. Most people I have run into who want to argue a point about the current state of our nation know very little about the facts. Often what they do know is based on a simple fact, but twisted into a lie. Trying to unravel that lie with them is like untangling a pile of coat-hangers. It takes patience and focus on your point. The purpose of The Daily Jot is to equip and encourage you to evangelize. Evangelizing can take many forms. In our case, it takes the form of using a current event to present a Biblical truth.
Deception is always key. People are deceived and, like a virus, they spread deception. Ephesians 5:6-9, "Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things comes the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Be not therefore partakers with them. For you were sometimes darkness, but now you are light in the Lord: walk as children of light For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth." Christ has given us life that we may have it abundantly. We don't need to get dragged down into the depths of deceit and anger because we already have the high ground in Christ. We just need to share it appropriately toward one another.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.