It wouldn't make any difference anyway. There is only so much crude available. If we could buy it from non-Saudi sources, it would force other countries to buy from the Saudis who now don't, so they would make exactly the same amount of money.

High energy prices are hurting us, but think how they are affecting third world countries that have to import oil.

Maybe we should all start wearing "V" suits?

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=59409

"Why is it that the federal government says the U.S. has virtually no inflation – less that 2 percent – but everything keeps getting more expensive, especially food and gasoline?"

"Solving this riddle – that is, why everything costs so much when the government tells us inflation rates are low – is simple:

The Bureau of Labor Statistics lies."

Agreed it has never happened.....but all it would take is once.  Once would bring down the full power of the gment on our churches.  And that is the scary part of it all.... Once it starts it would continue to cascade down and then with the laws in place and that the liberals want in place would bring the IRS down on pastors preaching about homosexuality, deviation, child discipline, husband/wife relations, and all things moral.

We need to remove the laws that are in place that are useless before someone abuses them and makes them useful for their own agenda.

While I agree with you that the law should be repealed, I doubt that the liberals will carry it that far as it would then prevent their churches from doing the same thing. http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080227/31340_IRS_Investigates_Obama%27s_Denomination.htm: "The IRS is investigating the United Church of Christ over a speech Sen. Barack Obama gave at its national meeting last year after he became a candidate for president, the denomination said Tuesday."

Black churches, for example, are notorious for politicking. Although hypocracy does seem to be a liberal trait!

And actually the law just prevents churches from endorsing individual candidates, not speaking out on issues.

The real issues are whether the church will stop preaching the truth to keep a tax exemption, and whether people are giving to get a tax break or because they love the Lord.

I remember when I was in Bible School someone in a local church gave some money to help a needy student, saying the Lord had led him to meet the need, then asked for it back because he couldn't get a receipt to deduct on his income tax. I don't think he is going to get much praise when he has to stand before the Lord.

http://spofga.org/ten_commandments/2006/feb/church_info.php

"Although many church officials and members think a church must be 501(c)(3) to be exempt from taxation, this status is not necessary for a church to carry out any of its functions. There are also theological objections to it, as stated by Rushdoony and others.

The lack of a 501(c)(3) designation does not exempt a church from any legal prohibitions against “politicking,” but not being 501(c)(3) would make any politically motivated investigation of a church more difficult. (The IRS, then, would have to examine church members’ individual tax returns, financial statements, etc.)

A church’s right to speak out on controversial issues, which may cross the line into prohibited political activity, is protected by the First Amendment. No church has ever lost its tax-exempt status as a result of “political speech” by the pastor."

The photo frames allow you to upload photos from your PC which they then display. They look quite like a normal framed photograph and can be hung on the wall or put on a shelf, but the pictures can be changed or even change automatically at intervals.

http://www.business-standard.com/common/news_article.php?leftnm=lmnu9&subLeft=2&autono=313 112&tab=r
5th cable cut fuels allegations of isolating Iran
The reason for the damage to the cables remains moot as the companies have claimed that they were cut after ships weighed their anchors over them. However, the Egyptian ministry (after monitoring the satellite surveillance pictures) had refuted these claims stating there were no ships in the vicinity 12 hours before and after the cable cut.

http://www.scandoil.com/moxie-bm2/financial/politics_/bennex-rov-stolen.shtml


Bennex ROV Stolen

Published Mar 2, 2004



Bennex Transmark Norge of Bergen, Norway, reports that some time during the recent weekend a remote operated vehicle (ROV) was stolen from the company’s site in Nordre Toobodkai. The 1.2-metre long, 500 kilogram ROV is of no use to anyone not having the necessary control system and software that is needed for the unit to function.

I expect in four years someone could have duplicated the control system and software.

Suez Canal Transit Guide: http://www.emco-shipping.com/suez_canal.html



Average transit time is 14 hours.

It really makes no practical difference.

We may never "run out" of oil if it is true, but we are pumping so much faster than the fields are being replenished that they would have to be shut down for decades before they refilled. Kind of like pumping more water out of an aquifer than rainfall refills it.

Of course, it is possible that knowing how oil is formed, we could create artificial "traps" deep within the earth to collect it, but that is so long-term it isn't going to help us right away.

Personally I blame the environmentalists for this, especially so those in political positions as there is actually plenty of oil available. If allowed access to it this would not be a problem but these environmentalist have done a lot to prevent just that.

Most of the new oil available is outside the US and is not being blocked by environmentalists.
Venezuela is spending all its oil revenues on social programs rather than drilling. The oil companies are understandably reluctant to drill in countries where what they find may be nationalized. The areas where oil is most plentiful are politically unstable and risky to operate in.
The US does have some areas where we could drill - Alaska, offshore, but the estimated reserves there are so limited they would make no practical difference in supply or price.

I believe this theory of oil production.

It actually makes little difference, though. We are obviously pumping oil out at a much faster rate than it is produced. Though we may not "run out" of oil, the oil fields are becoming exhausted and will take many years to replenish themselves. Unless we find many more huge fields (not happening at present) we will have to cut our usage dramatically to balance supply and demand.

We are doing the same thing with water - pumping out the aquifers at a much greater rate than they recharge.

Of course the government wants to devalue the dollar.

The only way we can pay off the debt the government has run up is to devalue the dollar until we are paying back our creditors with worthless paper.

I have no doubt that the American Republic is almost at an end, and George Bush's place in history will be to be remembered as the man who destroyed it. However, Congress is just as guilty for passing legislation like this and the Patriot Act.

I also have no doubt that governments worldwide will soon act to censor the Internet.

Supressing freedom of speech won't make America a better place. It will only free the government from having to listen to constructive criticism and allow them to make an even worse mess of things than they do now.

Those who can't "blow off steam" by speaking freely are more likely to act in violence. If they organize and copy the tactics of the Jihadists, America is in bad trouble - we haven't been able to counter those tactics effectively in Iraq, much less on our own soil.

Thankfully, I am old enough that I likely won't live to see it, but my children and grandchildren are going to suffer.

If the cost of gasoline and automobiles doesn't go down soon you won't have to worry about congestion.

I would say I am a regular dispensationalist, but I had a teacher in Bible School that was an Ultradispensationalist, but he got angry if you called him that. Though I believe he was wrong in his beliefs in that area, there is no doubt that he was a man of God and I learned a lot from him.

He was eventually forced to leave his post because of his refusal to be baptized.

Is it because we fear God or is it because we love God (John 14:15)? If we do it out of fear, it mean that we are trying to save our self from punishment?  In other words, it is out of self interest. On the other hand if it is out of love, then it is pure, holy and selfless. Which of the two reasons will bring us peace?

A little fear isn't a bad thing. Jonathan Edward's sermon "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" brought revival and many people back to the Lord. Too many Christians are a bit too "familiar" with God these days.

On the other hand, if you keep the commandments only out of fear, you won't have peace because you will always be running scared that you might break or have unknowingly broken one or more. Love is certainly the better motivation. But both can have their place.