The Bell Witch Haunting Of 1817

Never heard of the infamous Bell Witch haunting? I'm related to many of the Bell family of Tennessee and have heard this story before. There's even a historical marker and a recent movie made of this supposed event. I don't believe in curses nor ghosts but it's a pretty interesting story, at any rate. Hey, it's Hallowe'en!! Time to have fun, place dress up and pretend to be scared.

For now, this the story published in LJWorld.Com.

This takes place in 1817 Adams, Robertson County, Tennessee.

THE BELL WITCH HAUNTING
By David W. Myers

The Bell Witch haunting is notorious because it may be the best-documented case of murder by the supernatural in U.S. history. The alleged victim was John Bell, a Tennessee farmer and father of a large family.

Bell’s troubles began in 1817, when he claimed to have seen a demonlike beast in his cornfield. He shot at the creature several times before it disappeared into thin air. Later that evening, the Bells heard frightening “beating” sounds on their walls. They rushed outside with their shotguns and found nothing, but the sounds grew louder and more violent as the weeks progressed.

Soon, a quiet voice, described as that of a feeble old woman who would either sing hymns or sob, started emanating from inside the house. The disembodied voice also grew louder as time went by, and the Bells’ small daughter started to complain of being beaten by unseen hands — with cuts and bruises to prove it. John Bell finally asked his nearest neighbor to spend the night, but he, too, was awakened and then beaten by the invisible spirit.

After the violence spread to other household members, the Bells were visited by longtime family friend Andrew “Old Hickory” Jackson — the great war hero who would later become the nation’s seventh president. Jackson brought a small contingent of troops with him but left after a single night of terrifying encounters that included one of his own men being violently attacked by the malevolent ghost. “I’d rather fight the entire British Army than deal with the Bell Witch,” Jackson later said.

John Bell grew ill and finally died on Dec. 20, 1820. His family found a small vial of unidentifiable liquid near the corpse and gave it to the family cat, which died minutes later. Family and friends say a bodiless voice then filled the room: “I gave Ol’ Jack a big dose of that last night, and that fixed him!”

As mourners left Bell’s funeral a few days later, some said they heard the ghostly voice bellow with laughter and sing a little ditty about a bottle of brandy. Their accounts, as well as those of Jackson and others, are perhaps the best evidence to suggest that at least one human life has been claimed by the undead.


Want more? There's an awful lot of info about it on the 'net. Here's a few websites I found concerning this event:

Bell Witch Haunting (2004) ~ The Movie
Hallow Hill
America's Most Haunted Places ~ The Bell Witch Cave
The Examiner ~ The Bell Witch Haunting

Mike Pence: Reading Guide to the Pelosi Health Care Reform Bill

Reading Guide to the Pelosi Health Care Reform Bill

Please read and forward the link to this note (Facebook link) to your friends and family. This reading guide includes what we have uncovered in our initial reading of the Pelosi health “reform” legislation (H.R. 3962) introduced by House Democrats.

Page 94—Section 202(c) prohibits the sale of private individual health insurance policies, beginning in 2013, forcing individuals to purchase coverage through the federal government

Page 110—Section 222(e) requires the use of federal dollars to fund abortions through the government-run health plan—and, if the Hyde Amendment were ever not renewed, would require the plan to fund elective abortions

Page 111—Section 223 establishes a new board of federal bureaucrats (the “Health Benefits Advisory Committee”) to dictate the health plans that all individuals must purchase — and would likely require all Americans to subsidize and purchase plans that cover any abortion

Page 211—Section 321 establishes a new government-run health plan that, according to non-partisan actuaries at the Lewin Group, would cause as many as 114 million Americans to lose their existing coverage

Page 225—Section 330 permits — but does not require — Members of Congress to enroll in government-run health care

Page 255—Section 345 includes language requiring verification of income for individuals wishing to receive federal health care subsidies under the bill—while the bill includes a requirement for applicants to verify their citizenship, it does not include a similar requirement to verify applicants’ identity, thus encouraging identity fraud for undocumented immigrants and others wishing to receive taxpayer-subsidized health benefits

Page 297—Section 501 imposes a 2.5 percent tax on all individuals who do not purchase “bureaucrat-approved” health insurance — the tax would apply on individuals with incomes under $250,000, thus breaking a central promise of then-Senator Obama’s presidential campaign

Page 313—Section 512 imposes an 8 percent “tax on jobs” for firms that cannot afford to purchase “bureaucrat-approved” health coverage; according to an analysis by Harvard Professor Kate Baicker, such a tax would place millions “at substantial risk of unemployment”—with minority workers losing their jobs at twice the rate of their white counterparts

Page 336—Section 551 imposes additional job-killing taxes, in the form of a half-trillion dollar “surcharge,” more than half of which will hit small businesses ; according to a model developed by President Obama’s senior economic advisor, such taxes could cost up to 5.5 million jobs

Page 520—Section 1161 cuts more than $150 billion from Medicare Advantage plans, potentially jeopardizing millions of seniors’ existing coverage

Page 733—Section 1401 establishes a new Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research; the bill includes no provisions preventing the government-run health plan from using such research to deny access to life-saving treatments on cost grounds, similar to Britain’s National Health Service, which denies patient treatments costing more than $35,000

Page 1174—Section 1802(b) includes provisions entitled “TAXES ON CERTAIN INSURANCE POLICIES” to fund comparative effectiveness research, breaking Speaker Pelosi’s promise that “We will not be taxing [health] benefits in any bill that passes the House,” and the President’s promise not to raise taxes on families with incomes under $250,000

If you would like to read the entire 1,990 pages yourself, you can find the legislation here: http://docs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf

Peaceful Seniors Arrested At Pelosi Press Conference

More fascism from the Left.

Source: John Goodman's Health Policy Blog

What I Want For Christmas

Need I say more??!!
Well, I will say this,
I witnessed this little bad in action
on Lock 'N Load with R. Lee Ermey.
It's only costs $80,000 PER SHOT. Ouch!


How do you like our new family photo? :)

H1N1 Must Be Science Talk For Hog Droppings

Well, the Obama Administration, those kooky clowns living on the American tax dollars in The Big House, are at it again.

The "Swine Flu Epidemic" ... isn't. The strain is mostly harmless. So, there's no crisis folks. The flu isn't fun, and just like in years past, can pose a danger for those with weakened immunities, the very young, the very old, yada yada yada If contracted one will probably wish one was dead but more than likely you'll live to see another day. What can be and is dangerous is the vaccine. It has proved to be toxic to many.

This "epidemic" is just something else that the phony "Science Czar" [John Holdren - the same dude that believes in forced abortions, sterilizations, etc.] made up so as to not "waste a good crisis" in order to take over something or other. Yeah, another communist Obama power grab.

Gates Of Vienna's blog put this whole charade into better words here: The Flu Vaccine “Story” Mutates into a Deadly Strain

Move along ... there's nothing to see here ...

Andrew Klavan on PJ TV: Obama The New Jesus

By Painter Michael D'Antuono
Unveiled Controversial New Work in NYC's
Union Square on Obama's 100th Day in Office



Atlas Shrugs recently had a good article on the Obama blasphemy too.

Walter E. Williams "Our Problem Is Immorality"

As our country muddles its way into another inescapable quagmire under the Obama Administration, I am left to ponder what will become of the generations behind us. Those of us who are older will probably be long gone before all the real crap hits the fan. Our generation has become selfish and immoral, "waxing fat" with laziness.

Our treasury is robbing from Paul to pay Peter (and Paul is broke too!).

Our troops are languishing in Afghanistan with no clear direction and our guys are putting themselves at risk needlessly. Obama: Please bring them home since you obviously have no clue what you're doing!

I've come to the conclusion that one of the worst things ever created was health insurance. I have learned that since it's inception in the 1920s it was encouraged for 'workers' to be paid for by employers by .... wait for it ... TRADE UNIONS! link **Ding, ding, ding, ding** [waving red flag] Yep, it's been wrong from the get-go. Company's have been paying for most all health insurance. But as you and I know, NOTHING is paid by corporations. Taxpayers and consumers pay for everything. NOTHING IS FREE. ObamaCare is NOT FREE. It will crash and burn our economy forever and ever, amen.

I found a very good article about this very subject by Walter E. Williams, PhD. Mr. Williams is a patriot and a true American. He put my opinions down on paper in such a profound way. He expressed My Thoughts Exactly in a recent article:

Our problem is immorality
by Walter E. Williams
Link

Most of our nation’s great problems, including our economic problems, have as their root decaying moral values.

Whether we have the stomach to own up to it or not, we have become an immoral people left with little more than the pretense of morality.

You say, “That’s a pretty heavy charge, Williams. You’d better be prepared to back it up with evidence!” I’ll try with a few questions for you to answer.

Do you believe that it is moral and just for one person to be forcibly used to serve the purposes of another?

And, if that person does not peaceably submit to being so used, do you believe that there should be the initiation of some kind of force against him?

Neither question is complex and can be answered by either a yes or no.

For me the answer is no to both questions but I bet that your average college professor, politician or minister would not give a simple yes or no response. They would be evasive and probably say that it all depends.

In thinking about questions of morality, my initial premise is that I am my private property and you are your private property. That’s simple. What’s complex is what percentage of me belongs to someone else.

If we accept the idea of self-ownership, then certain acts are readily revealed as moral or immoral. Acts such as rape and murder are immoral because they violate one’s private property rights. Theft of the physical things that we own, such as cars, jewelry and money, also violates our ownership rights.

The reason why your college professor, politician or minister cannot give a simple yes or no answer to the question of whether one person should be used to serve the purposes of another is because they are sly enough to know that either answer would be troublesome for their agenda.

A yes answer would put them firmly in the position of supporting some of mankind’s most horrible injustices such as slavery. After all, what is slavery but the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another?

A no answer would put them on the spot as well because that would mean they would have to come out against taking the earnings of one American to give to another in the forms of farm and business handouts, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps and thousands of similar programs that account for more than two-thirds of the federal budget.

There is neither moral justification nor constitutional authority for what amounts to legalized theft. This is not an argument against paying taxes. We all have a moral obligation to pay our share of the constitutionally mandated and enumerated functions of the federal government.

Unfortunately, there is no way out of our immoral quagmire. The reason is that now that the U.S. Congress has established the principle that one American has a right to live at the expense of another American, it no longer pays to be moral.

People who choose to be moral and refuse congressional handouts will find themselves losers. They’ll be paying higher and higher taxes to support increasing numbers of those paying lower and lower taxes.

As it stands now, close to 50 percent of income earners have no federal income tax liability and as such, what do they care about rising income taxes?

In other words, once legalized theft begins, it becomes too costly to remain moral and self-sufficient. You might as well join in the looting, including the current looting in the name of stimulating the economy.

I am all too afraid that a historian, a hundred years from now, will footnote America as a historical curiosity where people once enjoyed private property rights and limited government but it all returned to mankind’s normal state of affairs — arbitrary abuse and control by the powerful elite.