The European Union is an evil empire

A shelf of books can be written to cover the topic linked to below, but David Noakes and Brian Gerrish have provided a web site and information that they recently shared with Laigle’s Forum, and this will substantially reduce the effort of assimilating this vital knowledge. I am very grateful to both of these fine Christian gentlemen for this eye-opening material, which relates in the broadest of terms to national sovereignty for nations and its antithesis, one-world government, or in other words, enslavement of nations. The choice between these two must be made quickly and decisively in America, because time is running out, as we can gauge by the breathtaking speed at which our European counterparts lost their nationhood. We hope and pray to Almighty God that they will someday regain the precious heritage they have lost, and likewise, that Americans will snap out of their lethargy before we follow them like lemmings to our own demise.

If you are concerned about the future of America, you need to read at least the information provided at the site By the future, I mean, not whether your children will graduate from one of those indoctrination centers we cynically call universities, and which, as Phyllis Shlafly recently showed (, will provide your youngster with a worthless diploma and a recommendation to seek blue-collar employment. No, I mean whether or not the United States of America, and the government by the people, of the people and for the people will or will not literally perish from the face of the earth. As you read the information linked below, you will no doubt see that this loss of national sovereignty is more imminent than you imagined.

We don’t often beg, but now we are shamelessly begging our readers to take as much time out of your busy week as you possibly can to read the articles appearing at David Noakes’ site and to view some enlightening videos, to which I also link below.

The small but growing group around David Noakes and Brian Gerrish is deeply concerned about the continued existence of Britain and other once-sovereign European countries, and about the future of America, because they know that the cause of freedom is a universal one. They know that if freedom is lost in America, it may quite possibly disappear from the face of the earth and be replaced with a Soviet style cadre-driven State, which is the Kafkaesque nightmare that is happening in Britain. They know that if America falls, there will never be anyone to say that the EU is an evil empire and demand that the power brokers in Brussels tear down that wall of deception and restore the rightful sovereignty to dozens of nations.

We know our readers are concerned about this issue, because they have told us so, and now is the time to decide: do we want to continue being the greatest nation on earth where the people decide their own destiny, or do we want the elites to decide? By “elites” I mean the ones who are responsible for a sputtering economy where meaningful manufacturing jobs are all but gone and where a gaping trade deficit benefits our most formidable enemy, who as I write these lines is aiming ICBMs at our cities (ever think about that as you buy “made in China”?). They are also responsible for vast losses of freedom in the form of “hate crimes” law, the Patriot Act, No Child Left Behind, a narrowly thwarted attempt to amnesty 20 million illegal aliens and the current open-border policy that punishes patriotic border guards while coddling hardened alien criminals.

The framers and hucksters of the European Union are already brazenly using the term “post-democratic” to describe the future they envision for Europe. Can they be any plainer in admitting they want to steal power from the people and give it to a few corrupt elitists?

The most chilling thing to me is the stunning similarity between the conspiracy behind the EU and the stealthy power brokering this side of the Atlantic. It is as though the operatives are acting in concert or taking cues from each other. And in fact they are. Let’s be plain: globalism is just communism in drag and the actors on both continents are working on a world stage for a common purpose (Common Purpose in fact being what the sinister European shadow-government movement calls itself). The following similarities come to mind effortlessly, but a longer list could be derived with some diligence:

–The treacherous sellout of national sovereignty and democracy was perpetrated by politicians thought to be Christian and conservative (the Conservative Party and others in the UK, the Bushes in the US).

–The first steps toward the final solution were innocuous-looking trade agreements (the European Economic Community, EEC, in Europe, NAFTA and CAFTA in America), but the net result was a loss of sovereignty.

–Another result was wealth redistribution, with European farmers, for example, losing their livelihood, and American manufacturing workers at first, followed by professionals in computer science, engineering and others, losing their jobs.

–Although the pretext for the supranational agreements was that everyone would benefit, the trade deficits in the industrialized countries grew disproportionately and once-proud manufacturers became lowly service providers.

–The growth of the supranational government is accompanied by a police state mentality and the brainwashing of once-patriotic, once-conservative people to accept a degree of control in their private lives that would have horrified them had it been advocated by avowed communists (a provision of EU law bans criticism of the EU; the Patriot Act allows government operatives to snoop into our private lives in ways that will inevitably lead to lost liberties and abysmal corruption).

–Critics who point out that sovereignty is being lost through the growing shadow governments on both sides of the Atlantic are belittled and mocked by those in power, who even as they strongly advocate a supranational government, deny that it exists or ever will (as Bush did after the SPP conference in Canada).

–One of the pretexts for foisting the supranational police state on everyone else is environmental concerns. People are brainwashed into believing that the earth is in imminent danger and that human rights are secondary to preserving the environment.

–The conspiracy goes by innocuous and high-sounding names: Common Purpose in Britain, New World Order in the US.

–The traditional family unit is targeted, with divorce facilitated and encouraged, with homosexuality glorified and promoted, with disenfranchisement of fathers and men and the almost total neglect of boys in education.

–The notoroius Marxist Frankfurt School is lurking in the background and is involved surreptitiously. Feminism, one of its platforms, plays a key role in the destruction of the social fabric.

This saga has all the earmarks of a good thriller, with one exception: it’s less realistic than fiction. As Nigel Farage says: you can’t make this up.

Be sure to listen to the speech by this talented orator European Parliament Member Nigel Farage dressing down Jose Manuel Barroso, the President of the EU. It is witty, blunt and titillating.

Here are the links:

EUtruth article: The Abolition of Britain

UK Traitors

Westminster News article charges sedition in British government

Albert Burgess, former police officer, files charges of sedition against the government officials who dragged the UK into the EU:

Brian Gerrish talks about Common Purpose and calls the EU a “vicious socialist police state”

Nigel Farage, Member of the European Parliament (MEP), dresses down EU head Jose Barroso, speaking of corruption in the EU. This is really hilarious!

This next link takes us into the fine details of the intrigue behind the subversion. Be sure to read the part about the Frankfurt School. This illustrious group of German Marxist professors, who emigrated to Britain and the US to escape a dictatorship, has aided mightily in bringing about dictatorial policies in the once-free countries that rescued them. (We hope to provide soon an eye-opening account of how the Frankfurt School contributed greatly to the subversion of American values here).

The North American Union. It’s part of the same thing: a one-world government. Call it “Common Purpose,” “The New World Order,” or whatever. The goal is a one-world government.

Please keep these sovereignty issues in mind when voting for a candidate this election cycle. Remember that whether or not a candidate is invested in the continued existence of our nation overrides all other considerations. After all, the sincerest pro-life Christian president who is oblivious to the sovereignty issue and rushes into sovereignty-compromising foreign accords, could easily usher in an era in which the American voter becomes totally irrelevant due to the abolition of the American government, in analogy to what is happening in Britain. It will happen here if the religious right remains in its hypnotic trance.

Informed conservatives on both sides of the Great Pond know that the prime movers in the supranational rush to remove democracy from the face of the earth are the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Trilateral Commission (TC) and the Bilderberger Group. CFR Republicans are Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Newt Gingrich and Fred Thompson. Hence, these men in particular threaten our nation’s further existence no less than any democrat.
Huckabee does not get a pass. The CFR has recently supported Huckabee’s position on immigration. That should be the kiss of death, and it is for informed Americans. Of course, informed Americans probably make up less than 5% of voters, but of course, they all are Laigle’s Forum subscribers.

So let me help you connect the dots:
Alan Keyes, Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul are not CFR members and are clearly against supranational governments that undermine US sovereignty. They also have a chance of winning the nomination. For those who are concerned with the hot button Christian conservative issues, these three are all Christians, strongly anti-abortion and oppose special rights for interest groups like homosexuals. Ron Paul opposes constitutional amendments such as the marriage amendment or an amendment that would declare the unborn child a person, because he doesn’t like the federalization of law, any law.

So I would hope that, if you are interested in the continued existence of the United States of America, these 3 would seem to be the only viable options to you. I am not oversimplifying. It is really just that plain and simple. And once you have read about the tragic situation in Europe, I believe you will agree.

Huckabee reminds me for all the world of G.W. Bush, I am sorry to say. He wants to be liked so very very much by influential people in power positions and by foreign dignitaries who despise the struggling little guy in America. And when he was governor of Arkansas, he showed that he was willing to compromise with them, at the expense of his constituents, raising taxes and running interference for alien scofflaws.

By contrast, we need a candidate who loves this country first and foremost, like a bridegroom loves his bride.

In other words, even more than himself. If we settle for less, won’t we be getting what we deserve?

Dutch parliament member plans to air anti-Koran film

Some say one man armed with the truth can defeat an army of 10,000 armed with a lie.Geert Wilders, Freedom Party leader of the Dutch parliament, wields the truth and plans to air it on Dutch TV on January 25, 2008.  The Dutch majority in the parliament claim this film, which reveals uncomfortable facts about the Koran, poses a security threat.  Almost the entire government, including the Justice Department, wants to stop him.  Obviously, the real enemy here is cowardice.

If all we have to fear is fear itself, then the enemy is formidable in Holland.  Note the utter abject cowardice of the reporter in this article, our translation of which (from the online Dutch newspaper de Volkskrant) follows.

You read it first at Laigle’s Forum.
de Volkskrant, Dec. 29, 2007
Fear of riots over Wilders’ Koran film

by de Volkskrant reporter Weert Schenk

Amsterdam — According to various sources, the majority party is making full preparations for the possible reactions to the film on the Koran announced by Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders.  Security around Wilders, which was already heavy, is being beefed up.

The Amsterdam police have had interviews with imams and other influential persons in the Muslim community this month to prepare for their reactions.  A scenario is being prepared for major public order problems.  Similar measures are being taken in the Hague and Utrecht.

The film by Wilders, which contains images offensive to Muslims [Excuse Laigle’s Forum, but why are these images offensive? If they offend because they show Islam is violent, then who is really offensive?], will probably be televised on January 25.  This will be done during broadcasting time for political parties made available to the Freedom Party (PVV).  The Justice Department is investigating whether anything can be done to prevent the film from airing.

According to a reputable source, policy makers are analyzing whether the film will make more of an uproar than the publication of cartoons mocking the Prophet Muhammad in Denmark.  Those cartoons in the newspaper Jyllands-Posten led to protests throughout the Islamic world.

When it was leaked that Wilders was coming out with an anti-Koran film, three ministers warned him of the possible consequences.  The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has since informed all of its diplomatic posts about this. This was to explain to other countries that the Cabinet has distanced itself from the film. [Let’s get this straight:  The Cabinet says it understands that a film showing Islam to be violent is offensive to Muslims and wants to assure Muslims it doesn’t think they’re violent, because it knows that if it doesn’t, they might react violently?  LF]

Following the publication of the Muhammad cartoons, thousands of Muslims took to the streets.  There were dozens of casualties in rioting in Afghanistan, Libya and Nigeria. Ambassadors were recalled from Denmark and Danish companies were boycotted.

According to sources, the apprehension in the majority party is increasing because Wilders has thus far shown no willingness to express any reservations about his film. Investigations are also underway to see whether Wilders will have to acquire a specially secured residence and whether his fellow party members will require security.

Wilders wants to show with his film that “wretched things” from the Koran are
still being put into practice.  The Islamic organizations, from moderate to fundamentalist, have expressed concern about the film.
Laigle’s Forum comment:
First, to our intrepic reporter, Weert Schenk:
There is nothing like telling the enemy you are afraid of him and suggesting that you are absolutely powerless to counter his unlawful attacks on you and your country.

Second, to the Dutch government:
It doesn’t take a genius to know that apologizing for telling the truth is not the way to deal with the enemy.  The Amsterdam police apparently went into the Muslim communities to confer with the enemy and find out how mad these hotheads might become.  Why didn’t they warn the Dutch Muslims that they were living in a democracy where the truth is not prohibited, not on television, not in the newspapers, not in government?  And if they don’t like it, they can go back home to the dictatorships that they supposedly came to Holland to escape.

As for the ambassadors, this would have been a wonderful opportunity to explain to the Islamic world that the only chance to overcome Wilders’ offense is to oppose it by a reasoned approach in the media, the same way the so-called offense was aired in the first place.  Muslims can say anything they want about Christians, Jews, Europeans, or whatever, in their media.  We’re used to the slander.  We don’t protest, we don’t kill people, we don’t burn cars.  We just patiently wait for the bearded babies to grow up.

If violence is your only response, then you have proved the basic thesis of Wilders’ film.  Because all the film does is say that you are a bunch of hotheads.  If you’re not, prove it. You can make a film about Wilders.  You can make a film about European Christians, European atheists, Dutch people who take their cue from the Bible and make suicide attacks on innocent people in Cairo, Baghdad, Istanbul and so on. You know what Christians we mean?Neither do we.

And that is our point.

Julie Andrews defends filth for kids

Hollywood actors have been self-destructing for as long as any of us can remember. Even those who are known mostly for children’s movies. After all, if a person falls into a vat of purple dye, they come out purple. They don’t even have to like purple. They will be purple. Likewise, if a person is surrounded by Hollywood liberal flakes day in and day out, the chances are, they will soon start sounding and acting like a run-of-the-mill Hollywood flake.Below is an email we received from the organization Grassroots American Values. We have always endorsed this group, which is at the forefront of the war that America’s most powerful librarians have declared on you and your children. The same librarians who pull books from the shelves because of their religious content will scream “book burning” if a parent objects to a “children’s book” in the children’s section that is replete with expletives that would make your ears burn.

This group had a debate with a local liberal newspaper that advocated the placement of books full of filthy language and explicit sexual descriptions in the children’s section of libraries, a policy that is in line with that of the leftwing ALA (American Librarians Association). A member of Grassroots American Values wrote a letter to the editors of that paper with direct quotes from the book they endorsed as a “children’s” book. The editors said they could not print the letter because of the explicit content. Yet they were saying this same content that they censored was appropriate for children.

Julie Andrews now writes children’s literature. No one is saying her books are full of inappropriate content. But like all good liberals, she takes the standard ALA viewpoint that children can be exposed to anything and everything, including all expletives and any imaginable explicit sexual description, and not only is this not harmful to children, but parents need to step aside and keep their mouths shut. (Our latest article on children as property of the State ties in with this idea that parents are no longer viewed as having the right to choose the kind of material their kids are exposed to. That that article relates to Germany clearly demonstrates that the viewpoins of the Left are very much international and amazingly homogeneous).

On November/2007 Grassroots American Values contacted Julie Andrews.  We asked if she “condones ALA policies on books for children.”  We reminded her that her own books, written for children, would be on the same shelves as Paul Ruditis’ “Rainbow Party,” John Green’s “Looking for Alaska,” and  Robert Cormier’s “Fade” (all age-inappropriate books).  Below is the dismissive answer we received from “The Julie Andrews Collection Editorial Team.”  Keep this in mind next time you consider watching one of her movies or buying her books. 
Grassroots American Values
Subj: Re: Question to Julie Andrews
Date: 11/30/2007 10:31:09 A.M. Eastern Standard Time

To:,,, cindy.tamasi@harpercollinscom,,
[…] Ms. Andrews is a staunch supporter of ALA and a lifelong advocate for libraries everywhere. A  transcript of her speech at ALA’s 2007 annual convention in Washington DC is available on the Julie Andrews Collection website at We hope that reading this transcript will answer any questions you have and will provide closure on this matter, as limitations of time and resources do not permit us to engage in further dialogue on this subject.  […]

Laigle’s Forum urges you the reader to contact the Julie Andrews Collection at the addresses listed above and ask why Julie Andrews endorses filth for children. Please visit the Grassroots American Values website first at and find out how the ALA endorses age-inappropriate literature for kids in libraries.

Update on Congressman Todd Platts and Hate Crimes

We had promised to keep you abreast of developments with a PA congressman who purports to be Christian and conservative but who voted for hate crimes bills. We had a long conversation with Mr. Platts about a month ago and he tried to defend his position saying that Christians are equally protected under this law. Later we noted that a pro-life group in CA had been harrassed by the police. We urged our friends to contact Todd’s office and ask him how his wonderful hate crimes bill would protect them against this obvious anti-Christian discrimination. He arroganttly returned an empty email to each of them, including us.

We later spoke with an assistant in his local office and she was a very strong advocate of this bill, knew a lot about it, and was extremely defensive, which seemed rather odd.
Now, just this weekend, an article appeared in the local paper ( naming Todd Platts in a lawsuit. The local government is trying to seize land from a local farmer and, allegedly, they have recruited Platts to engage the IRS in trying to have the land seized by the federal government.

Nationalizing children

The text that follows the introductory e-mail from our German homeschooling friend, Heiko Krautter, was written in a German context.  But this article is just as relevant to today’s America.  The hotly debated nationalization of children is one step away in that country, two steps away in America.  Intelligent Americans know it is Hillary’s final solution, but few suspect the GOP is her facilitator.

This article shows the utter lack of any meaningful difference between the parties on the right and left in Germany.  The “conservative” party, the CDU, is strikingly similar to our GOP.  George W. Bush’s no Child left behind act takes America a major step closer to the goal of nationalizing our children.  And the excuses given are the same: American parents aren’t educating their children, American women aren’t home to care for their children.

As Stefan Dietrich points out, the downward spiral in education is government-induced, which parallels the situation here.  The self-perpetuating cycle created by government is the following:

High taxes increase poverty > poverty (and state-supported feminist ideology) leads to two working parents > both parents on the job leads to child neglect > child neglect leads to “problem children” > problem children create a need for public child care > public care means less parenting > less parenting leads to problem children.

Americans desperately need to be educated prior to these coming elections. They need to learn that neo-conservatism is socialism in drag and they need to understand that all of the candidates promoted by Fox News, talk radio and the GOP are cookie cutter copies of each other. Our next candidate must break out of this mold. There are 3 candidates who break with the dangerous pattern we have become accustomed to: Alan Keyes (who has pulled ahead of Ron Paul in a recent poll), Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul. These are men of character who will be much less inclined than the run-of-mill GOP brand names to follow leftist tendencies, espouse supranational policies or turn your kids over to the state. We do not endorse any particular candidate.

Our translation follows. You read it first at Laigle’s Forum.

Dear friends,

We have not written you for quite a while.  However, if there should be any news about homeschooling in Saxony, we’ll let you know immediately.  We are happy and thankful for a bit of a respite.

Below you will find a news item that is chilling.  If you already are aware of it, you have certainly thought of it in prayer.  May the Lord watch over families.

In the news we hear our minister of family affairs saying that the Youth Office and Health Office will control families, that preventive checkups with the controversial inoculations are obligatory, and that [government sponsored] day care should be available for every child once and for all.  That way women can have their equal right to work.

You see, this is also why homeschooling is banned in Germany.  Families must be destroyed, all godly models must disappear.  Are these (families, that is) perhaps the mysterious parallel societies we keep hearing about?

It probably won’t be long before children completely lose the right to their own parents.  At any rate, this is not God’s will, and parents should certainly resist it.  Children are a gift of God, God, who created life and gave breath to every human child, but gave parents the task of bringing up children in the Lord.  Where do we find a mandate from God to send children to such anti-Christian institutions?

I don’t want to wax rhapsodic, but aren’t our children sacred?  Aren’t they like pearls?  Do we not read “give not what is holy to the dogs; cast not your pearls before swine, lest they trample them underfoot and turn and rend you”?  Matt.  7, 6.

Whether our children are “sacred” depends on our position before God, but at any rate, we read in I Corinthians 7:14: “… otherwise, your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.” 

Best wishes,
Heiko Krautter

Children’s Rights in the Constitution

Downward Spiral

By Stephan Dietrich

The SPD [German Socialist Party] isn’t satisfied.  Party boss Beck wants the Constitution to read: “every child has a right to positive development and to the achievable degree of health.”  At first glance, anyone would be glad to sign this.  However, in article 6, this immediately conflicts with paragraph 2: “the care and upbringing of children is the natural right of parents and their primary duty.”  In other words, children’s rights are secondary to parental rights.

The actual goal is something else

However, parental rights are (still) the strongest constitutional barrier to the nationalization of preschool education.  The actual goal of this initiative to change the constitution is therefore to replace the one with the other — even if Beck hasn’t said that yet.

The ground has long been prepared for this, and that with help from the CDU [Christian Democratic Union — supposedly, the conservative party]. Sometimes compassionately, sometimes reproachfully, politicians and the media deplore the increasing overburdening of parents, lack of education capacity and lack of early intervention for children.

There surely are poor family conditions, but most parents are not overburdened by their children but rather by the state.  Throughout all economic cycles, the percentage of children whose support must be ensured by subsidies has grown steadily — to 25% according to the latest surveys.  A Darmstadt family judge by the name of Borchert laments that a professional salary of €30,000 is no longer enough to feed a family with two children; but that families without children are far above the social minimum on the same salary.

Lost in the shuffle

For decades, there has been a downward spiral in family policy.  The risk of poverty increases with the number of children; the pressure to have two incomes increases with poverty; the double burden increases the risk of child neglect, and the desire for public care increases with the number of “problem children.”  This is how politics created the problems it purports to solve.

Ingrid Sehrbrock the deputy chairperson of the Christian Democrat Employees Association, just repeated it: “in fact, the goal must be to make day care, kindergartens and all-day schools mandatory.  But we can’t get there in one step.”  Margot Honecker [socialist] would feel right at home in this atmosphere. [LF comment: Notice how the “conservative” party in Germany is just an extension of the Left. Sound familiar?]

We had the chance to break out of this spiral.  In the 2005 election campaign, the Union parties came out with the promise to raise the tax exemption to €8,000 per child.  The bulk of today’s entitlement recipients would have at least become independent of state subsidies.  This idea was lost in the shuffle at the coalition bargaining table.

A lot of losers here

The CDU took up the platform of combining jobs and families and celebrated this as a bold “departure from an antiquated family pattern.”  €4 billion flowed twice into the development of day care openings and the new parent subsidies to promote working mothers. The earmarking of the parent money primarily for those with higher salaries was intentional.  But it was justified by Mrs. Von der Leyen, who stated “all families will be better off in the future.”

Less than a year later, the results failed to confirm this.  The Munster administration scientist Stefan Fuchs calculated from available data that about 60% of parents are worse off with the parent money than with the now abolished child subsidy (€300 a month for two years).  The biggest losers are low-income families and families with numerous children, and also single parents and university students.

The threat of child nationalization looms

Meanwhile, the debate over the social justice of minimum salaries and managerial salaries has glossed over the fact that the most valuable contribution made to this society, that is, the rearing of children, is always lower paid.  But why reward a home contribution that nobody wants anymore?

Children’s rights in the Constitution would be the next major step in nationalizing children.  It would no longer be “primarily the parents” but instead “the state community” that would assert these rights.  There is no talk of children’s right to their parents.  The consequences of such a remedy in family policy would be worse than the causes that served as the pretext for it.

A thaw in Narnia?

Remember how the movie (book) Narnia opens in a winter landscape that hasn’t seen a spring thaw for as long as anyone can remember?  Narnia is a picture of Europe.  The Ice Queen is the secular power structure, represented by the arts, the media, the universities, government, and yes, the secularized grassroots themselves.  But you recall that spring time came to Narnia in due time.  The ice melted, the sun shone, even frozen creatures thawed from the inside out.There are signs of a thaw these days.  The Dutch online newspaper de Volkskrant reports that the churches have gone on the offensive to counter the obvious threat posed by Islam.  Our translation follows:

de Volkskrant
Dec. 24, 2007

Christian churches going on a mission

by staff reporter Lidy Nicolasen

Amsterdam — The Catholic and Protestant churches are going on a mission in our country.  They want to stop the erosion of the Church and prevent Islam from becoming the dominant religion in the Netherlands.  The churches are afraid that they will otherwise reach the limits of their further existence.

“This isn’t about stealing sheep.  We are interested in having people find Jesus and learn his way,” says Wout van Laar of the Dutch Missionary Council.

“Christians and Muslims are competitors.  We are looking for new evangelism and ways to talk about Jesus.  We Protestants and Catholics must want to be missionaries again,” says Utrecht Assistant Bishop Gerard de Korte.

Christianity and Islam are both missions-oriented religions and are therefore competitors.  Both are active in recruiting believers, sometimes among each other but mostly among nonbelievers.  Many Muslims have a distinct profile.  A fair number of Catholics and Protestants lack a specific identity.  They want to play a part in the daily social life again.

On January 1, Holland will get a second missiology professor in the person of Mechteld Jansen.  This department at the Protestant theological University of Utrecht is paid for by the Protestant mission.  Jansen has the job of focusing primarily on missions in the home country.


Churches are developing missionary activities in their own circles.  The Protestant Church of the Netherlands wants to make nonbelievers curious, opening the church to alternative times, sponsoring encounters, for example, a spiritual café.  The influential Catholic Antoine Bodar wants to reintroduce the daily closing commentary on radio and television.  According to Korte, “there are low-threshold observances everywhere.  You can see the missionary zeal again on radio and television: KRO, CRV and especially EO.  There are websites, news sites, and a famous podcast priest who is known far outside of Holland.”

Europe has long ceased to set the tone in Christian congregations worldwide.  Nowhere has secularization gone so far as it has here.  In other parts of the world, Christian churches are growing.

Holland has about 800,000 Christian immigrants.  Every Sunday they get together.  Groups of about 75 people hold services in church buildings, garages and schools.  These are often evangelical churches.  The evangelical churches are the fastest-growing in the world.  Catholics and Protestants are giving this influx a chilly reception, but mutual contacts have meanwhile emerged.
Laigle’s Forum comments:
If the new missionaries in Holland impart the message of Jesus Christ, namely, sin and the redemption of fallen man, then they can take back their country for Christ. 

But if their spiritual café’s are staffed by wimpy long-haired hippies, whose only message is “God is love,” they might as well just hand over their country to the Muslims right now.  The rarest commodity in Europe at this point in time is testosterone, and the Muslims have it. They’re importing and selling it to disgruntled Dutch people who are sick to death of politically correct defeatist weakness.

The Dutch church needs to take a lesson from us. New Age Christianity with its nondescript effeminate music, lisping youth pastors and worship teams that look and act like car salesman, is failing miserably in the United States.  After all, when the church looks like the world, what is the point of going to church?  Sinners find their way into churches to repent of their sin with bitter tears, acquire a new self-sacrificing lifestyle and boldly tell others of the salvation they have found.  Yet all they find in many cases is the message that their sins aren’t all that bad or aren’t even sins, that God not only loves homosexuals but winks at gay sex as well.

Our advice to the Dutch Church: Open your spiritual cafés if you think that will help, but keep your churches open too.  And staff both with Christian real men who present the Gospel for what it is and portray Christ as a real man, because that’s who He is. 

You can let the girly hippies wash the teacups.

Should the Right to Homeschool be a Constitutional Right? Is it the Key to Liberty?

Homeschooling is in the news. Many Christians are aware of the obstacles (dare I say, persecutions?) of homeschoolers in Germany. The recent shootings in Colorado were perpetrated by a homeschooled child. After the requisite ‘hands-off’ period, you can expect homeschooling opponents to lay some emphasis on the fact that he was homeschooled. The homeschool supporters will retort that the Columbine shooters weren’t. To top it off, a homeschooling parent had to flee Utah recently because a judge threatened to remove her children. (Source:

With these thoughts in mind, I would like the reader to consider how it is customary of our society to forget so soon and so easily how things used to be different. There are things that we would never tolerate if they were just now presented to us but if they represent the status quo we reason to ourselves that we’ve lived with it ‘this long’ and ‘things are ok’ is it worthy of our attention? An example would be the legalization of abortion in Roe vs. Wade. I have heard people argue that we may as well just get use to it as it is, after all, the settled law of the land. Yet it has only been a little over thirty years!

Another example would be the Federal income tax. Many people don’t know that this tax is primarily a creature of just the last century, erected in the early part of the 1900s. The somewhat novel approach of withholding the tax before the person even saw a penny of their salary had the effect of dulling the invasiveness of the act. The Treasury Department’s own website includes this analysis:

Another important feature of the income tax that changed was the return to income tax withholding as had been done during the Civil War. This greatly eased the collection of the tax for both the taxpayer and the Bureau of Internal Revenue. However, it also greatly reduced the taxpayer’s awareness of the amount of tax being collected, i.e. it reduced the transparency of the tax, which made it easier to raise taxes in the future. (Reference)

Yes, it did make it easier to raise taxes in the future. Today, we hardly think twice about it, and that is not a good thing.

Now, the Department of Education was established only in 1979.

I want to be clear before I proceed and assert that I don’t have any objections to the public school system, or teachers. I was a teacher for four years. My wife teaches in the public school system and we have many friends and acquaintances in the public school system. Not only that, my children are currently in the public school system! So I don’t want to hear anyone accusing me of having an axe to grind on the public school system.

What the Department of Education represents is a trend towards the centralization of power and influence. Its original mission was to stay out of way of the States and the local communities but should any of us be surprised that it has exerted more and more influence or that legislators would use it as a vehicle to further exert Federal influence? Isn’t this illustrated by the “No Child Left Behind” Act? Never mind the good intentions behind this piece of legislation. It is a clear illustration how even government agencies formed to respect local communities will inevitably be co-opted ‘for the higher good.’

Let us ponder other kinds of ‘good intentions’ that might be coming down the road in later legislation. Some kind of legislation will assuredly be coming.

What constitutes a ‘good’ intention by a legislator in Washington DC might be horrific to a great many of us. However- and this is the key- so long as we at least have the alternative to move our children outside the sphere of influence of those ‘good intenders’ there is a good chance that lawmakers will wake up to what they are doing. So long as people are permitted to ‘vote with their feet’ it will become clear just how much your average American is willing to take.

It should be no surprise, then, that there are many who oppose homeschooling on principle.

Arguments against homeschooling range from concerns about the actual academic achievement by homeschooled students to the ‘lack of socialization’ such students receive. I am inclined to think that between those issues it is the socializing issue that has opponents most concerned. The public school system has long been seen as a mechanism to produce the kind of citizens the state- or the powerful interests within it- would like to produce. Clearly, money is also a driving factor. Because money is often tied to enrollment numbers, even if the parents of the homeschoolers themselves don’t get the money, the public school system’s budget can take a hit.

You rarely hear the socialization objection framed in terms of the state’s duty to produce ‘good citizens.’ Usually those concerns are directed towards social concerns, as if homeschooled students will be inclined to pick their nose in public if they are not exposed to the vicious taunting that kids are inclined to direct towards each other. For thousands of years people learned how to behave within society without public schools to teach them manners and decorum. We are led to believe that without the public schools, a relative recent thing, children would be severely stunted.

No, socialization is the concern, but it isn’t about getting along with other people.

Many atheists have sneered at the old Jesuit saying “”Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man.” This is interpreted as endorsing blatant mind control and indoctrination. The truth is that everyone sees the truth in this statement and many of them are clamoring to have the child.

For example, consider this quote from prominent atheist Daniel Dennett directed at anti-evolutionists, “… those of us who have freedom of speech will feel free to describe your teachings as the spreading of falsehoods, and will attempt to demonstrate this to your children at our earliest opportunity.” [Dennett, Darwin’s Dangerous Idea].

Why does Dennett make this argument? It is because he knows that it is just the way of human civilization- not merely religionists- to propagate ideas to children. This is the same man who responded to the Jesuit saying I just mentioned by saying, “I’m sure the Jesuit proverb is exaggerated. Many children bounce back from quite extreme forms of religious indoctrination quite readily.” (Reference) What an interesting thing to say for a man who just indicated in the strongest terms possible his intent to ridicule anti-evolutionist arguments to children as early as possible.

Dennett isn’t the only person making statements that should concern us. Richard Dawkins has indicated that he believes the Christian doctrine of hell, when taught to children, is actually child abuse. He says, “The threat of eternal hell is an extreme example of mental abuse, just as violent sodomy is an extreme example of physical abuse. Most physical abuse is milder, and so is most of the mental abuse inherent in a typical religious education.” (Reference)

Dawkins is stunningly unaware of the fact that suing people on account of child abuse is not the normal course of action by a compassionate and just society. No, removing the child from the abuser is the course of action we tend to favor. It is only a matter of time before someone smarter than Dawkins (or braver) puts it all together and notes that it tends to be, more often than not, Christians choosing to homeschool. What then, if ‘good intenders’ come to agree that Christian doctrines are perceived as ‘child abuse’ as Dawkins would allege? Isn’t the result of such thinking if actually applied obvious?

Keep the logic going. Can a compassionate and just society allow students to be taken out of the public school system and be abused by their parents who propagate the view that there is a literal hell? Can public society in good conscience keep children from being exposed to the obvious truth of evolution and the public ridiculing of alternatives?

We begin to see how important it is that parents be permitted to raise their children as they see fit and how a free country must allow it, even if they disagree radically with what those parents believe. Dennett and Dawkins represent a radical extreme, but I use them to point out what kind of views some people would like to expose children to. What if these two were in charge?

There will always be people out there with strong feelings about this issue or that and the public school system has always been an obvious avenue for introducing such views because everyone knows that that is a very effective way to expand the population of people who believe like they do. The trend is to make it even more appropriate for such propagation.

Whether or not one approves of what people want to teach their children freedom and liberty requires that parents always have the option to raise children as they see fit. The day in which education by the state is completely compulsory is the day when the stage is set for state education to be co-opted. Today, it might seem that the powers-that-be are benevolent or are promoting the values you approve of, but tomorrow it might be different. Today, secularists may rejoice that it is their ideas being promoted in the school system, but tomorrow that may chance.

Yes, though we do tend to quickly accommodate ourselves to the status quo the truth is that things can change, and change fast. If today you get what you want and every child is being taught exactly how you please, tomorrow it might be otherwise, but it will be too late. You won’t be able to do anything about it. You made your own bed.

The right to homeschool ought to be a right enshrined in the Constitution. It serves as an important ‘check and balance’ against the rise of tyranny. If the Constitution’s framers had known what was going to be coming in the 20th century, I think they would have already done so.

For more information about the history of homeschooling’s fight to be permitted in the USA, please see

Anthony Horvath is the author of Fidelis and the chief apologist and contributor at

The silent stalkers of Brazil

Laigle’s Forum has been at the forefront of a campaign in this country by a small but courageous group of Brazilian editorialists and activists to spread the truth about Brazil today. It is not a comforting truth. It is a story of misery, of corruption, of lies and misrepresentations by the Left, which has a chokehold on much of the South American continent.
Yet, our press, both conservative and leftwing, has failed miserably to convey the truth of this situation and in so doing, has played into the hands of these ruthless thugs, who wantonly burn farms, mutilate helpless cattle and commit murder and rape, all in the name of social justice.
Conservatives here are aware of our Left’s hypocrisy with regard to the environment–for example, Al Gore’s power-sucking mansions and jet liner for one, even as he campaigns for environmentally sound policies imposed by government on you.
But very few of us realize that President Lula of Brazil, who has arrogantly demanded that President Bush impose srticter controls on car emissions in the US (here: and here, is pursuing policies that are destroying the rainforests, the world’s most significant antidote to carbon emissions, and no one in our government or media has uttered so much as a peep.
The US has been a toothless hag in the war on Latin American terror, not only standing by and watching in silence, but in fact, empowering a despotic regime in Brazil whose favorites are Castro, Chavez and the killers and drug lords of the FARC.
To bring yourself up to speed, please read the article below and then view the PPT presentation “Landless Movement,” sent to us courtesy of Heitor De Paola and linked below.

Other links:

The Brazilian government is giving rainforest land to outlaws:

The silent stalkers of Brazil
by Heitor De Paola
In recent years, Latin American Countries have been facing a renewed leftist movement that jeopardizes the dwindling individual liberty, freedom of speech and most of all private property rights and free enterprise that still exist. The methods as well as the degree of violence vary from country to country. In Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Bolivia, vociferous and outspoken presidents stridently announce nationalization of oil and gas, enterprises and there are constant threats against the free press.
While this situation prevails in the open in those countries, Brazil is deemed as a quiet and peaceful nation that abides by the rule of law and sound capitalism. This is far from the truth. Actually, together with Fidel Castro, President Lula da Silva was co-founder in 1990 of the huge and powerful communist organization Forum of São Paulo. The center of the subversive leftist movement in Latin America didn’t move from Havana to Caracas as a large number of political analysts say, instead it moved to Brasilia. Caracas and Chavez are only well designed disguises to conceal the very source of all revolutionary actions on the continent. The Forum of São Paulo was founded to “restore in Latin America what was lost in Eastern Europe”: communism, no less! And at the same time to save Cuba from the imminent disaster that the island was facing when the Soviet injection of money ended. This deception is extremely important to divert attention from Brazil, thereby allowing the quiet development of the most dangerous of all revolutions: the one that’s difficult to see. Anyone who dares say Brazil is undergone a quiet yet sustainable journey to become a communist country is immediately certified as psychotic. Supposedly “well informed” analysts with their theories about the existence of “two lefts” – one “carnivorous” and another “vegetarian” –  and applying “populism” instead of communism to the left sa a whole, only collaborate with this obfuscation.

However, anyone who looks closely at the Brazilian social structure will see unfolding before their eyes many details apparently detached from each other that, when combined, reveal a terrible scene. From a Marxist-Leninist influenced education to statism; from attacks on Christian and moral values to invasions of all kind against private property; from government support to leftists NGO’s to growing corruption of the Legislative and Judiciary  branches together with growing empowerment of the Executive – all converge into a steady revolutionary trend. 
There are many fronts in this war but I must confine myself in this short communication to a small part of what is going on in the countryside. The MST (Landless Movement, or Movimento Sem Terra) is not what it is usually called, namely, a “social” movement of poor farmers, but really a very rich guerrilla revolutionary movement that has no interest in property for the landless but in destroying productive properties, agribusiness and experiments with genetically modified food. The MST combines its actions with a myriad of other revolutionary movements and is a branch of the powerful international guerrilla Via Campesina that is spreading through 56 countries around the world.
I hope the ppt presentation attached here will help the world to understand actual Brazilian situation today. This is only a tiny part of what is spreading all around the country nowadays.
Heitor De Paola
Cultural Director
Political analyst
Click below for this dramatic ppt file:
Landless Movement

Islam and gays on a collision course in Canada

by Donald Hank
Ever since my article (
“Will ex-gays bring down Big Sodomy?” ran at WND, I have been exchanging emails with people who originally wrote me in regard to it, some wildly enthusiastic about the column and others, mostly gay, not so enthusiastic, but none all that angry, which came as a surprise.
One of the writers is a homosexual gentleman who sparred with me for a while and then found that I was not about to give in. So we just drop each other a friendly line once in a while. I think it is safe to say both sides are hoping in the end to convert the other, which may be wishful thinking for me and is wishful thinking for him. Let us call him Ron, though it is not his name.
When I saw the article in WND about Bill Whatcott, who was fined $17,500 for opposing homosexuality, I couldn’t resist sending Ron, who is Canadian, a link:
Ron magnanimously granted that “laws against bigots are not necessary.” He compared Whatcott with Fred Phelps, which seems to be the standard barb for anyone who opposes the lifestyle. But he later also indicated that, considering that gays are executed in Iran, he felt no sympathy for people who are fined large amounts of money for opposing the gay lifestyle.
He asked me about my theology and when I mentioned something about the Apostle Paul, he reiterated another standard gay stance, namely, a disdain for the Apostle Paul, who, as I have long known, gay activists claim is unchristian (because of Paul’s passage in Romans about how unnatural it is for men to do, you know, with each other), but a predilection for Jesus (who is not quoted in the New Testament as specifically opposing homosexuality).
As we were going around on this issue, I got an email alert to the WND article on Mark Steyn, the renowned author who is being charged with a hate infraction in Canada for saying that Islam is hostile to free speech. This Muslim group wants to silence Steyn for saying that Islam tries to silence people.
So I sent this link to Ron:
with this comment:
A friend just sent the article linked above.
Now, you indicated that you were unsympathetic to those who embrace the Apostle Paul’s theology and don’t feel any sympathy for those who have to pay fines in Canada for practicing free speech if they embrace that theology.
You indicated this was because, in comparison to the execution of gays in Iran, this free speech issue is insignificant.
Ironically, the article linked above shows that if Canada continues to ban the spoken and written word just because it is deemed offensive by favored groups, it will not be your liberal viewpoint that prevails over the traditional Christian one but rather the Muslim viewpoint that trumps them both. Sharia law, when it comes to Canada, will declare gays outlaws punishable by death and the gay agenda is enabling this, unwittingly sowing the seeds of its own demise.
Thus the ultimate winner under a speech-banning government like yours will inevitably be a group that you need to fear much more than the Christians, and as you indicated in your earlier email, you do fear them, although you probably don’t dare to admit it for fear of your government. It must be horrible to fear both friend and foe alike.
If you draw the logical inferences from the article linked above, you will understand that banning free speech will ultimately hurt active gays much more than protecting free speech will. The current Canadian position is internally inconsistent: ban free speech if it offends gays and also if it offends Muslims, even though Muslims are the most dangerous homophobe group by far!
So in this light, are you sure you want free speech restricted only to “nice” speech?
If speech is protected, and the gay position is superior intellectually, you will prevail, right? But if the Christian position prevails, you will at least be able to keep your heads, and no one will ever forbid you to defend your Constitutionally (
protected viewpoint.

I haven’t heard from Ron since. Of course, he did offensively mention that Iranian Muslims execute gays. I sincerely hope his computer has not been seized by his “friends” in government.
Donald Hank is a technical translator and the Editor-in-Chief of Laigle’s Forum.

Contact the author:

Laigle’s Forum just got an email from reader Greg Smith regarding our recent column on “Bush’s new tax.” It turns out this increase in the minimum age for full social security benefits is not directly attributable to President Bush. Greg says:

Actually this change was made 24 years ago.
However it is just now catching up to those who are ready to retire.
Greg Smith / Pittsburgh
Social Security Today
The first recognition of the fragility of the Social Security program occurred in 1975. A report developed by the Treasury Department indicated that Social Security payroll taxes collected would be insufficient to meet Social Security payments by 1979. In response, Congress increased the tax rate, reduced benefits, and made the automatic adjustment to the amount of earnings subject to Social Security independent of the COLA. These steps averted a potential Social Security failure.
In 1983, another potential Social Security crisis was avoided. President Ronald Reagan formed the Greenspan Commission to study the financial state of Social Security. The commission issued a detailed report calling for numerous, sweeping changes to be implemented in order to strengthen Social Security. A bill passed by Congress based upon the recommendations of the Greenspan Commission taxed some Social Security benefits, included federal employees in the definition of employees for Social Security payroll tax purposes, and scheduled increases in the retirement age in the next century.

Thanks for that friendly alert, Greg! It is always good to hear from our readers, regardless of the message.

Chuck Baldwin on Ron Paul

Who Are These Kooks?
By Chuck Baldwin
December 18, 2007

This column is archived at

According to the Associated Press, “Republican presidential hopeful
Ron Paul’s supporters raised over $6 million Sunday to boost the
10-term congressman’s campaign for the White House.”
The AP report also said, “The [Paul] campaign’s previous fundraiser
brought in $4.2 million.”
According to the Paul campaign website, “In a 24-hour period on
December 16, the campaign raised $6.026 million dollars, surpassing
the one-day record of $5.7 million held by John Kerry.
“During the day, over 58,000 people contributed to Dr. Paul’s
campaign, including 24,940 first-time donors. Over 118,000 Americans
have donated to the campaign in the fourth quarter.
“The $6 million one-day total means the campaign has raised over $18
million this quarter, far exceeding its goal of $12 million.”
Now, if one listens to most of the political pundits in the major
media, Ron Paul is some kind of “kook,” and his supporters are also a
bunch of “kooks.” So, the question must be asked, Just who are these
kooks that are supporting him, and why are they giving Ron Paul all this
First, let’s take a look at this “kook” who is receiving all this
money. Ron Paul was born the third son of Howard and Margaret Paul,
and was brought up with a work ethic in which one worked six days a
week and went to church on Sunday. His first job was at age 5 helping
his uncle wash bottles. He worked all the way through his youth mowing
lawns, delivering newspapers, working in a drug store, delivering
furniture and laundry, etc.
In high school, Ron was a track star, winning state as a junior in the
220-yard dash and running 2nd in the 440. His time in the 100-yard
dash was 9.8. That’s pretty good. I was never able to break 10-flat in
the 100. Although, I bet I could have beaten him in the 50-yard dash.
He also wrestled in high school. Coincidentally, so did I. But here
Ron leaves me: he was president of the student council and an honor
student. I never accomplished that. I was just glad to get promoted to
the next grade. Even as a senior statesman, Ron Paul keeps himself in
terrific shape. Have you seen him lately? He still maintains a
rigorous exercise regimen.
Ron’s two brothers are both ministers, and he became a medical doctor.
He graduated from Duke University School of Medicine. When the Cuban
Missile Crisis arose, Ron became a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air
Force. He also served in the Air National Guard.
As an OB/GYN physician, Dr. Paul has delivered more than 4,000 babies,
and he and his wife, Carol, have been married for more than 50 years.
They have 5 children, 18 grandchildren and 1 great-grandchild. Ron
Paul is currently in his 10th term as a congressman from Texas.
As a congressman, Ron Paul has never taken a government-paid junket.
He is not accepting a government pension. He returns a portion of his
office budget every year to the taxpayers. As a member of Congress, he
has never voted a raise for himself. Do you know any other member of
Congress that can make such a claim? Of course you don’t, because Ron
Paul is truly one-of-a-kind.
Former President Ronald Reagan said this about Ron Paul, “Ron Paul is
one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national
defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our
armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him
fighting for our country.”
Perhaps this helps explain why many of the “kooks” supporting Ron Paul
are active-duty military personnel. In fact, Ron Paul has received
more campaign contributions from active-duty military personnel than
any other Presidential candidate from either party.
But who are the other “kooks” supporting Ron Paul? What kind of people
give more than $18 million in a quarter-year to a Presidential
candidate that is almost universally ignored by the mainstream press?
What kind of people give record contributions to a Presidential
candidate that is lampooned by his fellow Republican Presidential
For example, Mike Huckabee recently said he could support any of the
other Republican Presidential contenders (including Rudy Giuliani),
except Ron Paul. That means, Mike Huckabee would rather support a
pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-gun control liberal such as
Giuliani than support the pro-life, pro-traditional marriage,
pro-Second Amendment candidacy of Ron Paul. Why is that?
Furthermore, why are the entire major media and establishment
Republican machine either ignoring or lampooning a distinguished Air
Force veteran, medical doctor, and ten-term Congressman? What is it
about Ron Paul that the elite are so afraid of?
Here is something else: while Ron Paul’s contributions have exploded,
Mike Huckabee is all but broke! How can that be? How can a political
“front-runner” be out of money, while a man who “doesn’t have a
chance” is breaking fundraising records?
So, who are these “kooks” who are sending Ron Paul so much money? And
just why are they sending him so much money? I will tell you who they
are, because I am one of them. They are rank-and-file, tax-paying
citizens who are sick and tired of out-of-control federal spending and
deficits. They have had it with an arrogant federal government that
runs roughshod over both the Constitution and the liberties of the
American people. They are people who have had enough of the IRS, the
BATFE, and a thousand other federal agencies that have “erected a
multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass
our people, and eat out their substance.” (Declaration of
They are people who see through the phony, disingenuous federal
politicians who only want to fleece the American citizenry for the
purpose of building their own personal fortunes. They have had it with
the Military-Industrial complex that desires to build international
empires at the expense of the blood and sacrifice of the American
people. They have had it with David Rockefeller and his Council on
Foreign Relations. They have had it with the arrogance of George W.
Bush and Nancy Pelosi.
They are sick and tired of paying outlandish taxes for a public
education system that produces high school graduates who cannot read
and write. They are sick and tired of working for 30 years to pay off
a mortgage, only then to be forced to pay extortion money (a.k.a.
property taxes) for the rest of their lives to the feudal state. They
are sick and tired of the government telling them what they can and
cannot do with their own property. They are sick and tired of watching
people with food stamps buy T-bone steaks and expensive Nike tennis
shoes while they are forced to buy fatty hamburger and cheap sneakers.
They are sick and tired of watching their manufacturing jobs go to
China and India. They have had it with money-hungry businessmen who
hire illegal Mexicans at slave labor wages. They have had it with
labor unions promoting politicians who support NAFTA, CAFTA, and the
FTAA. They are sick and tired of being bled dry at the gas pump.
They have had it with this phony “war on terrorism” that sends
trillions of dollars to nations throughout the Middle East, but
refuses to close our own borders to illegal immigration. They have had
it with the “war on drugs” and the “war on terror” being used as
excuses to trample people’s freedoms. They have it with Vicente Fox
and Felipe Calderon. They have had it with Bush’s North American
Union. They have had it with Joel Osteen and Rick Warren. In short,
they have just had it!
They also know that a vote for any other Presidential candidate is a
vote for more of the same. Democrat or Republican: it is more of the
same. Ron Paul, and Ron Paul alone, will bring a revolution of freedom
and independence to America. Believe me, the Ron Paul revolution is
bigger than Ron Paul. This is the beginning of a movement.
No matter what ultimately happens to Ron Paul’s candidacy, the fight
to return America to its roots of freedom and independence has
started. The fire is lit. There is no putting it out. There will be
other Ron Pauls, other campaigns, other spokesmen, other fundraising.
The people supporting Ron Paul will not be silenced; they will not be
ignored; they will not be intimidated. In truth, Ron Paul’s campaign
may just be the beginning of the end of the elitist, globalist,
stranglehold over America.
As one who is also fed up with the globalist goons that dominate the
two major parties, I join the Ron Paul revolution and vow to fight for
the rest of my life for the freedom and independence of these United
States. This means I will never again support a business-as-usual,
millionaires-club, globalist toady from either party ever again! I
will only support candidates who are fully committed to restoring
constitutional government. If that makes me a kook, so be it.
(c) Chuck Baldwin
This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.
To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so
does not charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column
is copied intact and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web
site address is included.
Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin
for permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in
scheduling an interview with Chuck should contact
When responding, please include your name, city and state. And, unless
otherwise requested, all respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon
address list.
Please visit Chuck’s web site at


Laigle’s Forum won’t be part of the media blackout

If Ron Paul is not to be taken seriously, why is it the media are treating him like a leper?
Don’t conervatives say biased coverage such as media blackouts, distortions, lies and the like are tricks of the the liberal left?
 Yet, Fox News gives huge coverage to lukewarm figures like Giuliani and McCain while ignoring the candidate who has had the biggest fund raisers of all time and has generated more unbridled enthusiasm than any other candidate.
While not endorsing any candidate, Laigle’s Forum will not be part of any blackout or any conspiracy to withold information from the public or stonewall an unorthodox candidate.
Here is a page full of links I got from a lady who has shown enormous enthusiasm for Ron Paul, even though she voted twice for Bush.
It is here for you to view should you wish to do so.

Coming Soon: RonPaulaPalooza Music Festival Fundraiser For Freedom=== A Modern Day Woodstock for Peace.

IAHF is helping to organize this Two Day Music Festival to Raise Funds for RP— Listen to the Song That Loads When You Click Here and Feel Inspired, especially by the word “CODEX” which is part of the Song (!!!) 

The IAHF Health Freedom Mssg is being incorporated into this Campaign, slowly but surely, and is going to continue to pick up momentum as word keeps percolating into the public consciousness. If you swing a sledgehammer at a slab of concrete long enough, you’ll start seein’ cracks. We just raised $6.4 Million dollars for RP the other day to set the new one day fundraising record for a political campaign. Thanks to all of you for helping!!! Good job!
We’re gonna beat it with this music festival….

This is a true Revolution.

See this interesting article in Mother Jones Mag: “The Apostles of Ron Paul”

In Addition to viewing tuesdays (todays) scheduled mainstream news coverage of the RP Phenomenon, (listed below) please view some of the mainstream coverage we got yesterday due to the success of the Moneybomb, Also see RPs letter which thanks us all– see links below and please forward. 

See the alert I sent out to the IAHF list at re the Canadian Ron Paul Tea Party if you missed it, and PLEASE– phone your friends to alert them all: RP to be on Glen Beck, CNN Network News tonight (check local listings) & on many more shows due to all our efforts. They’ll keep trying to do spin against his mssg, but its getting harder for them all the time.

RP Media Schedule for December 18th Tuesday

Dec 18

1. Ron Paul on Fox & Friends

Fox News Channel

7:15 AM ET

2. Ron Paul on CNN American Morning


8:15 AM ET

3. Ron Paul on Morning Joe


8:30 AM ET

4. Jan Mickelson interviews Ron Paul

WHO Radio

9:00 AM CT

5. Glenn Beck interviews Ron Paul

CNN Headline News

Check local listings (7 or 9PM)

Sunday, Monday  + Extras: MEDIA COVERAGE OF THE EXPLODING RP PHENOMENON- esp see the You Tube of the Santa Monica CA Tea Party Pier Rally with Speech by Ed Griffin.

Jack Cafferty and The 6 Million Dollar Man is Ron Paul   or

ABC: Paul Raises $6 Million in 24-Hour Effort

John McCain Gets Owned on Meet The Press

CNN Early Tea Party Coverage

Austin TeaParty or here

So Cal Tea Party

RON PAUL Dubai to Boston Tea Party Celebration GO RON GO RON


PBS Special on Ron   (I?m in it at 2:24 and 3:50 ;p)

New RP Song

Roots, Grassy Roots!

 Dec 16th Ron Paul donation day coverage on CNN

Las Vegas Tea Party!!!

The Strasbourg Tea Party for Ron Paul

Proclaiming Ron Paul (Sheep no more!)

Ron Paul: $6 million haul and blimp on CNN (12/17/07)

Morning Joe Mentions Tea Party Ron Paul Success 11/17/07

Ron Paul Makes History with donations.

Ron Paul Rally Santa Monica Pier Dec 16

Ron Paul: Change the World 2.0


Daily Show: America to the Rescue. Please Stand By.

To The Parents On The Forum

Ron Paul – KWQW Radio Interview (YouTube Video)


Ron Paul: Tucker interview with Ron Paul’s campaign manager

<< Thank you Message From Ron>>>   <<<If you didn?t get this email sign up @ >>>

December 17, 2007

What a day! I am humbled and inspired, grateful and thrilled for this vast outpouring of support.

On just one day, in honor of the 234th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, the new American revolutionaries brought in $6.04 million, another one-day record. The average donation was $102; we had 58,407 individual contributors, of whom an astounding 24,915 were first-time donors. And it was an entirely voluntary, self-organized, decentralized, independent effort on the internet. Must be the “spammers” I keep hearing about!

The establishment is baffled and worried, and well they should be. They keep asking me who runs our internet fundraising and controls our volunteers. To these top-down central planners, a spontaneous order like our movement is science-fiction. But you and I know it’s real: as real as the American people’s yearning for freedom, peace, and prosperity, as real as all the men and women who have sacrificed for our ideals, in the past and today.

And how neat to see celebrations all across the world, with Tea Parties from France to New Zealand. This is how we can spread the ideals of our country, through voluntary emulation, not bombs and bribes. Of course, there were hundreds in America.

As I dropped in on a cheering, laughing crowd of about 600 near my home in Freeport, Texas, I noted that they call us “angry.” Well, we are the happiest, most optimistic “angry” movement ever, and the most diverse. What unites us is a love of liberty, and a determination to fix what is wrong with our country, from the Fed to the IRS, from warfare to welfare. But otherwise we are a big tent.

Said the local newspaper ( “The elderly sat with teens barely old enough to vote. The faces were black, Hispanic, Asian and white. There was no fear in their voices as they spoke boldly with each other about the way the country should be. Held close like a deeply held secret, Paul has brought them out of the disconnect they feel between what they know to be true and where the country has been led.”

Thanks also to the 500 or so who braved the blizzard in Boston to go to Faneuil Hall. My son Rand told me what a great time he had with you.

A few mornings ago on, I saw a YouTube of a 14-year-old boy that summed up our whole movement for me. This well-spoken young man, who could have passed in knowledge for a college graduate, told how he heard our ideas being denounced. So he decided to Google. He read some of my speeches, and thought, these make sense. Then he studied US foreign policy of recent years, and came to the conclusion that we are right. So he persuaded his father to drop Rudy Giuliani and join our movement.

All over America, all over the world, we are inspiring real change. With the wars and the spying, the spending and the taxing, the inflation and the credit crisis, our ideas have never been more needed. Please help me spread them in all 50 states. Victory for liberty! That is our goal, and nothing less.



Appreciate the obvious effort to collate all this info at 2 am? Let IAHF know by sliding us a donation to help with gas money to get our pickup truck with the new RP float out all over Point Roberts and all over the Pacific NW to whip people into a frenzy for this cause of freedom: [paypal  IAHF 556 Boundary Bay Rd., Point Roberts WA 98281 USA  

For Health Freedom, John C. Hammell, President International Advocates for Health Freedom 556 Boundary Bay Road Point Roberts, WA 98281-8702 USA 800-333-2553 N.America 360-945-0352 World