Rite of Passage

Cherokee Legend

Do you know the legend of the Cherokee Indian youths’ rite of Passage?

His father takes him into the forest, blindfolds him an leaves him alone.  He is required to sit on a stump the whole night and not remove the blindfold until the rays of the morning sun shine through it.  He cannot cry out for help to anyone.

Once he survives the night, he is a MAN.

He cannot tell the other boys of this experience, because each lad must come into manhood on his own.

The boy is naturally terrified. He can hear all kinds of noises. Wild beasts must surely be all around him . Maybe even some human might do him harm.

The wind blew the grass and earth, and shook his stump, but he sat stoically, never removing the blindfold. It would be the only way he could become a man!

Finally, after a horrific night the sun appeared and he removed his blindfold.

It was then that he discovered his father sitting on the stump next to him.

He had been at watch the entire night, protecting his son from harm.

We, too, are never alone. Even when we don’t know it, God is watching over us, sitting on the stump beside us.

When trouble comes, all we have to do  is reach out to Him.

If you liked this story, pass it on.
If not, you took off your blindfold before dawn.

Moral of the story:
Just because you can’t see Our Father in Heaven, Our Creator
Doesn’t mean He is not there.

“For we walk by faith, not by sight.”




A New Year, a new chance to be reborn

Many Happy New Year Wishes to everyone I know and to those who wander here from other links.

To start this year off, here is something that I feel I need to address on a personal level,  as I have a son who is in crisis right now.

Many people think that being a Christ follower means being “religious” and getting caught up in the denominational confusion.  Having personally been part of that scene and seeing the spiritual life blood drained from so many over petty issues, I came to the conclusion,  read the Word for yourself, pray for guidance and the meaning to be revealed and it happens.

Maybe your reveal will not be the same as it was for me, but truth as He sees fit to give, will be given to each of us at the time of His choosing.

Some can easily denounce the love found in the Word or even that of a concerned parent, because of the RULES of CONDUCT stated and advised for us to follow, which they reject. They think they understand all about religion, calling it lame, etc,  because of the “hypocrites” that claim to be Christan yet who break those very same rules.

If they would take time to read the Word, they would know that nowhere is it written in the Word, that Our Father in Heaven considers us “perfect” or “Flawless”.

He is Our Father and as such,  the Word is set down to help guide us to the best path possible that He wants for us. True, we as parents should live a life that sets a good example for our children and others. But that does not mean we are always perfect or have all the answers or solutions to life’s problems.

Blaming others for ones bad choices does not resolve the problem.  But what it does do, is help destroy the trust, love and respect in the relationship, which is why it is used so often by the dark powers.

There is good and not good in this world and we all must choose the path right for us.  The not good, evil or dark side is always setting traps for us to fall into, always busy putting up barriers on the righteous path,  hoping to lead us far from Our Father and His love and forgiveness.

Being imperfect is part of our human nature and to address this, Our Father loves us so much, that he asks that we acknowledge our faults and wrong doings,  try harder to overcome our weakness, and learn by those mistakes and not repeat them.

May Our Father in Heaven find those in need and bring them to the path that He chose for them. That he setup a barrier of Protection around them and give them strength and courage to defeat the dark powers of this world. With love and in the Name of Jesus Christ. Amen

We love you son and want only the best Our Father has in store for you.

The Gates of Hell about to be Opened

Matthew 16:18-19 “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the GATES of Hell shall not prevail against it. 19) And I will give unto thee the KEYS of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt BIND on earth shall be BOUND in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt LOOSE on earth shall be LOOSED  in heaven.”

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

Part 8

Part 9

Part 10

Part 11

JFK Blockbuster Coverup Revealed by ex-FBI agent

Propaganda Flier handed out in Dallas before the Assassination

Alex Jones welcomes back to the show Don Adams, the former FBI agent who has presented compelling evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald did not assassinate president John F. Kennedy.

Part 1 of 3

Part 2 of 3

Part 3 of 3

Latest compelling evidence from expert, Tom Wilson.

Was JFK shot from the sewer drains beneath Dealey Plaza?

Related Links


A bit of JFK History and how is applies today.

Koran burning! The outrage heard round the world! America was it worth it?

Matthew 7:15-21
“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits…”

It was not my plan to add more hype to an already disturbing act, but I find I need to point out a few possible reasons for what has recently taken place with the insult of anothers culture and the burning of their religious Holy Scripture.

I enjoy the privilege of  having freedom of speech and being able to express my opinions uncensored and unedited–unmoderated and respect others to have that same God Given Right and firmly believe you OWN, are personally responsible for, what you say or write.

However, for me personally and morally, this right does not include doing so with malice nor at the expense of creating  outrage from one person, muchless 5 Billion,  and justifiable so, Islamic followers, nor extends to the detriment of others in life and death situations, such as may concern our soldiers in a war zone.

This does not mean creating laws against it, but shows that morally, some things are best left unsaid or undone, OR at the very least, not media hyped,  if it could cause bodily harm to another.

Rhetoric and hate speech are fine to do if that is what a person lives for—they are easily ignored and discounted on a personal or local level,  click a button, change a channel, stop participation of; but when the actions of a few extremist coupled with an agenda driven corrupted media uses it as a world wide weapon, where do we draw the line? What can be done?

Could implementing laws against harmful freedom of speech be the REAL purpose of insulting 5 Billion followers of Islam around the world?

I agree, that the actions of a FEW American’s to exercise their freedom of speech/expression of burning another Religions Holy Book here at home is 100% Constitutional but ONLY IF,  in addition and in accordance with State and LOCAL CODE (Something most Americans are ignoring or failing to even consider given nothing but the media spin). 

This being said though, I personally find the very thought of doing such an outrageous and hurtful act, so very disturbing and ominous, filling me with a sense of foreboding on so many levels,  its hard to get my mind wrapped around it!

By that same token,  I must wonder and find it odd, that for some ELUSIVE reasons, a few EXTREME points of view,   were broadcast  repeatedly by the main stream media, then sent around the world with up to the minute updates, which in essence rallied a WHOLE Religion against us, which has endangered not only us, but has also created more hatred for our honorable soldiers who fight on foreign ISLAMIC soil—they are the closest to the fire,  least ye forget!

It is at this point in the drama,  that I find, I don’t blame the extremist doing the book burning, but those who gave them one second of air time to begin with!

Funny thing,  how the media works in today’s time and filters what THEY want us to feel or see–I call it selective coverage.  They for the most part,  can sure ignore approximately 2 million American people from all over the USA who marched on DC to protest the government corruption, yet, almost every channel was broadcasting a handful of  those threatening or doing the act of,  burning another Religion’s Holy Sacred Book?? Go figure?

Whose agenda does this benefit?  IMO—Not that of the USA for sure.  Those of the Islam faith who may have supported the USA have just been given one of the greatest insults I can think of, because IMO, that is how I would feel if it was done to me.

So this agenda in the media, who benefits from it? Who is pushing the NWO? Could the United Nations maybe somehow have a solution already worked up and ready to implement?  I say stay tuned in to what takes place within the UN for what is coming!

“It is a question of proximity and degree. When a nation is at war, many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight, and that no Court could regard them as protected by any constitutional right.”

Can America say INTERNATIONAL LAW, governed by the UN? Because of the actions of a few, blasted in the media, do you not see what it coming?

IMO—The UN has the solution already worked out—-wait for it to be revealed soon and sanctified by our  government leadership with the forfeiture of our Constitution and all the rights thereof.

Where could all of this malicious activity be leading us? Maybe a war with Iran=WWIII?  From my understanding and interpretation of chapters 10-11 of Daniel, The Archangel Michael is in alliance with the King of Persia.  Could the emergence of the Mahdi in the Koran, be that of  Michael? Read them and decide for yourself their meaning.

With that being said, here is one more simple matter to consider while we are at it. China + Russia + Islam uniting under ONE banner, are not GOOD things for those arrogant Americans who seem to think WE are on the high road. IMO–WWIII will end with the USA, British and IsRaEl’s destruction and then the coming battle of Armageddon.  Our Father in Heaven’s Will shall be done.

Dan 10:13 “I will remain WITH the Kings of Persia;  20) “I will return to fight WITH the Prince of Persia

The word “With” refers to being aligned with, going with, standing with = An Alliance, in the example above.

“Gabriel was bringer of enlightenment and God’s message and is often depicted with a vessel containing the sacred water of God’s salvation.  By contrast, Michael was the instrument of God’s wrath and is often depicted with a sword and the severed heads of the Lord’s enemies.”

Below is a compelling video which I agree with.

Here is another intriguing one from the same source.


Here is one possibility to consider that could affect the USA

Clear and present danger is a term used by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. in the unanimous opinion for the case Schenck v. United States,[1] concerning the ability of the government to regulate speech against the draft during World War I:

The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that the United States Congress has a right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree. When a nation is at war, many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight, and that no Court could regard them as protected by any constitutional right.

Following Schenck v. United States, “clear and present danger” became both a public metaphor for First Amendment speech[2][3] and a standard test in cases before the Court where a United States law limits a citizen’s First Amendment rights; the law is deemed to be constitutional if it can be shown that the language it prohibits poses a “clear and present danger”. However, the “clear and present danger” criterion of the Schenck decision was later modified by Brandenburg v. Ohio,[4] and the test refined to determining whether the speech would provoke an imminent lawless action.

The vast majority of legal scholars have concluded that in writing the Schenck opinion Justice Holmes never meant to replace the “bad tendency” test which had been established in the 1868 English case R. v. Hicklin and incorporated into American jurisprudence in the 1904 Supreme Court case U.S. ex rel. Turner v. Williams. This is demonstrated by the use of the word “tendency” in Schenck itself, a paragraph in Schenck explaining that the success of speech in causing the actual harm was not a prerequisite for conviction, and use of the bad-tendency test in the simultaneous Frohwerk v. United States and Debs v. United States decisions (both of which cite Schenck without using the words “clear and present danger”).

However, a subsequent essay by Zechariah Chafee entitled “Freedom of Speech in War Time” argued despite context that Holmes had intended to substitute clear and present danger for the bad-tendency standard a more protective standard of free speech.[5] Bad tendency was a far more ambiguous standard where speech could be punished even in the absence of identifiable danger, and as such was strongly opposed by the fledgling ACLU and other libertarians of the time.

Having read Chafee’s article, Holmes decided to retroactively reinterpret what he had meant by “clear and present danger” and accepted Chafee’s characterization of the new test in his dissent in Abrams v. United States just six months after Schenck.[6] Significantly unlike Abrams, the cases of Schenck, Frohwerk, and Debs had all produced unanimous decisions. Justice Brandeis soon began citing the “clear and present danger” test in his concurrences, but the new standard was not accepted by the full court until its official adoption in Brandenburg v. Ohio fifty years later.


Here are a few to consider along with a few from the United Nations

“The United Nations is the centre of the world’s efforts to advance mutual respect, understanding and dialogue.  We must also recognize that the real fault line is not between Muslim and Western societies, as some would have us believe, but between small minorities of extremists on different sides with a vested interest in stirring hostility and conflict.”


Quran-Burning Plan Draws Worldwide Condemnation

Afghans protest against Koran burning for third day



Related Posts:


Obama grants immunity powers to FOREIGN INTERPOL OVER our Constitution?

Could the photo above represent what is in store for Americans?

This is a duplicate post from the one published on Dec. 29,2009.  Seems the original post link pulls up an ‘error” and is no longer “Found”? This makes TWICE that censorship has found it’s way to my blog and my post links disappeared and are not found. It is truly a sign of the times people.

“I do solemnly swear  that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, Preserve, Protect and Defend the Constitution of the United States.

The Federal Government of the United States is the central government entity established by the United States Constitution, which shares sovereignty over the United States with the governments of the individual U.S. states.

The policies of the federal government have a broad impact on both the domestic and foreign affairs of the United States. In addition, the powers of the federal government as a whole are limited by the Constitution, which, per the Tenth Amendment, states that all powers not expressly assigned to the federal government are reserved to the states or to the people.

Below are other links with ties back to the European Union and the United Nations. I wonder HOW granting a foreign Police force immunity from our Constitution and laws can be considered DEFENDING, PROTECTING or PRESERVING that precious document?

An international law enforcement arm assisting a court we are not a signatory to has been ELEVATED above OUR CONSTITUTION upon our OWN SOIL! America  get ready for the guys in Blue Helmets, they are coming!!

Wither Sovereignty

Executive Order Amended to Immunize INTERPOL In America – Is The ICC Next?

By Steve Schippert, Clyde Middleton | December 23, 2009

Post Source found at: http://threatswatch.org/analysis/2009/12/wither-sovereignty/

Last Thursday, December 17, 2009, The White House released an Executive Order “Amending Executive Order 12425.” It grants INTERPOL (International Criminal Police Organization) a new level of full diplomatic immunity afforded to foreign embassies and select other “International Organizations” as set forth in the United States International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945.

By removing language from President Reagan’s 1983 Executive Order 12425, this international law enforcement body now operates – now operates – on American soil beyond the reach of our own top law enforcement arm, the FBI, and is immune from Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release December 17, 2009

Executive Order — Amending Executive Order 12425

– – – – – – –

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and in order to extend the appropriate privileges, exemptions, and immunities to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 12425 of June 16, 1983, as amended, is further amended by deleting from the first sentence the words “except those provided by Section 2©, Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of that Act” and the semicolon that immediately precedes them.

December 16, 2009.

After initial review and discussions between the writers of this analysis, the context was spelled out plainly.

Through EO 12425, President Reagan extended to INTERPOL recognition as an “International Organization.” In short, the privileges and immunities afforded foreign diplomats was extended to INTERPOL. Two sets of important privileges and immunities were withheld: Section 2© and the remaining sections cited (all of which deal with differing taxes).

And then comes December 17, 2009, and President Obama. The exemptions in EO 12425 were removed.

Section 2c of the United States International Organizations Immunities Act is the crucial piece.

Property and assets of international organizations, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, unless such immunity be expressly waived, and from confiscation. The archives of international organizations shall be inviolable. (Emphasis added.)

Inviolable archives means INTERPOL records are beyond US citizens’ Freedom of Information Act requests and from American legal or investigative discovery (“unless such immunity be expressly waived.”)

Property and assets being immune from search and confiscation means precisely that. Wherever they may be in the United States. This could conceivably include human assets – Americans arrested on our soil by INTERPOL officers.

Context: International Criminal Court

The importance of this last crucial point cannot be understated, because this immunity and protection – and elevation above the US Constitution – afforded INTERPOL is likely a precursor to the White House subjecting the United States under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC). INTERPOL provides a significant enforcement function for the ICC, just as our FBI provides a significant function for our Department of Justice.

We direct the American public to paragraph 28 of the ICC’s Proposed Programme Budget for 2010 (PDF).

29. Additionally, the Court will continue to seek the cooperation of States not party to the Rome Statute and to develop its relationships with regional organizations such as the Organization of American States (OAS), the Arab League (AL), the African Union (AU), the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), ASEAN and CARICOM. We will also continue to engage with subregional and thematic organizations, such as SADC and ECOWAS, and the Commonwealth Secretariat and the OIF. This will be done through high level visits, briefings and, as appropriate, relationship agreements. Work will also be carried out with sectoral organizations such as IDLO and INTERPOL, to increase efficiency.

The United States is not a party to the Rome Statute – the UN treaty that established the International Criminal Court. (See: Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court)

President George W. Bush rejected subjecting the United States to the jurisdiction of the ICC and removed the United States as a signatory. President Bill Clinton had previously signed the Rome Statute during his presidency. Two critical matters are at play. One is an overall matter of sovereignty and the concept of the primacy of American law above those of the rest of the world. But more recently a more over-riding concern principally has been the potential – if not likely – specter of subjecting our Armed Forces to a hostile international body seeking war crimes prosecutions during the execution of an unpopular war.

President Bush in fact went so far as to gain agreement from nations that they would expressly not detain or hand over to the ICC members of the United States armed forces. The fear of a symbolic ICC circus trial as a form of international political protest to American military actions in Iraq and elsewhere was real and palpable.

President Obama’s words have been carefully chosen when directly regarding the ICC. While President Bush outright rejected subjugating American armed forces to any international court as a matter of policy, President Obama said in his 2008 presidential campaign that it is merely “premature to commit” to signing America on.

However, in a Foreign Policy in Focus round-table in 2008, the host group cited his former foreign policy advisor, Samantha Power. She essentially laid down what can be viewed as now-President Obama’s roadmap to America rejoining the ICC. His principal objections are not explained as those of sovereignty, but rather of image and perception.

Obama’s former foreign policy advisor, Samantha Power, said in an early March (2008) interview with The Irish Times that many things need to happen before Obama could think about signing the Rome Treaty.

“Until we’ve closed Guantánamo, gotten out of Iraq responsibly, renounced torture and rendition, shown a different face for America, American membership of the ICC is going to make countries around the world think the ICC is a tool of American hegemony.

The detention center at Guantánamo Bay is nearing its closure and an alternate continental American site for terrorist detention has been selected in Illinois. The time line for Iraq withdrawal has been set. And President Obama has given an abundance of international speeches intended to “show a different face for America.” He has in fact been roundly criticized domestically for the routinely apologetic and critical nature of these speeches.

President Obama has not rejected the concept of ICC jurisdiction over US citizens and service members. He has avoided any direct reference to this while offering praise for the ICC for conducting its trials so far “in America’s interests.” The door thus remains wide open to the skeptical observer.


In light of what we know and can observe, it is our logical conclusion that President Obama’s Executive Order amending President Ronald Reagans’ 1983 EO 12425 and placing INTERPOL above the United States Constitution and beyond the legal reach of our own top law enforcement is a precursor to more damaging moves.

The pre-requisite conditions regarding the Iraq withdrawal and the Guantanamo Bay terrorist detention facility closure will continue their course. meanwhile, the next move from President Obama is likely an attempt to dissolve the agreements made between President Bush and other states preventing them from turning over American military forces to the ICC (via INTERPOL) for war crimes or any other prosecutions.

When the paths on the road map converge – Iraq withdrawal, Guantánamo closure, perceived American image improved internationally, and an empowered INTERPOL in the United States – it is probable that President Barack Obama will once again make America a signatory to the International Criminal Court. It will be a move that surrenders American sovereignty to an international body whose INTERPOL enforcement arm has already been elevated above the Constitution and American domestic law enforcement.

For an added and disturbing wrinkle, INTERPOL’s central operations office in the United States is within our own Justice Department offices. They are American law enforcement officers working under the aegis of INTERPOL within our own Justice Department. That they now operate with full diplomatic immunity and with “inviolable archives” from within our own buildings should send red flags soaring into the clouds.

This is the disturbing context for President Obama’s quiet release of an amended Executive Order 12425. American sovereignty hangs in the balance if these actions are not prevented through public outcry and political pressure. Some Americans are paying attention, as can be seen from some of the earliest recognitions of this troubling development here, here and here. But the discussion must extend well beyond the Internet and social media.

Ultimately, a detailed verbal explanation is due the American public from the President of the United States detailing why an international law enforcement arm assisting a court we are not a signatory to has been elevated above our Constitution upon our soil.

Methodology Of INTERPOL

Each member country maintains a National Central Bureau (NCB) staffed by national law enforcement officers. The NCB is the designated contact point for the Interpol General Secretariat, regional bureau and other member countries requiring assistance with overseas investigations and the location and apprehension of fugitives. This is especially important in countries with many law-enforcement agencies. This central bureau is a unique point of contact for foreign entities, which may not understand the complexity of the law-enforcement system of the country they attempt to contact. For instance, the NCB for the United States of America is housed at the United States Department of Justice (DOJ). The NCB then ensures the proper transmission of information to the correct agency.

Interpol maintains a large database charting unsolved crimes and both convicted and alleged criminals. At any time, a member nation has access to specific sections of the database and its police forces are encouraged to check information held by Interpol whenever a major crime is committed. The rationale behind this is that drug traffickers and similar criminals have international ties, and so it is likely that crimes extend beyond political boundaries.

In 2002, following United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 passed in the aftermath of September 11, Interpol began maintaining a database of lost and stolen identification and travel documents, allowing member countries to be alerted to the true nature of such documents when presented. Passport fraud, for example, is often performed by altering a stolen passport; in response, several member countries have worked to make online queries into the stolen document database part of their standard operating procedure in border control departments. As of early 2006, the database contained over ten million identification items reported lost or stolen, and is expected to grow more as more countries join the list of those reporting into the database.

More about INTERPOL at : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpol

Current Secretary General of INTERPOL: Ronald Noble

Current President of INTERPOL: Khoo Boon Hui


Another IMPORTANT Executive order—Obama’s FIRST one after swearing in as President of the US.

On January 21st, 2009, his very first day in office, Barack Obama implemented and signed into law  Executive Order 13489.

For those of you who can’t take the time to read it. here is the section that applies:


Notice Of Intent To Disclose Presidential Records

When the Archivist provides notice to the incumbent and former Presidents of his intent to disclose Presidential records  pursuant to section 1270.46 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist, using any guidelines providied by the incumbent and former Presidents, shall identify any specific materials, the disclosure of which he believes may raise a substantial question of executive privilege.”

Now for all of you who commented on our previous articles that we were no more that right-wing nut jobs, that this thing about Obama’s birth certificate was a non-issue, and those of you who tried to shift the focus of the stories, doesn’t this strike you as just a little odd?

That the first order of business Obama took care of on day one of his Presidency was to sign off on an Executive Order that states that only the records he chooses to be made public will be released?

This is the subject that was at the absolute top of his agenda?

If this isn’t proof that Obama is hiding something, I don’t know what is.



Related Links:






Truthers Still Remember and look for Answers to the attack of 9/11

The infamous day of Sept. 11th is fast approaching and yet instead of closure of this crime, for years, the powers that be has given We The People a bunch of propaganda and little facts,  if any at all.  We were TOLD that the “Terrorist crimes” were committed by Muslim extremist, yet they, the powers that be,  the masters of deception and disinformation,  have seen to it that any that dare question their inept findings are demonized and belittled as “Truthers”.  lol

I’m proud to be considered a TRUTHER and hope to see the truth fully revealed about this attack on our home soil, and those who committed these crimes prosecuted, and finally closure will be found.

Expert after expert has stood tall stating the physical impossibilities of the twin towers collapse, we even have firefighters at ground zero talking about the multiple explosions that took down the buildings, just like they were rigged for demolition. And if that was not enough proof, what about the 3rd building that collapsed in the exact same fashion as the towers,  which was NOT hit by a plane? Hmmm…seems the plot was missing a plane that was suppose to hit the building,  yet maybe got diverted by some passenger HEROS perhaps?

Though the criminals/ terrorists that committed these crime were surely killed in the crashes, fear mongering fed by agenda driven medias and outraged emotions took hold of our country, myself included after it happened. Add this,  along with LIES of WMD which were leaked and next thing you know, we went to war on a nation, that was NEVER 100% proven to have had one thing to do with any of  the attacks on that fateful day.

I’ve always wondered why Saddam Hussein claimed the USA had betrayed him? Interesting thing to say when you’re about to get hung IMO.  http://www.rense.com/general45/araao.htm

Now flash forward with ten years of media spun hatred against the boogy man Islam and now another outrage ‘crisis’ has developed with the questionable Mosque building,  should they or should they not build it near ground zero?

Personally, I think they should not,  not because they are Muslim or guilty of the crimes committed on 9/11,  but in order to promote goodwill to their fellow Americans,who have been programmed for ten years with  media spewing hatred for some unknown agenda not yet revealed.  If we go by the Constitution, they have the right to erect their building as code allows….the end.

It is with extreme HONOR that I offer my prayers to the families and to the brave souls who died that day in the planes, on the ground, those who died trying to rescue others,  and our soldiers who were sent to a foreign land.  I shall never forgot that fateful day, nor shall I ever give up questioning the TRUTH of what really happened that terrible day and afterwards. Below is a video of thousands who also remember and still seek answers of that day.

You are REMEMBERED.  May our Heavenly Father bring you peace.

God Bless the USA

CrossTalk about Islam