The Leftist Tactics of Lies and Character Assassination.

UPDATE: So many things they lie about and I barely touched on the problem. One of the most dangerous right now is suppression of the information that more wuites than blacks are killed by police in all the same situations that are being made into this huge racist indictment of the police and America itself The fact that BLM is a Marxist organization that really doesn't focus on blacks at all is suppressed. The true nature of Antifa is suppressed, that they are the ones with the fascist tactics. The whole theme of white supremacy in America is a lie. It's all made up. I'm sure there are some white supremacists but they aren't the ones doing the rioting and murdering, that's coming from the Left. You actually hear people saying that white supremacy is our biggest problem? Huh? It's a big fat lie. All thes lies are designed to create conflict between groups of Americans> That's a Marxist tactic.

Some of the biggest lies these days are about what is going on ibn Israel. They routinbely make it sound like Israel is the problem, all a huge dangerous lie. Hamas attacked Israel out of the blu, lobbed some 4000 rockets into Israel. Israel was able to stop 90% of them with their defense system. Some 25% of the Hamas-launnched rockets landed on their own people, drestroyed their own property, but those get blamed on Israel. What is going on here? Israel is always being portrayed as te aggressor when the fact is that they are not only always in the defensive position but are extraordinarily careful to avoid civilizian casualties, warning civilians to get out of areas where Hamas is quartered and being targeted by Israel. What is the purpose of these lies?

Why is it that the Left is so consistently built on lies? Why do they want the bad guys to appear good and the good guys bad?

Now we are hearing about lies involved in the pandemic, covering up the source of the viru in a Chinese virology lab, by vilifying those who saw the evidence for it early one. Now the truth is starting to come out so they are having to backtrack and that's a relief. Then there wree all the lies about the effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine in the early traetment of COVID, the suppression of which is no doubt the cause of a huge percentage of the deaths attributed to the virus. There have been lies about the aapprorate way to tdeal with teh virus all along, so many changes of opinion you couldn't figure out which was the right policy. Even the number of deaths attributed to COVID has been falsified, imputing it to deaths that wre really due to other causes.

Maybe those lies shouldn't be laid on the Left, I don't know, but the point is that we are living in a world being shaped by an unprecedented campaign of disinformation. Indlucing the disinformation that imputes the disibnformation to the other political party. This is so diabolical it is hard to understand how it could have happened, and hard to find a way to counter it. ============================================


EARLIER POST:
To do this right I know I'll need to track down all the evidence and that's not going to be easy, first because it's scattered, and second because of the censorship of conservative opinion. But at least I want to declare what I believe to be the truth:\

I hear all these Democrats claiming that the Republicans want to suppress voters by proposing laws that require proof of identity in order to vote. It's hard to believe they believe that. How hard is it to get personal identification? Doesn't everybody already have it anyway, for driving and other purposes? Proof of identity PROTECTS voter rights. Without that proof unqualified people can vote and that steals the votes from legitimate voters. The Democrats as usual are supporting lies and criminal behavior. How do they justify that to themselves?

Then there's the long list of accusations they've made against Trump. It's a very long list and I don't know if even one of the accusations is true but I know most of them are lies. Are they all conscious lies invented to smear him or do they actually believe them? I think the former but the effect is that the public thinks they are the truth because they never get to hear the truth. All the media have to do is leave out an important statement to create the lie they want people to believe. Trump was not saying the white supermacists in Charlottesville were "good people" on one side of the issue, he went right on to say explicitly that he was not talking about them and that they should be condemned but that part was left out. The two sides he was referring to wrere those for and those against the removal of historical monuments. There ARE good people on both sides of that. At least that's what he was saying.

They also let it appear that Trump was mocking a crippled man by a certain gesture he made, suppressing the truth that Trump often makes that gesture when he thinks what someone said is stupid. A few years ago I found videos of him doing it over and over again. But the leftist media prefers to let you think he was mocking a cripp-led person's infirmity. That's called lying.

People who suspect fraud in the last election are called liars but it is their accusers who are the liars. I had heard the testimony of many witnesses to fraud who had signed affidavits declaring their testimony to be the truth, witness after witness, and then I heard this amazing lie from the Left that the elections were perfectly legitimate. The courts refused to take the cases and they called that evidence that the election was legitimate when it was merely a refusal to find out if it was legitimate or not. How do they let themselves get away with this stuff?

Larry Elder says that statistically 85% of Democrats think Trump is a racist. Since he is not in the slightest a racist how did that lie get to be believed? Because the public only gets to hear what the leftist media tell them.

Lies are powerful weappons. They can destroy a nation. They can cause wars.

(It would take a lot of work to muster all the evidence for the above and I hope I'll be able to do it, but at least I wanted to get that much said.

What Makes America Great, and Is it Lost Forever or Is There Still a Flicker of Hope?

At the very end of his talk to Hillsdale College that I link in the previous post, Ian Rowe quotes DeToqueville, in Chapter 13 of America:

The greatness of America lies not in being more enlightened than any other nation, but rather in her ability to repair her faults.

Yes. Those who object to the MAGA slogan for instance, who grumble that America hasn't been great for everybody, totally miss the point of what makes America great. Everybody has a story of struggle and unhappiness even in America. It's not about human fallenness that will always tend to some form of injustice and sinfulness, it's about the ideal that's always there if we remember to come back to it. Somehow those fallen men who put it all together back there in 1776 got it right enough to produce the greatest prosperity for the most people AND produce the most morally effective nation on the planet that has extended its influence around the world. Yes MORALLY, despite bad stuff we've exported too and despite the the misguided ignorant moral indignation of the Marxist Wrecking Crew. The current Marxist effort to destroy it all because humanity isn't perfect is only going to worsen that imperfection bring on the tyranny that the American founding aimed to prevent. That's what utopian dreams always end up doing in a fallen world. Self-righteous blind perfectionism only destroys, ends up in the mass murder of hundreds of millions by tyrants, but they never learn.

A great failure to educate us all in the principles that have sustained us for so long, a great failure to recognize the destructive trends and unravel them in their early stages, a great failure of vigilance and a great failure of the Protestant perspective that was the core of the system that made it all possible.

Benjamin Franklin wondered if we could keep the Republic they had just created. It looks like we couldn't. It looks like it's lost. UNLESS the means of repair still flickers and could still be kindled into flame even now. I don't know and I don't hear much hope from most watchers of the scene out there. I vacillate horrifically these days between total despair and surges of hope. I see the country being destroyed without any apparent checks on it, destroyed in the streets, destroyed in the highest offices of the land, and it's made me more aware than ever of what we are losing. There's still a flicker of hope but it's just a flicker.

The Lord could come for us at any moment and the global tyranny could just take over everything. But that would be the Great Tribulation and the return of Jesus would be just seven years away. I'd be happily freed from it all but for the unbelievers it would be all over. The end of the world, the beginning of the reign of Christ. Greatly to be desired. But as long as we're here we have two jobs: spread the gospel and try to preserve the best that's possible in a fallen world? That's what it means to be salt and light isn't it?

One Man's Work Toward Improving Education for Poor Black Kids

A little late but let me wish everyone a Happy Memorial Day. Hope it was. Hope everybody got some patriotic inspiration as well as barbecue and potato salad. I didn't do anything myself which is why i forgot. ==================================

This post is for celebrating and hearing from another of those smart sane (conservative of course) black people I keep discovering these days. This is educator Ian Rowe who puts his mind to the problem of educating poor kids toward realizing the American dream. He claims not to represent one particular side of the political divide but he certainly espouses strong conservative values and has a great appreciation of the founding principles of America. This link is to a talk he gave for Hillsdale College:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iUlIMzWWmE&t=286s

And here's an interview of him by Glenn Loury in which he talks about a specific project of his of building a school in the Bronx for boys, to provide a high-level education to poor black kids. Some of it reminds me of the essay by Dorothyt Sayers that inspired the foundinag of at least one Christian school I know of, "Recovering the Lost Tools of Learning" in which she advocates the methods of ancient Greek education. Rowe and Loury are both connected with the 1776 Project of the Woodson Center, Robert Woodson being another of my recent discoveries of black people who are making the kind of difference I think needs to be made for the good of all of us and the nation itself. The name of the project points of course to the priority of American foundinjg principles, and at least in its inception to countering the execrable evil false 1619 Project (my own opihnion of course).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teLs4FL--hA

I think I get more hope for saving America from these conservative black voices than from any other source these days. Of course there are other important conservaqtive voices, but the way these guys have recognized and embraced the founding principle of America as THE source of success and prosperity for everyone, transcending even the suffering of racism, is particularly heartening.

Thomas Jefferson's Warnings on Today's Leftist Immigration Policies

The following quotes from Thomas Jefferson are from a website I'm not familiar with, titled The Progressive Conservative, which to my mind is a wacko oxymoron. To describe a political position, the term "progressive" was consciously chosen as a way to obscure the Communist agenda it was intended to represent. There must be a huge number of people who identify with it today who have no idea what they are supporting. What on earth it means on this website I don't know. I'm reproducing part of this article because I appreciate its point of view. And by the way, they also quote Jefferson saying some things about immigration that the Left would embrace, but since they go on to counter it with the following I didn't quote that part. It's there if you want to look it up.

https://www.proconservative.net/PCVol5Is272FarrellImmigrationInsecurity.shtml

In his Notes on the State of Virginia (1787), Jefferson reflects:

"It is for the happiness of those united in society to harmonize as much as possi- ble in matters which they must of necessity transact together. Civil government being the sole object of forming societies, its administration must be conducted by common consent. "Every species of government has its specific principles. Ours perhaps are more peculiar than those of any other in the universe. It is a composition of the freest principles of the English Constitution, with others derived from natural right and natural reason. To these nothing can be more opposed than the maxims of abso- lute monarchies. Yet from such we are to expect the greatest number of emi- grants." (3)

Jefferson warns, nearly prophetically:

"They will bring with them the principles of the governments they leave, imbibed in their early youth; or, if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an un- bounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from one extreme to another. It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty. These principles, with their language, they will transmit to their children. In pro- portion to their numbers, they will share with us the legislation. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp and bias its directions, and render it a heterogeneous, in- coherent, distracted mass.

Why Do Ordinary Liberals Support the Destruction of America? Andy Ngo on Antifa and BLM.

Is it ignorance, thanks to the organized propaganda and censorship of the truth, along with the undermining of American education over the last half century or so, or do they actually hate the principles on which the nation was founded?

Journalist Andy Ngo has studied Antifa and written the book "Unmasked" about them:
https://www.amazon.com/s?k=andy+ngo+unmasked&i=stripbooks&crid=1EM0LWNI80EXD&sprefix=Andy+Ngo+%2Caps%2C225&ref=nb_sb_ss_ts-doa-p_2_9

He shows that they operate under a false image, that they are out to destroy America, their background is Communism, and that their success at continuing to destroy the cities they have targeted for over a year now, is due to the support of everyday liberals. He lays out his experience and conclusions in a talk he gave at Hillsdale College this month:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yziRK7j0Zpw
He sees no way to stop them because of the support they get so he offers no hope of ending the violence.

The whole anti-racism and anti-fascism explanation is based on lies. Why don't those on the left see this? Why don't they see what Antifa and BLM really are? Why don't they see that what they are destroying is America itself? Or is that OK with them?

The Destructive Effects of the Modern Bible Versions

According to Wikipedia there are 450 English translations of the Bible. Their number includes versions in premodern English as well as those most in use today. The modern versions are based on the work of Westcott and Hort that came out of the last Church-convened reviving committee in 1881. Again according to Wikipedia, the most popular version among scholars today is the New Revised Version based on that work. Most Bibles in use today are based on the Critical Text which indludes readings from the Greek manuscripts Westcott and Hort introduced to the revising committee. There are usually some dozen or so translations listed wherever you go online to look up a passage from scripture. There may be many more modern versions than that but at least a dozen are popular.

There has been a big controversy for decades about the Greek manuscripts that underlie the modern versions, splitting the English-speaking Christian world into the KJV-Only camp versus those who accept the work of the revising committee. The KJV-Only group argue that the new Greek manuscripts are not genuine, but the scholars have prevailed in most of the churches, accepting the judgment of Westcott and Hort. My own attempt to understand the controversy put me on the side of the KJV-Only camp, but not completely since some of them tend to a sort of superstitious belief in the divine source of that English version. I came to the view that the KJV should be updated to keep up with changing English usage, which means I don't regard it as divinely ordained, but that the Greek manuscripts that underlie it ARE divinely ordained.

The view I find most persuasive is that of Dean John William Burgon who wrote extensively against the work of the 1881 revising committee. He objected both to the new Greek manuscripts and to the committee's translation which he dismissed for its "schoolboy" level understanding of Greek. He regarded the Greek manuscripts Westcott and Hort brought into the new revision as the work of heretics in the early Church, which he said was known by the Church before Westcott and Hort legitimized them and based their revision on them.

Since then more information suggestzs that those manuscripts may have been later forgeries. In any case they are in oddly pristine condition which suggests that they didn't undergo the wear and tear of use that has left most Greek manuscripts as well as older translations in fragments no older than the tenth century. (If I'm remembering correctly, Chris Pinto's documentaries "Tares Among the Wheat" and particularly "Bridge to Babylon" present evidence against the legitimacy of the manuscripts).

The worst effect of the legitimizing of those manuscrupts comes from the fact that they leave out some well-knownn passages, so that accepting them as the authentic originals discredits the King James version which includes those pasages, and all others based on the earlier Greek textual tradition known as the Received Text or Textus Receptus. Westcott and Hort made up a theory without any evidence whatever that the early Church had added in those passages that are not found in their favored manuscriptus but are found in the manuscripts that underlie the King James. That argument of course destroys the authenticity of the King James, and calls into question the inerrancy of the Bible.

Some try to argue for Bible inerrancy despite the destructive effects of Westcott and Hort's theory, and most of the modern versions incorporate the passages missing from their new manuscripts just because they are so well known, which of course anyone with a logical mind knows is deceitful. Yet most of the churches accdept the new versions as legitimate.

Burgon also objected to the English translation produced by the revising commnittee of 1881 as bad Enghlish based on worse Greek. Of course I have no way of judging this, at least not the Greek, but Burgon is clearly an eminent scholar and to my mind far more convincing than his opponents. And of course my own reaction to the English doesn't carry any weight, but I do enormously appreciate Burgon's criticism of one particular element of the translation: Westcott and Hort render the "aorist" tense in Greek into a klutzy aping of it in English rather than into correct English usage. That is, the Greek has this special tense called the "aorist" which conveys an ongoing action, wheras English puts ongoing action in the simple past tense.

For instance, take a phrase like "Jesus taught the people" which implies an ongoing action in English, while the Greek puts it in the aorist tense because that's how the Greek language conveys ongoing action. Westcott and Hort translate it "Jesus was teaching the people" instead of the simple "taught the people." I remember hearing a very popular Bible translation lauded for its accuracy because of this rendering of the aorist tense, whereas Burgon calls it bad English. English doesn't need this aorist tense. We know when it implies ongoing action as opposed to a one-time past action, and in the rare situations where it isn't clear THEN we can use the other form but it's rarely needed. Westcott and Hort use this klutzy phrasing so often I can hardly stand to listen to some versions being read out loud by the teachers who use them. I'm no linguist of course but it grates on me. It's lousy English and when I saw that Burgon objected to it I was enormously grateful.

They brought heretical Greek manuscripts into our Bible, they threw a monkey wrench into Biblical inerrancy and they contributed to the debasement of the English language. What's not to like? The destructive effect of the modern Bibles based on the 1881 revision should be classed up there with the destructive effect of the Liberal Theology that came out of Tubingen, Germany, also in the 19th cemtury, and the Marxist attack on Western Civilization and the Darwinian attack on the Bible. The 19th century seems to have been the devil's playground, and after it all went through the intensification of the sixties it's brought us to the mess we're in today. .

But I digress. Sort of . The conlusion I came to about the Bible versions is that the KJV is the only legitimate Bible we have these days. Yes I agree it could use some updating but even so any updating needs to be done by men of the caliber of the KJV translators of 1611 and I don't think that's possible today. It also needs to be done under the auspinces of the Church and not by commerciqal interests as so many of the modern versions were done, and not by any self-appointed individual or group. Even a Church appointed committee can get it wrong though, which is certainly evidenced by the work of the committee of 1881 that included at least one heretic and was was manipulated by Westcott and Hort. We're probably better off leaving the KJV alone for now.

There's also the problem of having different translations at all. I know some people say it's only the underlying text that's the problem, a translation is just a translation, no big deal. But I think it is. Once you've learned a passage from the KJV, say a familiar psalm, it is jarring to hear it from a different translqation. Even if the words have the same meaning there's a kind of violence in hearing a different set of words. And if it is also a bad translation, which to my ear is the case with even the most popular translation from the Westcott and Hort family --which I wouldn't have the nerve to say if Burgon hadn't already said it, but it's a sort of violence to the body of Christ to hear in other words something that is as familiar as a loved psalm.

Guess I can say what I like out here in the cyber gulag, nobody needs to take me seriously. But it feels good to get it said. If it pleases God may He get any glory.

Are UFOs to Provide the World's Explanation for the Rapture?

Jan Markell and her May 28 radio show guest think it's a strong possibliity. When the Church is Raptured an explanation will be needed. There will be "Christians" left behind who won't want to believe those who were taken were the true Church so they'll look for some other explanation. The world in general isn't going to want to credit the Bible or Christianity with anything either. The upcoming release of government documents (June 1 according to Markell) and the recent upsurge of interest in UFOs or UAPs (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) may provide the Likely Story.

hhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgTWYMJCvs4&t=1273s

The program covers other facets of the End Times scenario, The Great Reset being the plan that fits the Great Tribulation prophecies. They talk about UFOs about ten minutes in. The theme of the show is that all the elements of the End Times prophecies are coming together rather dramatically these days. The renewed attacks on Israel by Hamas and the Palestinians are one element. the release of classified documents about UFOs seems to fit in as a likely propaganda tool for explaining away the Rapture. The rapture is to be the initiating event of the seven-year Tribulation period or the Seventieth Week of the Seventy Weeks prophecy of the Book of Daniel, leading up to the return of Jesus Christ.

A Great Delusion is to grip the Earth. Not that this sort of delusion is anything new, most of the world is already well primed for it by the materialist mindset. The revelation that the US government regards the UFO phenomena as real physical phenomena should establish the idea of extraterrestrials in the public mind, though in reality it's most certainly a demonic deception. The ET explanation will no doubt prevail. In a world that rejects the supernatural and explains everything in physical terms what else could it be? Evolutionary Theory that reduces humanity to primary physicality for instance is a well established major path to the end times delusion.

Some eyes will be opened, may they be yours. Others will only close tighter.