Wednesday, May 31, 2006
The Vatican, Fascism and The USA - Jordan Maxwell
Should We Look for Another? by David J. Stewart
Should We Look for Another?
by David J. Stewart
"And John calling unto him two of his disciples sent them to Jesus, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another? When the men were come unto him, they said, John Baptist hath sent us unto thee, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another?" -Luke 7:19-20
This is one of the most amazing Scriptures in the Word of God. John the Baptist had prepared the people for the coming of the Messiah. Therefore, Jesus said concerning John the Baptist ... "Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist..." Yet, we see this giant of the faith faltering here in Luke 7:19-20. John had given his utmost to preaching the Gospel of repentance and faith towards Jesus Christ. It was John who baptized Jesus (Matthew 3:14). It was John who proclaimed to the people in John 1:29 ... "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." John was a mighty preacher, and NOT a yellowbellied compromiser concerning sin.
John the Baptist Preached Against Sin!
Lest anyone should think John the Baptist never preached against sin, one only needs to read Matthew 14:3-4, "For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for Herodias' sake, his brother Philip's wife. For John said unto him, It is not lawful for thee to have her." John preached against Herod's adultery, and was arrested for it. John didn't limit his preaching to Jews. John didn't limit his preaching to believers. John didn't limit his preaching to poor people. No, if John saw a black kettle, he called the kettle black. John was no respecter of persons. John saw what he saw, and spoke his mind about it. John the Baptist was a street preacher, and he had no reservations about taking a stand against sin. We need many more John the Baptists today. How many Christians today are willing to be arrested for preaching against abortion or homosexuality? Not many.
Every Christian should take a stand against sin, one way or another.
Even the Best of Christians Fall
Yet, despite John's uncompromising stand against sin, and His genuine loyalty for the Savior--his faith faltered in Luke 7:19-20. John was now in prison. I can here John now ... "I've given my very best to God, and look where I end up. I don't get it. I mean, God can do anything, and yet I'm rotting in this stinking prison cell. Jesus can perform all those miracles, but he can't get me out of prison. I thought He was my friend. Is this what I get for serving God?" Notice again what Luke 7:20 states, "John Baptist hath sent us unto thee, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another?" Wow! John was so discouraged that He even questioned weather Jesus was the Savior. He literally sent his disciples to ask Jesus if they should look for someone else. This is amazing! The very man of God who presented Jesus as the "Lamb of God," is now wondering if perhaps he made a big mistake. Poor John, he was really having a bad time in prison. He wasn't singing in prison like Paul and Silas (Acts 16:25). John was doubting. Of course, Paul had his own faults; but discouragement wasn't one of them.
Don't be too hard on John, he was just a man. Perhaps you have felt that way at times in your Christian life. It's very easy for us as believers to get upset with God, because we know what God can do. We know and believe that God spoke the world into existence with the very Word of His mouth (2nd Peter 3:5). Yet, it is easy to ask ourselves at times ... "why won't God do thus-and-so?" Matthew 8:8 reads, "The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed." This man had great faith in the Lord, trusting the power of Jesus' Words alone. Those who trust in the Word of God today, are equally trusting the Savior. Jesus is the Living Word of God (John 1:1; Revelation 19:13). So many times I have found myself asking Jesus to ... "speak the Word only" ... and I know everything will be better. However, things don't always get better. This can be frustrating. What I had to learn, and what all believers need to learn, is that God does things in His own time, and in His own way. This is clearly stated in Isaiah 55:8-9, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." It is very true that God works in mysterious ways, i.e., they are mysterious to us. We often expect God to works in hours and days; but, God sometimes works in months and years. Hindsight is always 20/20. Looking back over my life, I can now see where God was working, when at that particular time I couldn't see my hand in front of my face. We must learn to trust the heart of God, when we can't see the hand of God. As an example: God is not mentioned at all in the Old Testament Book of Esther, but we see God's hand of providence working throughout the Book.
I am thankful that God allows us today, to see this moment of desperation in John the Baptist's walk with God. If the greatest man ever born amongst women can falter in his faith, then so can any of us. I am completely confident that John the Baptist would have recovered from his despair in a short time. But, things went from worse to worst. Jesus didn't come to rescue John. John was executed by Herod! God has His reasons. It is important for believers to realize that things won't always get better just because we are Christians. Lazarus was the righteous man in Luke 16, and he was eating out of the garbage. In Acts 12, we read that Herod beheaded the Apostle James; but, Peter was delivered by an angel from prison. Of the 12 Apostles, 11 were martyred for preaching the truth.
We read in Proverb 24:16, "For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again: but the wicked shall fall into mischief." A prerequisite to being a just man is to "fall." How can you rise again if you don't fall? I say this, not to condone to sin; but to encourage the fallen that you now have the opportunity to RISE up and try again. Only a hypocrite, like many self-righteous Methodists, would claim that a Christian can live without any sins or faults. Sin is wrong, and we shouldn't sin; but, we are sinners, prone to rebellion and wrath. A man may learn to live above reproach; but, NO man can live above sin. This is why the Apostle Paul exclaimed in Romans 7:24, "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" No Christian has a license to sin; but, as sinful human beings, we will. The best of Christians are still people, and the best of people are still sinners (Romans 3:10,3:23).
Modernist Skeptics Today Tell Us to Look for Another Jesus
"For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him." -2nd Corinthians 11:4
The recent book and movie, The Da Vinci Code, attacks the deity of Jesus Christ. They tell us to look for another, claiming Christ is a fraud and a deceiver. The Jesus Papers claim that Jesus wasn't actually dead when He was removed from the cross. They tell us to look for another Savior, because Jesus wasn't really crucified to death for man's sins. The Gospel of Judas portrays Jesus Christ as a master con artist and schemer. They tell us to look for another, claiming that Jesus was no more than a great deceiver. This is what the chief priests and Pharisees called Jesus in Matthew 27:63, "Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again." Whom say you Christ is ... lunatic? liar? or Lord? The priests and Pharisees called Him a liar.
Modernists today are working relentlessly to assassinate Christ's character, and to discredit the truth of God's Word. To no surprise, every sin imaginable is flourishing in the wake of this evil--Homosexuality, abortion, gambling, alcoholism, adultery, fornication, murder, injustice, feminism, witchcraft, indifference, etc.. Oprah Winfrey, who's show receives 15,000,000 to 20,000,000 millions daily, said that Jesus couldn't possibly be the ONLY way to Heaven. Well the Word of God proclaims that Jesus is the ONLY way to Heaven ,"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." Oprah is Hell-bound wrong! Don't let Oprah tell you to go find another Jesus in the New Age movement.
We DON'T Need to Look for Another!
I tell you, we DON'T need to look for another Jesus! All you need is the precious Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 4:12; 1st Timothy 2:5; Revelation 3:20). No John, you don't need to look for another. Jesus PROMISED in John 11:25 that anyone who believes upon Him will live forever ... "Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live." And again in John 10:9, "I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture." Either you believe that the Bible is God's Word, or you do not. Unbelievers WILL be cast into the Lake of Fire, which is the Second Death ... "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death." (Revelation 21:8)
No my friend, you don't need to look for another Jesus, you'll find the True Jesus in the Word of God (which in English is the King James Bible). All other modern Bibles attack Christ's deity by removing the Word "Godhead," and by diminishing the deity of Jesus. For more information on false Bible, please click here. Also, please read the last Chapter in my book on Salvation, titled Misconceptions Concerning Christ. We don't need to look for another Jesus, we have Him in the Word of God. The Jesus' of the world is only a good man, a prophet, a great leader; but, no more. In sharp contrast, the Word of God declares Jesus Christ as God Almighty (Isaiah 9:6; John 1:1-3,10,14; John 8:57-59; John 10:33; Colossians 1:9; 1st Timothy 3:16; Revelation 1:8). Jesus is the Christ, the Creator of the universe, the Son of God, and our Heavenly High Priest. Thank Jesus for His mercies and for the precious blood which He shed for our sins. No John, you don't need to look for another. JESUS IS THE CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD!
Ye Must Be Born Again!
Going on are still problems that still must be solved. I've just discovered that as high as 1/3 of Americans have Pre-Diabetes Syndrome. Why is that? The reason is that now obesity is at high levels, people exercise less, and many American eat more sugar filled foods. Especially, genetically modified foods can cause serious destructive consquences for human beings. That's why many European nations have banned genetically modified foods from their own markets. Dr. Dominique Beroule cite allegeries and pesticides produced from GM foods. Many animals like pigs and cows trying to eat GM corn and other foods reject it outright. So, why would us humans eat it. We shouldn't and try to eat organic foods. The World Cancer Report, the most comprehensive global examination of the disease to date, tells that if radical changes aren't done, cancer rates can increase by 50% by 2020. It's all nothing more than poison. Poisons are in our water supply, air, and in our foods.
AP on May 31, 2006 had Israel's UN Ambassador Dan Gillerman saying that WWIII has begun. Gillerman said it's between the West and the axis of evil (i.e. Iran, al-Qaeda, etc.) In truth, certain people want it to be a real world war. I don't believe in a lust for war. I believe war should only come in a legitimate resort and both parties ought to ask peacefully as much as possible to get solutions done. Peaceful solutions can decrease the bloodshed that will surely occur as a result of wars. I also want to add that the US/NATO bombings of Serbia was just as wrong as the invasion of Iraq. Both nations posed no threat to us. Even before both configuations, sanctions were dumped against the Iraqi civilians. Thousands of Iraqi people died as a result of the sanctions, yet ex-US Secretary of State M. Albright said that those sanctions were worth it. Madeline Albright is covering up here statements now, but she should of know full well to not mention those digusting, insensitive comments. She is now promoting a book claiming that George W. Bush is some religious conservative. The truth is that Bush is part of the occult Skulls and Bones plus Bohemian Grove, he said the Muslims and Christians worship the same god, he supports amnesty, and he doesn't want Roe v. Wade to be banned. That isn't being a social conservative to me. She is part of the establishment promoting division along political lines just like Bush is. I can debate her and refute her on these points as well. The Supreme Court recently in a 5 to 4 decision that people who are to be a whistleblower aren't protected by the First Amendment.
I see the emergence of the neo-liberals. These are liberals who support globalization and some even support the invasion and further occupation of Iraq. One famous magazines endorsing this view is called "The Nation." I saw one neo-liberal named Peter Beinart of The New Republic. Beinhart's arguments are so popular, because most American's don't want the policy of endless war to end "terrorism."
By TruthSeeker24 (Timothy)
Is The Bush Regime A Sponsor Of State Terrorism? By Paul Craig Roberts
Is The Bush Regime A Sponsor Of State Terrorism?: The Evil Within
By Paul Craig Roberts
A powerful case can be made that it is.
In the past three years the Bush Regime has murdered tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians and an unknown number of Afghan ones.
US Marines, our finest and proudest military force, are under criminal investigation for breaking into Iraqi homes and murdering entire families. In an unprecedented event, General Michael Hagee, the Marine Corps commandant, has found it necessary to fly to Iraq to tell our best trained troops to stop murdering civilians.
General Hagee found it necessary to tell the U.S. Marines: "We do not employ force just for the sake of employing force. We use lethal force only when justified, proportional, and most importantly, lawful."
The war criminals in the Bush Regime have dismissed the murders as "collateral damage," but they are in fact murders. Otherwise, there would be no criminal investigations, and the Marine commandant would not be burdened with the embarrassment of having to fly to Iraq to lecture US Marines on the lawful use of force.
The criminal Bush Regime has now murdered more Iraqis than Saddam Hussen. The Bush Regime is also responsible for 20,000 US casualties (dead, maimed for life, and wounded).
Bush damns the "axis of evil." But who has the "axis of evil" attacked? Iran has attacked no one. North Korea has attacked no country for more than a half century. Iraq attacked Kuiwait a decade and a half ago, apparently after securing permission from the US ambassador.
Isn't the real axis of evil Bush-Blair-Olmert? Bush and Blair have attacked two countries, slaughtering their citizens. Olmert is urging them on to attack a third country--Iran.
Where does the danger to the world reside? In Iran, a small religious country where the family is intact and the government is constrained by religious authority and ancient traditions, or in the US where propaganda rules and the powerful executive branch has removed itself from accountability by breaking the constitutional restraints on its power?
Why is the US superpower orchestrating fear of puny Iran?
The US government has spent the past half century interfering in the internal affairs of other countries, overthrowing or assassinating their chosen leaders and imposing its puppets on foreign peoples. To what country has Iran done this, or Iraq, or North Korea?
Americans think that they are the salt of the earth. The hubris that comes from this self-righteous belief makes Americans blind to the evil of their leaders. How can American leaders be evil when Americans are so good and so wonderful?
How many Serbs were slaughtered by American bombs released from high above the clouds, and for what reason? Who even remembers the propagandistic lies that the Clinton administration told us about why we absolutely had to drop bombs on the Serbs?
Wasn't it evil for the US to bomb Iraq for a decade and to embargo medicines for children? When US Secretary of State M. Albright was asked if she thought an embargo that resulted in the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children was justified, she replied, "yes."
The former terrible tyrant ruler of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, is on trial for killing 150 people. The US government murdered 500,000 Iraqi children prior to Bush's invasion. When the US government murders people, whether Serbs, Branch Davidians at Waco, or Iraqi women and children, it is "collateral damage." But we put Saddam Hussein on trial for putting down rebellions.
Gentle reader, do you believe that the Bush Regime will not shoot you down in the streets if you have a rebellion?
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: email@example.com
document.write("Email This Article");
Email This Article MainPage
This Site Served by TheHostPros
YOUR FINANCIAL SUPPORT IS NEEDED NOW - I remain on the road presently in Minnesota, and am in great need of financial support at this time to continue in this ministry. You can send me support via MAIL or WESTERN UNION. Postal Money orders are preferred if mail is used. (I have no bank.) WHY IS YOUR SUPPORT NEEDED??? Because is COSTS to remain on the road in ministry and research...food and gas are critically needed ALWAYS! Especially with the HIGH COST of GAS now IF GOD LAYS IT ON YOUR HEART, PLEASE HELP! I estimate that LESS THAN 2 PERCENT OF ALL MY READERS who have enjoyed my reports throughout the years (10 now) have ever given me support...YET what cost me my life savings to give them FREE OF CHARGE throughout the years on the internet and radio, they have received FREELY NOW for these past ten years. PLEASE DON'T ASSUME SOMEONE ELSE IS GOING TO DO THIS! I often have gone for weeks at a time with NO support and NO finances. God bless YOU!
Present MAILING ADDRESS:
3400 75th Ave North, Brookly Park, MN
55443 WESTERN UNION
The UN and Milosevic.
UN Closes Book On Milosevic Cover-up
Investigators clear themselves despite overwhelming evidence of foul play
Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com May 31 2006
The Hague Tribunal's final verdict on Slobodan Milosevic's death has concluded that he was not poisoned and there was no foul play involved. Imagine my shock. The truth is that the circumstances of Milosevic's death and why it had to happen prove foul play even absent allegations of poisoning.
How can an investigation that, if evidence of murder was uncovered, would result in criminals charges for the investigators themselves be impartial?
The BBC reported on the nature of Milosevic's death,
"Guards knocked on his door for an 0900 wake-up, but assumed he was still sleeping and left him alone until 1000 when they saw "that he was still lying on his bed".
"As he approached the bed he saw that Mr Milosevic's face was greyish in colour and that his arm was hanging over the side of the bed," says the report.
The guards tried to find a pulse, but realised the prisoner was dead."
Milosevic's prison cell was under 24 hour video surveillance. At first the UN ridiculously claimed he had poisoned himself by having someone smuggle in drugs past armed guards before changing their story to a heart attack. If Milosevic had died of a sudden heart attack surely his reaction to it would be captured on the tape. All the UN had to do was show the Dutch authorities the tape and no investigation would have even been necessary.
Heart attacks are not usually considered a subtle and quiet way to die. The symptoms are chest pain, discomfort, sweating, weakness, nausea and vomiting. Are we really expected to believe Milosevic experienced all this while remaining in a peaceful sleep and without his watchers noticing?
"They kept cameras and lights on in Slobodan's cell non-stop, so that he could not sleep. That is an officially recognised form of torture," said Milosevic's wife.
The fact that Milosevic was under constant surveillance coupled with the total lack of response from medical personnel to his heart attack proves foul play in itself, absent of any allegations of poisoning.
Milosevic wrote a letter one day before his death claiming he was being poisoned to death in jail. The lawyer who advised Milosevic during his trial, Azdenko Tomanovic, showed journalists a handwritten letter in which Milosevic wrote: "They would like to poison me. I'm seriously concerned and worried."
Milosevic's trial was coming to an end and the only verifiable evidence to emerge from it was proof that the real Butcher's of Serbia were Wes Clark and Bill Clinton. The US government's financial and military support of Al-Qaeda, after the embassy bombings, was also being exposed.
The Globalists have wanted to eliminate Milosevic for a long time. Former MI6 agent Richard Tomlinson said he saw documents in 1992 that discussed assassinating Milosevic by means of a staged car accident, where the driver would be blinded by a flash of light and remote controlled brake failure enacted to cause the crash. This exact same technique was utilized for real in the murder of Princess Diana.
The illegal Clinton-NATO bombing of Serbia was fueled in part by a staged ITN news report purporting to show evidence of a Bosnian Serb death camp. Pictures of emaciated 'prisoners' behind a barbed wire fence were used to claim the Serbians were running internment camps. In reality the emaciated man was a tuberculosis victim and the film screw were the ones inside he barbed wire enclosure, filming out to refugees who had willingly entered the refugee camp.
Milosevic, just like Saddam Hussein when his testimony was shut off after he discussed the US' role in staging bombings in Iraq, had to be silenced and the trial prematurely aborted before its credibility completely collapsed.
Related: Why Milosevic Was Murdered
Related: The Real Butchers Of Serbia: Clinton, Clark, NATO
Related: Milosevic Autopsy: The Murderers Clear Themselves
COMMENT ON THIS ARTICLE
Is Haditha real? (an article written by Victor Thorn)
Iraq's Mai Lai Massacreby Victor Thorn
All the details aren’t in yet; in fact, charges haven’t even been brought. But if reports about an Iraqi Mai Lai Massacre prove true, could it be the final nail in the coffin of this ugly war?Probably not, but with the number of attacks per day, deaths, and the U.S. military’s inability to quell what is referred to as “the insurgency,” Americans now have the same ugly taste in their mouths as they did during Vietnam. Billions of wasted dollars, abysmal worldwide PR, Abu Ghraib, Halliburton cronyism, and the lies of 9-11 (which this entire disaster was predicated upon) all add up to a powder keg that at some point will begin to blow.Now up to 24 innocent citizens, including women and children, were slaughtered in the Iraqi village of Haditha for no reason whatsoever. Subsequently, lies were told, a cover-up ensued, and the evil thread of war keeps winding its way through out society. But as each new day passes, the whole tangled mess keeps unraveling a little bit more.War … we’re doing the same thing today that we did 4,000 years ago. Why?
Don't Rely On 'Experts' To Fight New World Order; Americans Must Do It Themselves
is the link.
The Whole Truth behind Al Gore's Latest Campaign
The Whole Truth behind Al Gore's Latest Campaign;
Climate Experts Expose the Facts Missing from 'An Inconvenient Truth'
Mon May 22, 2:26 PM ET
To: National Desk, Environment Reporter
Contact: Bill Riggs for TCS Daily, 202-772-2189 or http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/usnw/pl_usnw/storytext/
WASHINGTON, May 22 /U.S. Newswire/
Al Gore documentary on climate change, enters theaters this week and is sure to fan the debate over the causes of global warming. Expert climatologists who are members of the TCS Daily Science Roundtable recently screened the film and conclude that many of the points made by Gore are based on exaggerated facts and scientific results that lack consensus or have been refuted.
Dr. Robert Balling, professor in the climatology program at Arizona State University, and Joseph D'Aleo, former chairman of the American Meteorology Society's committee on weather analysis and forecasting, have screened the film and found that many of the facts contradicting Gore's message hit the cutting room floor.
"Through alarmist rhetoric and dire predictions, the film attempts to portray man as the culprit behind global climate change," said Balling. "But in typical Gore fashion, many of his facts are drawn from hand-picked science that overstates what is happening in climate change."
According to Balling, the most notable omission in the film comes from misrepresenting the position of Gore's self-described mentor and inspiration, Roger Revelle. Gore praises Revelle for his discovery that CO2 levels were rising and contributing to higher temperatures, yet there was no mention of Revelle's article published in the early 1990s concluding that the science is "too uncertain to justify drastic action." (S.F. Singer, C. Starr, and R. Revelle, "What to Do About Greenhouse Warming: Look Before You Leap. Cosmos 1 (1993) 28 to 33.)
The movie discusses glacial retreats of Kilimanjaro -- implying that human induced global warming is to blame. But Gore fails to mention that the snows of Kilimanjaro have been retreating for more than 100 years, largely due to atmospheric moisture, not global warming.
Many of Gore's conclusions are based on the "Hockey Stick" -- a reconstructed temperature record that has been summarily discredited in the scientific community. Nevertheless, Gore maintains that we are on the verge of a tipping point with only 10 years to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions and avoid spiraling towards catastrophic heat waves, tornadoes and hurricanes.
"Looking at 10,000 years of climate history, there is nothing unusual about the warming of the 20th century," said Balling.
Gore blames most of the extreme and unusual weather and other changes solely on carbon dioxide and states that this fact is 'settled' (indisputable).
"Though man is playing some role in the world climate through urbanization," D'Aleo admits, "the truth is that you can explain most of the climate changes and extreme weather, and even changes in the glaciers and icecaps, with natural cycles in the oceans and on the sun."
D'Aleo cautions that, "Focusing on greenhouse gases alone, we may be blindsided by a sudden climate shift due to the natural cyclical changes in one or more of the factors. The recent decadal shift that doubled hurricane frequency is a prime example."
Pro Life News
Canada Amnesty International Group Backs Abortion, Pro-Life Orgs Upset
Email this article Printer friendly page
by Steven ErteltLifeNews.com EditorMay 30, 2006
Winnipeg, Canada (LifeNews.com) -- The Canadian affiliate of the human rights watchdog group Amnesty International has joined its British and New Zealand counterparts in approving adding abortion to the list of human rights the organization supports. Pro-life groups are upset by the move, which leads up to an AI vote on Mexico next year.
Officials with the Canadian affiliate met in Winnipeg last week and endorsed a proposal calling on AI to favor lobbying to overturn pro-life laws against abortions in numerous countries around the world.
But, unlike the British and New Zealand affiliates, the Canadian Amnesty International voted to only support abortion in cases where the woman's life is in danger or she is a victim of rape or incest.
"The majority favored Amnesty going in that direction," Canadian secretary-general Alex Neve told the Toronto Star. He indicated that a large number of Canadian AI officials opposed favoring abortion in all cases.
"People had a wide variety of opinions and there was no consensus. But there was a feeling that this approach was the best one," he said. Neve added that those favoring abortion said they didn't think AI should have no view on the issue when it works with women's issues around the globe.
"Obviously this is a very difficult issue, even in a social justice organization," Neve told the Star. "We have members with a variety of religious beliefs."
Pro-life groups blasted the decision.
"It is unbelievable that a group that concerns itself with human rights as its stated goal should not consider the rights of three million little Canadians killed since 1969," Mary Ellen Douglas, the national organizer of the Canadian Campaign Life Coalition, told the Star.
Douglas said that abortion doesn't erase the pain of a woman's rape and that "the trauma is not wiped out by killing the unborn child."
She indicated her group is worried that doctors and other medical professors will be forced to perform abortions in cases of rape or incest, even if they have moral or religious objections.
Amnesty International is slated to have a worldwide vote on the issue at its next global meeting in Mexico in 2007.
Neve said the more limited Canadian approach could be put forward as a compromise proposal and could win support at an international executive meeting in Portugal AI will have in July.
AI's decision to consider whether or not to take a pro-abortion stance is upsetting human rights campaigners across the globe who say the right to life is the basic human right. Should AI promote abortion, pro-life advocates are concerned at the international effects the decision will have.
AI would likely begin filing lawsuits on behalf of women in nations where abortion is illegal, such as the recent lawsuit that legalized abortion in Columbia in cases of rape and incest or severe fetal handicaps.
"This kind of change will put the lives of unborn children into the hands of one of the most powerful groups in the world," Austin Ruse of the Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute has said. "They can throw the weight of the international legal community against the unborn."
Thanks to Bush administration officials, the United Nations has not ratified documents declaring abortion an international right and the president will likely work to prevent that as long as he is in office.
However, AI's proposal says it will encourage NGOs who lobby at the UN to press for an international document saying abortion is a human right.
Currently, Amnesty International says it “takes no position on whether or not women have a right to choose to terminate unwanted pregnancies; there is no generally accepted right to abortion in international human rights law.”
TAKE ACTION: Tell Amnesty International that you don't want it to become a pro-abortion organization fighting to make abortion legal worldwide. Go to http://web.amnesty.org/contacts/engindex to contact the group and express your opposition. Also, use the group's web site to find your national affiliate and tell them you oppose the idea.
Related web sites:Amnesty International - http://www.amnesty.org
New Study: Pregnancies Lower The Risk of Breast Cancer; Abortions Hurt
Email this article Printer friendly page
by Steven ErteltLifeNews.com EditorMay 30, 2006
Heidelberg, Germany (LifeNews.com) -- A new study by international researchers finds that a woman's risk of contracting breast cancer is lowered and the decrease is more substantial the more pregnancies a woman has had. As a result, women who have abortions could be losing missing an opportunity to lower their chance of contracting the disease.
Women with mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes have an increased breast cancer risk. In the general population, factors such as multiple pregnancies, first pregnancy at a young age and breastfeeding have a protective effect by helping to reduce breast cancer risk.
But, researchers didn't know if those actions had a beneficial effect for women carrying the mutated genes. In order to answer the question researchers in several nations initiated a study called the International BRCA1/2 Carrier Cohort Study (IBCCS).
Scientists at the German Cancer Research Center studied women with inherited mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. They found that a woman's risk to develop breast cancer after age 40 is the lower, the more pregnancies she has had.
All of the women participating in the IBCCS study had the mutated genes and 853 of them had breast cancer.
Professor Jenny Chang-Claude of the German center, French scientist Dr. Nadine Andrieu and other colleagues used the data of 1600 study participants to investigate whether and how pregnancy affects women with the mutated genes.
The found that women with the genes having just one child had the same breast cancer risk as women who had no children.
However, among mothers with several children, the risk of contracting breast cancer after 40 was lowered 14 percent with every child she had.
The positive effect may be accounted for by the fact that the milk forming cells in the glandular tissue of the breast only mature completely during a pregnancy, the researchers said. Scientists suppose that the cells' tendency to transform decreases with increasing maturation degree.
They also found that women with the BRCA2 mutation had double the risk of contracting breast cancer if they gave birth after 20 than those who gave birth before 20. The data suggests teenagers who are considering an abortion should be advised to carry the pregnancy to term.
Carries of the BRCA1 mutations were found to have a lower breast cancer risk when having a child after the age of 30, suggesting that older women should also be advised not to have an abortion.
George Washington Had It Right
George Washington Had It Right
by Charley Reese
Have you ever thought how peaceful and prosperous we would be if our national leaders had followed the advice of George Washington in his "Farewell Address"?
For starters, we would not be hopelessly in debt, and there would not be so many Americans buried in national cemeteries and in distant lands. Nor would we be as hated as we are today in so many countries, where new polls show people not only dislike American foreign policy and the American government, but are now deciding they don't like the American people.
Washington's recommended policy can be summed up as armed neutrality, the same policy Switzerland practices. While the rest of the world participated in a slaughterhouse during the 20th century, the Swiss remained at peace.
Washington was a very wise man. He said that no country can be trusted beyond its own self-interests. He said that habitual friendship toward a foreign country is as dangerous as habitual enmity. The policy of America should be trade with all but entangling alliances with nobody. The quarrels and vendettas in other parts of the world were none of our business, he said. As far as trade goes, all countries should be treated equal, with no favors granted to any of them.
He warned against foreign influence, calling it a poison to republican government. While he was no doubt thinking of the French, his advice applies to Israel. No foreign country should be allowed to influence American policy because that country will always seek to influence policy to favor its interests, not ours. If we followed Washington's advice, the only thing we would be sending to the Middle East would be oil tankers and tourists.
We could build a military force that could deter attacks on this country for a fraction of the cost we spend on trying to maintain an empire with about 745 military bases in 120 foreign countries. The only people who might attack us are a gang of terrorists, and, of course, our massive military machine is not equipped to deal with them.
As for domestic policy, Washington said the best way to preserve the union was to obey the Constitution and to never tolerate any branch of government usurping the Constitution's power. He said that a republican form of government required a virtuous people, and since religion is the best way to instill virtue in the masses, anybody who was an enemy of religion was an enemy of republican government.
All of that is pointless now, because we no longer have a republic – or a virtuous population, for that matter. We have an empire. We have a federal government that does nothing more than pay lip service to the Constitution, if that. Elections are decided by money, not by the people. Greed, self-indulgence, and commercial entertainment seem to be the main motivations of a goodly number of our people. We will, as all empires have, bleed ourselves in foreign wars and domestic tyranny until we collapse. President Bush is a heck of a lot closer to Nero than he is to George Washington.
Too bad, because we could be such a happy place if we had sense enough to mind our own business and to elect men and women who would obey the Constitution. We have no legal authority, no moral authority, and certainly no divine authority to interfere with the internal affairs of any other nation. It should not matter to us what kind of governments other people have or what their cultures are. There is nothing in the Constitution to authorize the federal government to tax Americans and then write checks to foreign countries. There is nothing in the Constitution that authorizes the president to take us to war. That is a power reserved exclusively to Congress. The Constitution also requires a warrant based on probable cause before the government can spy on us or search our homes and businesses.
Americans ought to read their Constitution, if for no other reason than to see what kind of government they are missing. It's written in very plain English and is easy to understand.
Gypsy Taub Confronts Members of the Kean Whitewash Commission
John Conner and Roberts on Illegal Immigration.
My disagreements with Eric Jon Phelps on Race
-The bible forbids oppressing the neighbor wrongfully (Ezekiel 22:29).
-Joseph married an Egyptian (Genesis 46:20), and Rahab, a Canaanite married an Israelite (Rahab is in Jesus' lineage at Matthew 1:5-6). So, God never forbids interracial marriage among believers, but God forbids inter-faith marriages with unbelieving foreign women like Solomon did and other apostates. (1 Kings 11:1-2)
-Not to mention, that in Revelation, all kindred are together living in the eternal kingdom of God on Earth. (Revelation 7:9)
-Jesus called the Great Commission for the apostles and believers to convert all men, not limited to our own race or ethnic group. (Matthew 28:18-20; Mark 16:15; Luke 24:44-48; Acts 1:8)
-The Bible says that from one blood God created all men, so we all have the same origin. (Acts 17:26)
-All men equally have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23)
-The Bible says that all believers in Christ are one. (Galatians 3:28, Romans 1:25, Colossians 3:11)
-Every single human being is equal spiritually under Christ as set forth in the Holy Scriptures. Yes, God divided mankind after the Flood and the Tower of Bible, but all believers are connected under him and can have fellowship to worship God.
-Even the OT allows foreign believers to worship in Israel, so that the HOUSE OF THE LORD IS FOR ALL PEOPLE. (Isaiah 56:3-7) The Bible gives verses that allows foreign neighbors to fellowship with the Jewish people in integration of believers (Ezekiel 47:22, Leviticus 19:34, Acts 8:27-29, Numbers 15:15-16, Some people forgotten about that concept. All believers are equal. Equal doesn't mean identical in every fashion since men aren’t identical physically to women, but it does mean equal in salvation, equal in worth, and in the capability of intelligence to receive the Holy Spirit.
-Don't get me wrong, I don't believe in disregarding your God-given heritage and God-given diversity. I respect people acknowledging their beloved history and heritage since all people have a glorious history, but God doesn't forbid interracial marriage among believers. Weren’t Simon, a Canaanite integrated with the other Jewish apostles? Yes. (Matthew 10:4, Mark 3:10)
-In Acts, a black man called Niger fellowshipped with other men in Turkey. This is the msoking gun promoting voluntary intergration of believers. (Acts 13:1) The Bible says that we aren't to judge by someone's appearance, but by righteous judgment (John 7:4). If we judge men by their skin color, we think carnally and with a pagan mindset.
- The apostle Philip baptized a eunuch in Ethoipia. This was in Kush, because the Bible says that the queen were candaces. Cancades was a known title given unto Black Nubia Queens. If Eric was right, Philip would have no business baptizing a eunuch in Ethopia, but this isn't the case. (Acts 8:27-40)
-God is no respecter of persons. (Romans 2:11, Colossians 3:25)
*The Bible is rather clear on this racial issue. I know my scriptures well. It has nothingto do with people's skin color, it's a sin problem. Also, we aren't even supposed to judge a man by their appearance as the book of Samuel says. We judge righteous judgment. Also, when I say equality, I don't mean equality in the Communist fashion of equal wealth, all humans are virtually identical (no one is viritually identical), etc. I mean equality meaning that all men are equally born in sin, equally having the same worth in the eyes of God, and equally have the capability for high intelligence given great effort. History has proven that among mankind of every color. As a black man, those who have hatred for white people are just as wrong as people denying the great contributions made by black people throughout human history. Also, any negative experience done by any people isn't representative of a whole people. We can't use our experiences to justify our perceptions of people 100% of the time. Real men don't allow experiences to allow them to believe in faulty and false stereotypes about groups of people.
By TruthSeeker24 (Timothy)
P.S. Oh, I have links you know:
http://www.dianedew.com/interrace.htm http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/OneBlood/chapter5.asp http://www.onehumanrace.com/qa_articles.asp
*I do my homework.
Keanu Reeves Slams Police State As Scanner Lights Up Cannes
Keanu Reeves Slams Police State As Scanner Lights Up Cannes
Media suggest films show world is in sorry state
Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com May 30 2006
Keanu Reeves has slammed the modern day police state and surveillance society, a centerpiece of the upcoming film in which he stars, during promotion for A Scanner Darkly at the Cannes film festival.
In A Scanner Darkly, the government, corporations and the elite conspire together to keep free thinking, free expression, freedom itself on the outside-- to facilitate a perceptive wall confining individuality itself to a realm doomed to the fringes.
The film chronicles how power interests exploit the drug war in order to create unthinking armies of drone servants and erect police state measures to prevent the people from ever glimpsing the dark truth behind a highly mechanized surveillance panopticon.
"Certain personal rights that were protected in the (U.S.) constitution for privacy are being chipped away at under the guise of homeland security without redress, and that's not good," Reeves told Reuters.
Several years ago the media tried to create a stereotype that Keanu Reeves isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, a complete 180 from the truth. Anyone that knows Reeves and has spoken in depth with him comes back with the same impression, that Keanu is a deeply engaged thinker and cares passionately about real issues.
Media reports out of Cannes have focused on the hard-boiled edge of the productions filling the screens this year, which include Aaron Russo's eagerly awaited America: From Freedom to Fascism, saying they represent a mirror for a world in a sorry state.
In reality the overwhelming rush of influential new films tackling topics of war, government control, surveillance and dictatorship are a creative backlash to the tiresome dumbed-down verbal diarrhea dished out by the establishment propagandists.
In a nation where the White House produces fake government PR and packages it as 'news' for the indoctrination of a bewildered US television audience, movies like Scanner are a refreshing challenge to the conformist driven orthodoxy
The outstanding Scanner Darkly website is continually updated and has a new audio clip of one of Alex's rants from the movie. Click here for the website and then click 'substance D'.
A Scanner Darkly is set for release on July 7. Read producer Tommy Pallotta's Cannes blog by clicking here.
COMMENT ON THIS ARTICLE
Tuesday, May 30, 2006
By Kevin Potvin
http://www.republic-news.org/archive/139-r...tvin_police.htm Vancouver Police Chief Jamie Graham last week breezily invoked the American-invented War on Terror to justify his proposal to install police video cameras around the city’s public spaces.
In an interview May 19 with Bill Good on CKNW radio, he said public cameras would help in the Vancouver Police Department’s contribution to the War on Terror, before he went on to dismiss critics warning of privacy invasions with the usual corker, “If you’re doing nothing wrong, you’ve got nothing to hide.” This weak argument—always trotted out by authorities whenever the issue of police surveillance comes up—must be quashed once and for all. Why the “nothing to hide” cat has never been held under water long enough we’ll never know, but it does seem to have amazing abilities to keep coming back. There are any number of replies that should have killed it by now: “Then I suppose you won’t mind me installing a camera in your bathroom,” or the always reliable—or always should be reliable—“Why stop at cameras? If you’re doing nothing wrong and have nothing to hide, why not allow police to search your body, your house, your computer files?” Why indeed not? Besides the pure voyeurism of it, what is it that makes us shudder so chillingly at the idea of unwarranted police searches of our selves, our homes, and our computers? What really lies at the root of our strong natural resistance to the idea of those powers landing in the hands of police? The same arguments advanced in favour of video surveillance cameras can be used to justify unwarranted police searches of our bodies, homes, and files.
It will surely reduce crime, it will expose crime where police weren’t aware of it, it will be a strong deterrent to more crime, it would provide great tools to police investigating crimes, and to follow Police Chief Graham, it would be an important tool in the War on Terror. All good things, no? Yet, no one who makes those arguments is even remotely convinced it is a good idea to allow police these extraordinary powers of surveillance. The reasons invoked to resist these powers are the same as those that can, and should, be invoked to resist the installation of police surveillance cameras in Vancouver’s public spaces.
Nothing is more corrosive to the social fabric of a city than unwarranted police surveillance. This is what all veterans of bloody battles for democracy and justice in countries around the world throughout history tell us, and our own most observant commentators, from George Orwell to Robert Fisk and John Pilger, repeat it: the encroachment of the police state marches in lock-step with the shrinkage of the democratic and just state. It is our well-founded fear of the potential use of this information as a tool of corruption and abuse of power—and the equally frightful potential for mistakes made with that information—that brings on the chill we feel at the mere mention of unwarranted police surveillance and monitoring in any of its forms, no matter how little we have to hide. What is the price we would pay for Chief Graham’s local version of Total Information Awareness? The new police-installed anti-terrorism-juiced cameras won’t be your garden-variety, convenience-store set-up, but instead will be a centralized web of digital recorders linked to sophisticated computers running facial recognition software. These work in some airports around the world by flashing a miniscule light bright enough to cause everyone to glance up at the source to allow the computer to frame the face perfectly for the facial recognition software to work its magic. That magic is simple enough. Facial recognition software measures the distance between the centre of the eyes and compares that measurement to one between the eyes and the centre of the chin, and makes other similar types of measurements and comparisons. It turns out such ratios and distances produce a unique profile for each of us, as unique as our fingerprints. But our facial characteristics are much easier to gather than our fingerprints.
This software, in tandem with police cameras and data banks of public information, is no longer the sort of anonymous, disconnected, and relatively sporadic surveillance we are familiar with as we move from bank to store and through traffic lights. It is an interconnected web of total surveillance showing our every move, complete with a sign over our heads showing our names, our addresses, our phone numbers, our ages, and our drivers’ licence numbers, as well as a good deal more information we think is private, but is not. Our credit ratings, our email addresses, our online habits, where we shop, what we eat—all of it is available with no warrants. There are a lot of things we do that are not criminal, but that can nonetheless be something we don’t want known. People have affairs, or they go to “massage” parlours; they might wish to meet with future employers they are considering jumping to, or they might meet secretly to settle sensitive business transactions; government and private sector whistle-blowers might meet with journalists to pass along information; political operatives might need to meet with opposition figures to arrange secret deals. Despite Chief Graham’s assurances, there is plenty we may wish to hide, even when we are doing nothing criminal. And what’s more, even if we are up to no good, is this level of surveillance justified? Imagine getting a jay-walking ticket in the mail, complete with a photo. How about a debilitating tax audit triggered by too many visits to Holt Renfrew, information police shared with Revenue Canada?
Imagine a crusading police officer tracking every move of an abortion-providing doctor. How would you feel if you made a career of making public speeches highly critical of the police, knowing they can track all your patterns and know where you are at any moment? Politically motivated people may have friends in the police department who can help them learn who an opponent is having lunch with, and where. The opportunity for blackmail and other forms of corruption this information makes available is staggering. There is a well-known and widely practiced police technique of catching minor criminals and offering to drop charges for information on more major criminals. Informants are useful because they can go places police can’t. Use of this technique would explode once police gained new evidence of petty crime on countless more potential informants. The power police would have in our society would match that exercised by the world’s most tyrannical police-state regimes—all without their having to dispense with the façade of democracy, accountability, and justice. When Chief Graham mentioned the War on Terror in justifying the web of cameras he envisions for Vancouver, this is what came to my mind. He should be opposed, and opposed strongly.
Anti-War Protesters Hit With Pepper Spray
Bush and laws.
is the link.
Neocon Gingrich Proposes Jeb Bush as Ruler
Neocon Gingrich Proposes Jeb Bush as Ruler
Kurt Nimmo May 30 2006
Newt Gingrich, the neocon troll who put out a contract on America, is pushing Jeb Bush as ruler, not in 2008 but down the road, in 2012 or 2016. “I just think his natural, personal ability is so great that people are going to realize he is not his father and he’s not his brother. He’s a very unique, charismatic leader with extraordinary capabilities. … Jeb Bush may well be the most innovative (governor) in the entire country,” Gingrich averred during the taping of a St. Petersburg television show. No word if the interviewer and television crew vomited.
Never mind even Republicans, when polled, don’t want Dubya’s younger brother to run, and never mind as well Jeb is connected at the hip to the same Straussian neocons who brought us the invasion and occupation of Iraq, the trampling of the Constitution here in America, and will soon enough bring us the shock and awe campaign against Iran.
Jeb is infamously credited with helping to trigger the Florida S&L crisis in 1988 by defaulting on a $4.5 million loan. Try this with your mortgage and see what happens.
Bush has a long and sordid history of rubbing elbows with Cuban criminals, namely Camilo Padreda, a former intelligence officer with the Batista dictatorship, and the embezzler Hernandez Cartaya (see this write-up at the Project for the Old American Century). Jeb the Younger is also connected to the prominent Cuban exile Miguel Recarey, a former CIA asset who attempted to assassinate Fidel Castro. Recarey was eventually charged with big time Medicare fraud and skipped out of the country and is now a fugitive.
Bush has turned Florida into graft central and “has overseen corruption and nepotism run amok in his administration. It is now estimated that nearly 40 percent of Florida’s $48 billion dollar state budget gets kicked back in the form of contracts with private companies—many of which employ former Bush staffers,” according to POAC (see previous link). Bush declared himself the “accountability governor” and then undercut the oversight and accountability measures in Florida’s contracts and bidding process, going so “far as to cut the funding for the state auditor general and the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability.”
Jeb made out like a bandit on his Enron stock. “I suppose it’s somehow fitting that while Florida’s retirement system lost more than any other state in the Enron debacle, Jeb personally benefited from his Enron stock. In the end, Jeb Bush has used Florida to turn a profit for his friends at the expense of the states future, just as Ken Lay used the employees and investors at Enron. In four short years, Florida has become the Enron of state governments and Jeb Bush is their very own Ken Lay.”
Jeb facilitated the election theft for his brother in 2000. He purged felons who were non-felons (they were primarily Democrats) from voting rolls. “Florida Governor Jeb Bush and his Secretary of State Katherine Harris, created a phony list of convicted felons—57,700 to be exact—to ’scrub’ thousands of innocent people from the state’s voter rolls. Of the thousands who ultimately lost their vote through this scrub of voters, 80% were African-American, mostly Democratic Party voters. Had they voted, the course of history would have changed. Instead, however, Harris declared Bush the victor by only 537 votes.”
Gingrich, a habitual ethics violator while “serving” in the House, wants Jeb Bush, a hob-nobber with criminals (a natural propensity, as Jeb hails from a notorious crime family) and runs Florida as his own personal fiefdom, to be your president, not in 2008 (this slot is reserved for the globalist queen, Hillary Clinton) but later. Neocons will continue to talk this sort of trash, and subvert the political process in order to make talk walk, until they are fumigated from government. In a sane world, the fact the Bush family supported and financed the Nazis would make them persona non grata (if not inmates), not only in the political world but society at large. Instead, they are at the very pinnacle of power and control, thus demonstrating the nation is ruled by sadistic perverts in possession of do not go to jail cards.
If Jeb the Younger is “elected” come 2012 or so, the neocons will have a second chance, that is after the Clinton crime family—think Arkansas and the Mena-CIA-cocaine connection—runs amok, allowing the more traditional neolibs a chance to run the White House again. It should be noted that Hillary was adopted by none other than the fascist propaganda master, Rupert Murdoch, who will likely push her 2008 presidential bid, thus demonstrating there is little difference between Republicans, Democrats, neocons, and neolibs.
Of course, America may reject Hillary, as she is rather unsavory, but such public opinion is hardly a consideration, as Bush was “re-elected” (through vote fraud) in 2004, and under normal circumstances he would have long ago been impeached and imprisoned for telling lies, murdering more than one hundred thousand Iraqis, trashing the Constitution, stealing elections, and various other sundry crimes.
Positivity , not Negativity keeps me going
World events are never a dull moment. Within ourselves lies our nature to resist evil and tyranny. That's why I will focus on being more accurate and exposing the criminals in the world. The criminals are those who maliciously perpetrate in abortion. Also, I will expose the criminals who prepetrate any corrupt policies revolving around this "war on terror." One of the tactics that these criminals use is presenting propaganda as fact, while concealing real evils going on. One example is the story about the Iranian government using badges on Christians and Jewish people. Now, we know that story is completely false. Another example is about MacBeth. MacBeth's confession, which was about committing evils against Iraqi civilians. That "confession" was proven to be hoax according to News Hounds. While, the public is stuck on that, real evils like Abu Ghraib, the Haditha controversy (or the claim the American troops killed Iraqi civilians for vengeance on November 2005), P2OG, and other things. That's why we in the alternative media will continue to show more accuracy in our news coverage. Kimberly Dozier, a 39-year-old American CBS journalist, was attacked. Also, at least 2 journalists died recently. A riot occured in Kabul, Afghanistan a couple of days ago. Also, violence is occuring in East Timor.
Something new that I've discovered was about the House passing NAIS. What is NAIS? NAIS is the National Animal Identification System. When I read Ron Paul's article about it, I realized that NAIS promoted more of the demented policies of the Neo Cons. NAIS is about trying to tag all livestock (whether it's cattle, poultry, dairy, or even horses) with electronic devices. Paul wrote that it will cost taxpayers $33 million for starters. Paul is right that this NAIS program is unnecessary, because people have a right to not have their livestock forcibly tracked by the federal government. The federal government is getting too much power under the Bush administration, but our Founding Fathers were always dedicated to the proposition that government powers ought to be limited. NAIS isn't about preventing mad-cow disease. It's about to further control the resources of this country, while small farmers could reap economically disastriously consequences. The reason is that NAIS may be too costly for farmers to adjust to the new regulation processes.
It doesn't take a Phd to decipher that militarized police and odd drills are mainfesting themselves all across the United States of America. A couple of days ago, there was a false alarm over a bomb threat in the Capitol Building. During that melee, armed police with assault weapons made House members to put their hands on their heads. Also, the House members were forced to go through metal dectectors. FOX News relished this moment as great police work. FOX News' Catherine Herridge loved how the highly militarized people (who were dressed in black) were so well behaved. I also condemn CNN's cover up over 9/11 as well, so I'm not obsessing over FOX in criticisms. I delved more into the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) connection to the amnesty & American Union agenda. Obviously, the CFR wrote a plan talking about merging the infrastructures of Canada, Mexico, and America. This is about globalization and the elite wanting a world government.
You won't hear Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh talking about this. Even the Neo Con Savage have talked about illegal immigration being used as a plan for creating a new world order (being said by Bush 41, Kissinger, David Rockefeller, and others for decades). Victor Y. Veritas wrote an article that caught my eye. Vertias mentioned that Paul Warnke and Howard Baker are members of the CFR and are connected to people in the Bush White House like Robert Divine. Problems not only occur in America, but inside of Canada as well. Not only is Ottowa, Canada is having a Bilderberg Group meeting, which has some of the richest and most powerful political people in the world. The Prime Minister of Canada is Stephen Harper, who claims to be a Conservative. Yet, Stephen Harper never eliminated the hardcore gun control provisions in his country, but solely weakening the gun registry., Also, Stephen Harper is a member of the Bilderberg group and scheduled to go into their new meeting at this June in Ottowa.
The BBC on May 30, 2006 talked about the EU or European Union ending a deal with the USA. The deal was about sending European passenger information to US government officals. The EU court banned it, because the European airlines were required to send US authorities passengers' names, addresses, and credit card details. The truth is that the EU and those in the United States promoting centralization of power are equally wrong. The European Union's inception in the 20th century (around the 1950's) was solely about creating a New European Empire, while disregarding the national sovereignty of European nations. Brother Nicholas Rivera wrote that the failed EU Constitutional Convention was chaired by Knight of Malta Valery Giscard D’Estaing. I also want to add that I thank Eric Jon Phelps, Nicholas Rivera, 2tuff, Mark Brewer, Alexandra, novusordo, and others showing all new information exposing the Jesuits, Freemasonry, Knights of Malta, Opus Dei, Knights of Columbus, and other sinister, evil orders on this planet.
It occurs to me that those in Hollywood are awakening to the anti-Constitution provisions promoting by the government. For example, Keanu Reeves condemned the policies of Homeland Security as being a violation of our right to privacy and other rights that exist from the Bill of Rights plus Constitution. He said these comments at the Cannes film festival. He promoted the film called "A Scanner Darkly." That film is about exposing the phony Drug War ruining communities in the USA (since intelligence agencies send the drugs into America, while non-violent users are given unfair sentences) and the overly aggressive Big Brother society that we have. While, I don't agree with much of the agenda of Hollywood in bashing real values, we need to further tell Hollywood to radically reform the smut in that industry.
I've just learned about the 9/11 Truth Activist Gypsy Taub. Taub is from Russia. Taub went into the Kean Commission conference and interrupted their offical story promotions. Taub said that 9/11 was an inside job and the Kean Commission never looked into the real issues about 9/11 like Building Seven and the Twin Towers. Gypsy is right, because the Kean Commission is even worse than the Warren Commission. At least the Warren Commission "attempted" to look into various angles. The Kean Commission blatantly refused to look into Building Number Seven, how the government had drills and wargames during 9.11, how the US funded the Taliban and al-Qaeda for years, and how the Bush family had business links to the Bin Laden family. The activism of people wanting a real, full investigation of 911 isn't suprising, because a Zogby poll have less than 50% of Americans are satisfied with how the offical story of 9/11 has been presented. Henry Paulson is the new Treasury Secretary chief and he is the CEO & Chairman of Goldman Sachs. Henry replaces Snow, who resigned today.
If you think that America have our rights protected, then check out the Free Speech zones and how Anti-War Protesters were Hit With Pepper Spray. This isn't part of real America, but Amerika. I will continue to do my duty and expose the CIA, Mossad, Freemasonry, Jesuits, ADL, and all deceptive organizations. I don't suck up to the establishment Left or establishment Right. I'm my own man with my own thoughts. Australian Prime Minister Howard is on board with the agenda of Bush and the global elite.
I wouldn't be afraid of the CFR (which has many of its members in the Project for a New American Century Program), the federal government, etc. since they're afraid of us growing and exposing them even more. Negativity isn't going to let me go down. Positivity and real strength is going to allow me to go into higher intellect and present more truth. I will expose the surveillance cameras, gun control, government sponsored terrorism, the wars for empire, and the threats to our health.
By TruthSeeker24 (Timothy)
New Orleans and Katrina.
is the link.
Note by Me: There is nothing wrong with exposing evil Jewish people in N.O. or Masonic Jewish Zionists, but I disagree with this site in blaming the Jewish people for everything wrong in this country and Katrina. The link is borderline anti-Semitic.
By TruthSeeker24 (Timothy)
A person confronting people about 9/11
Naudet Brothers vs. Loose Change
is the link.
Is This The Last Memorial Day In The Free Republic We Call America? by Greg Szymanski, May 27, 2006
is the link.
The President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health
is the link.
Stop the NAIS
Stop the NAIS
Ron Paul May 30 2006
The House of Representatives recently passed funding for a new federal mandate that threatens to put thousands of small farmers and ranchers out of business. The National Animal Identification System, known as NAIS, is an expensive and unnecessary federal program that requires owners of livestock – cattle, dairy, poultry, and even horses – to tag animals with electronic tracking devices. The intrusive monitoring system amounts to nothing more than a tax on livestock owners, allowing the federal government access to detailed information about their private property.
In typical Washington-speak, NAIS is “voluntary” – provided USDA bureaucrats are satisfied with the level of cooperation. Trust me, NAIS will be mandatory within a few years. When was the last time a new federal program did not expand once implemented?
As usual, Congress is spending millions of dollars creating a complex non-solution to a very simple problem. NAIS will cost taxpayers at least $33 million for starters.
Agribusiness giants support NAIS, because they want the federal government to create a livestock database and provide free industry data. But small and independent livestock owners face a costly mandate if NAIS becomes law.
Larger livestock operations will be able to tag whole groups of animals with one ID device. Smaller ranchers and farmers, however, will be forced to tag each individual animal, at a cost of anywhere from $3 to $20 per head. And NAIS applies to anyone with a single horse, pig, chicken, or goat in the backyard – no exceptions. NAIS applies to children in 4-H or FFA. Once NAIS becomes mandatory, any failure to report and tag an animal subjects the owner to $1,000 per day fines.
NAIS also forces livestock owners to comply with new paperwork and monitoring regulations. These farmers and ranchers literally will be paying for an assault on their property and privacy rights, as NAIS empowers federal agents to enter and seize property without a warrant – a blatant violation of the 4th amendment.
NAIS is not about preventing mad cow or other diseases. States already have animal identification systems in place, and virtually all stockyards issue health certificates. Since most contamination happens after animals have been sold, tracing them back to the farm or ranch that sold them won’t help find the sources of disease.
More than anything, NAIS places our family farmers and ranchers at an economic disadvantage against agribusiness and overseas competition. As dairy farmer and rancher Bob Parker stated, NAIS is “too intrusive, too costly, and will be devastating to small farmers and ranchers.”
NAIS means more government, more regulations, more fees, more federal spending, less privacy, and diminished property rights. It’s exactly the kind of federal program every conservative, civil libertarian, animal lover, businessman, farmer, and rancher should oppose. The House has already acted, but there’s still time to tell the Senate to dump NAIS. Please call your Senators and tell them you oppose spending even one dime on the NAIS program in the 2007 agriculture appropriations bill.
Fake Soldier Confession Video Runs As Cover For Real Slaughter
Fake Soldier Confession Video Runs As Cover For Real Slaughter
Dilutes impact of genuine war atrocities like phony rape photos distracted from Abu Ghraib
Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com May 30 2006
A widely circulated video in which an army ranger confessed to the brutal indiscriminate murder of Iraqi civilians and its vehement debunking as a hoax has acted as a smokescreen for the very real admission and evidence of US war crimes in Iraq.
Working in this field for five years and scanning news on a day to day basis you quickly develop and hone a bullshit detector that can spot hoaxes, psy-ops and frauds from a mile off. As soon as the MacBeth Marine video hit the Internet I smelt a very large rat.
The alternative media community is plagued by deliberate disinformation specialists and gullible individuals who will act as unwitting conduits for bogus information. This minefield of deception breeds confusion, distraction and lowers the credibility of the truth community.
In the video, MacBeth claims that he was part of a unit that regularly killed innocent Iraqis, their wives and children if they didn't explicitly follow orders.
Proof that the video is a hoax is legion. MacBeth's uniform is totally inconsistent with that of a US army ranger and his claimed medals are not verified by any official record. Army spokesman John Boyce said there was no record of MacBeth ever serving.
“Initial research by the U.S. Army Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg shows no Soldier with the name of Jesse Macbeth having ever been assigned to the Special Forces or the Army Rangers -- which are, in fact, two separate disciplines."
At its height, the fake video confession was the number 2 clicked news item across the entire Internet.
The video has eclipsed the real evidence of US war crimes in Iraq. The BBC video above carries bona fide testimony from US soldiers who served in Iraq and were party to killing civilians. To emphasize, this video carries accurate, unimpeachable, and legitimate testimony regarding US war crimes in Iraq.
In addition, charges are expected to be brought against Marines after an investigation into the killing of 24 unarmed civilians in the Iraqi town of Haditha in November. Congressman John Murtha said that the slaughter and its subsequent cover-up could do more to harm the US reputation in Iraq than the Abu Ghraib scandal. To emphasize, this event carries accurate, unimpeachable, and legitimate evidence of US war crimes in Iraq.
The hoax video has allowed Neo-Con media government boot-lickers to discredit all claims of US atrocities in Iraq, despite the fact that the army has admitted to them and charges are pending. This is an exercise in bait and switch and it softens the backlash of opinion against the coalition of the killing when true and verified examples of war crimes are brought to the fore. It dilutes the reaction to a growing body of hardcore evidence of ceaseless atrocities committed against innocent Iraqis.
Fox News wasted no time in exploiting the hoax to whitewash the real issue of war crimes and civilian murders in Iraq. Michelle Malkin (who advocates bringing back internment camps for Muslims) also cited the video as an example of anti-war propaganda and used it to dismiss genuine US-led slaughter in Iraq.
Watch below as fawning Neo-Con Malkin revels in debunking "peace propaganda" by comparing MacBeth's words to John Kerry's Vietnam testimony. This is also the only remaining record of the MacBeth video as all other postings of it have been removed.
News Hounds hit the nail on the head in assessing the consequences of this hoax.
"This segment serves a two-fold purpose. It plants in viewers heads the seed of doubt about stories of atrocities and murder of civilians, just as the Haditha story seems poised to break and expose exactly the kind of behavior dismissed here. For many of FOX's true believers, the Haditha story will be a conspiracy of the liberal media to hurt Bush because they hate him, and this discredited story will bolster their position of denial."
Fox were able to spin the hoax video and offer it as evidence of their ridiculous claim that the turmoil in Iraq is a US media creation and that we really are there to liberate everyone.
In considering the timing of the hoax confession tape it is pertinent to recall a similar instance of bait and switch which occurred at the beginning of the Abu Ghraib scandal.
Two days after the Abu Ghraib torture photos were released, the Internet was flooded with fake rape photos taken from porn websites. So when the actual military report stated that rape did take place at Abu Ghraib, the Neo-Con media junta could discredit and deny it. The Boston Globe inexplicably published these photos days after they were known to be a hoax and then staged-managed an apology, which garnered great attention. Printing the photos and then apologizing was a theatrical set-up to plant seeds of doubt in the minds of the body politic for future release of new photos and allegations.
In addition, staged photos of British soldiers urinating on and beating Iraqis were leaked to the Mirror newspaper in Britain. Despite numerous military eyewitnesses coming forward to say that beatings had taken place, the circus revolved around these few photos which were admitted hoaxes. The public was left with the impression that stories about British troops mistreating Iraqis were fraudulent, even though other cases of abuse had been admitted.
Though the news cycle moves far too quickly to immediately identify a story as a hoax, we should remain guarded in precisely what items we choose to inflate and circulate to a wider audience. Otherwise we're nearly as bad as the White House itself, which produces fake government PR and packages it as 'news' for the indoctrination of a bewildered US television audience.
But you won't see Fox News or Michelle Malkin kick up any fuss about that.
COMMENT ON THIS ARTICLE