James Dobson may consider voting for John McCain after all. I hope he doesn't compromise his values because a person with common sense can understand that John McCain is far from a real conservative. I've been researching Presidential elections for a long time and it's obvious that the elite will sponsor or heavy fund both major candidates. Dobson and others fall for the lesser of 2 evils argument. The truth is that when you vote for the lesser of 2 evils, you'll still recieve evil. Back centuries ago, real Christians (not the megachurch/World Faith Movement puppets that you witness on Television today) would be willing to be jailed or murdered rather than compromise their belief system. Dr. Cathy Burns have written many exposes about Dr. James Dobson. Dobson is apart of the religious establishment just like Prince Hall Freemason Al Sharpton (why do you think both men can go on CNN and FOX News in primetime. That's why each of them won't expose the new world order, the Bohemian Grove, the New Atlantis plan of Sir Francis Bacon, GM foods, and other real issues). Even Janet Parshall outlined the Hillary Clinton is better than Barack Obama line when both persons are virtually identical on the major issues. This was the same clique of people outlining legitimate criticism against John McCain. Some say if you stay home or vote for Obama, Obama wins or if you stay home, McCain wins. Well, when you cut the disinformation out, both McCain and Obama are more alike politically than Republicans and Democrats will admit to. For example, each believe in gun control, each support the man-made global warming hysteria, each favor abortion (yes, John McCain believes in abortion for rape and incest. Plus, McCain wants embryonic stem cell research when IPCs can do the exact same thing ESCs can do), each want to fight a fradulent war on terror, each support the Patriot Act, each believe in the illegal FISA law, and each have similar immigration policies (the difference is the time of the implementation of that policy). Therefore, no one can fool me on the bigger picture. Both men have ties to the Council on Foreign Relations as well. McCain went into CFR meetings and Obama's wife is apart of the Chicago CFR. People have a right to vote for a Third party or not vote at all for conscience sake. You have the right of your convictions. You have the right to preserve your own conscience. Individuals certainly have the freedom to reject the Iranian invasion if necessary proponent of John McCain and the killing babies even if they survive an abortion subscriber (as documented by the numerous articles of Jill Stanek) like Barack Obama is. John McCain and Barack Obama whether they like it or not are puppets of Big Government and Big Corporations (i.e. this has nothing to do with legitimate businesses, but multinational corporations involved in corruption with governmental powers). That is why I'm opposed to the new world order. Regardless of who is the next President, our core values shouldn't be compromised or forsaken.
Michael Mukasey is being criticized from among a variety of quarters. Stephen C. Webster from Raw Story on Tuesday, at July 22, 2008 made known about the ACLU's criticism against Mukasey. Michael Mukasey is the present Attorney General of the United States. Mukasey spoke to the neo conservative AEI or the American Enterpise Institute (the AEI makes no bones about their support of preemptive war whether in Iraq, Iran, and other places). Michael Mukasey said that he wants new rules to govern the rights of detainees at Guantanama Bay, Cuba. The ACLU immediately responded to Mukasey's request as a plan to ask Congress to subvert the Constitution. Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office, in a media advisory said that Mukasey is asking Congress to expand and extend the war on terror forever. The essence of habaes corpus is to prevent the President or any member of the executive branch to arbitrarily define a person a terrorist or make a detainee to be held indefinitely without a trial. It's been apparent that the administration wants to still violate habeas corpus.This is despite of the fact that even the Supreme Court says that detainees shouldn't be convicted without any trial or legal representation. The Supreme Court decision plainly pointed out that detainees have the right to challenge their captivity in U.S. federal court. There is nothing wrong with that. Under Mukasey’s proposals, a detainee would be able to challenge their detention, but would receive no extradition to the United States for the proceedings. The Washington Post said the Mukasey's Justice plan will make the government hold prisoners indefinitely as long as the armed conflict with al-Qaeda persisted. Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) said that the federal courts are capable of handling detainees held in Guantanamo Bay. The detainees should have a trial and challenge their detention because it's been proven that many of them were innocent of any crime. Mukasey's proposals like limiting federal courts, limiting how detainees could appeal or challenge their capture, etc. puts further strain on habeas corpus indeed. The essence of due process existed even in the times of the 1200's (via the Magna Carta). That impacted American laws and especially the Bill of Rights. Torture is never a political issue. It's just morally wrong period.
DAPRA plans on tagging system for soldiers. Lewis Page from The Register on Monday at , July 21, 2008 described more information about this story. DARPA was created by the Pentagon to invent cutting edge Big Brother technology. DARPA wants to electromagnetically tag U.S. combat soldiers in the same way some criminals are under judicial restraint. Like always, the government justifies this action as a means to find troops if they get lost or if they are in need to be rescued. DARPA calls this plan the "Individual Force Protection System." It is inteded to be taken forward by the U.S. defence contractor named Science Application International Corporation (SAIC). DARPA believes that SAIC is the only source that in the case of a follow on requiement with the indepth knowledge and experience with the Individual Protection System. The IFPS is undergoning much extensive development. Although, it isn't to be put in the market yet, but it's under a previous contract. DARPA invented the Internet in the late 1960's, promote nanotechnology, and are in league with the elite's goal of transhumanism (i.e. trying to make man into a godlike being via machines). DARPA officials said that the IFPS system will include a smal three inch lightweight tag attached to a soldier' uniform. There are a variety of vehicle borne or portable recievers to locate the tag (even in the vast array of the electromagnetic spectrum inside of the battlefield). DAPRA doesn't want it to include GPS because the tracking range of 150km is possible. Machines like Land Warrior with GPS exist. The small IFPS can be placed around someone's neck. The UK has Miltrak system.This system utilizes standard mobile phone and satnav electronics in certain cases. They exist in the frontlines in Afghanistan right now. The Tagging soldiers proposal is a long list of Big Brother actions planned by the government. This is nothing new, yet I don't see it being promoted so overtly before. These new technologies even exceed the predictions of books like Animal Farm and 1984. Many from across the political spectrum are exposing this matrix like system. It is a matrix system because DARPA always have devices light years of what is shown presently in our military. The tags do raise legitimate privacy concerns, because it can monitor troops everywhere you go. So, we have to be careful with our lives and promote real independent liberty. Bohemian Grove and 9/11 Truth are interrelated now. The list of the 2008 Bohemian Grove members have been obtained by 9/11 Truth Activists. This group is based in San Franscisco. Its name is truthaction.org. They've held protests outside of the Grove retreat in Northern California at Sonoma County. The list reveals the names of George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, David Rockefeller, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, and numerous former directors of the CIA like James Woolsey. The activists handed out 9/11 truth information packages to employees and even some members plus guests of the Bohemian Grove. A truthaction.org forum entry stated that employees there gave gratitude to them and recieved their information. They even said that an elite camper was interested in 9/11 truth materials. He said that he was camping with a former CIA director before going back into the Grove with his infopack. The Grove is a huge resort area with 2,700 acres where many bigwigs in America stay for a time. There are bars, stages, lodges, and other locations there. It's all male and it existed for 136 years (It also has prostitutes of both sexes to services the members in a sick way when much of the Grovers are married). There are many cliques from Mandalay (one of the most powerful camps with defense contractors, politicans, Presidents, etc.), Caveman, HillBillies, Lost Angels, etc. The Grove has a Cremation of Care ceremony (with Druidic, Babylonian themes) that praised an owl statue. The owl symbol was a key emblem of the Bavarian Illuminati of the late 1700's according to Keith Thompson. The Statue of the owl relates to Minerva relating to wisdom. There is once an image of a Mass so the Bohemian Grove does have links to the Vatican. The 9/11 Truth group showed posters of exposing the 9/11 cover up plus how the war on terror is a fraud. The 9/11 Truth Movement is growing rapidly presently. That can't be denied anymore. I don't agree with Arizona State Senator Karen Johnson's connection with Scientology (she accepted invitations to Scientology events. Scientology is a group that was created by a leader called L. Ron Hubbard who demonized those who were disabled. Hubbard followed the teachings of deceiver, Satanist, and British Intelligence agent Aliester Crowley. Scientology believes in many false doctrines and promotes secrecy in their OT levels). She is right that the official story of 9/11 doesn't add up because Osama bin Laden didn't destroy Building Number Seven neither made NORAD standdown its own standard operating procedures at all. Karen was on the state Senate floor talking about 911 Truth. People have a right to question the 9/11 Commission report. Karen questioned the theory that fire alone caused the collapse of all of the Twin Towers.
Internet Freedom is under threat all of the time. That's easy to decipher. Kevin Parkinson from Reality Check on July 22, 2008 reported on internet suppression being tested in Canada as a test case. Kevin wrote that the Internet allowed us to access more information than even before in modern history. About 1 billion Internet users are global and a lot of them are expressing communication with people from around the world. The Internet is one of the greatest technological advancements in the 20th century. The essence of the Internet should be that it should be the free transfer of information that is uncensored, unlimited, and untained. Now, there are foes of the Internet like Bell Canada and Telus. They want to twist the Internet into a cable like system thereby people must sign up to go into specific ites and then pay to go into other sites beyond a cutoff point. Various fields of endeavors are plainly effected by the Internet from government, commerce, entertainment, education, news, politics, religion, etc. There are bad things in the Internet as well. Yet, it's the responsibilty of parents and individuals to have oversight on the evil things on the Internet not corporations or government mandates. The reason is that the government has no right to interfere with how we look at the Internet at all. Telus and Rogers wanted to have a charge for a text messaging without any warning to the public. The public won that battles, but more battles are here like Internet2. Internet2 is a system where you have to pay to get while old hubs aren't repaired. France, Germany, China, etc. are building firewalls to block certain websites. Censorship is on an underheard level on the Internet. Telus and another company, Bell Canada, the two largest Internet Service Providers (ISP’S) in Canada are still fighting for Internet censorship. Kevin Parkinson cites a plan of killing the Internet in Canada by 2010 plus globaly by 2012. Some will have to pay extra to just to go sites that aren't registered in the new Internet system. This is about corporate interests plus globalists controlling the Internet instead of the people and individuals doing it. Bell Canada and Telus deny such plans, but we know that Internet 2 is all about Internet restrictions. One reason for these goals is because of the public's outright rejection of the mainstream news. That form of news are filled with propaganda and omissions.
Free Speech zones are the essence of an anti-free speech atmosphere. John W. Whitehead from Huffington Post at July 21, 2008 exposed this issue. The First Amendment is rather clear that Congress shall make no law preventing the freedom of speech, the press, the right to peaceably assemble, or the right to believe in a religion. Today, we regularly have the government violating our free speech rights with free speech zones. This has occured on a rising level every since 9/11 came about. The basic purpose of the existence of free speech zones is to stifle the free speech rights of citizens and all human beings in the United States of America. According to John W. Whitehead, President Bush's Presidential Advance Manual outlines the specific strategies his administration has used to minimize "the demonstrator's effect." These tactics doesn't just include free speech zones. They include the Orwellian actions of selling tickets to only presidential supporters and having rally squads. These squads are utilized to drown out plus intimidate protestors of Bush. It isn't just a Republican thing. Free speech zones have been instituted by Republicans and Democrats to prevent an active amount of dissent in American society. The DNC or the Democratic National Convention are planning to have cages (made up of chicken wire and chain link fences) located more than 2 football fields from the delegates' entrance. Not even the Republicans are doing that. The DNC are planning this for late August of 2008. Those who want to express their First Amendment rights outside of this oppressive cage could be in risk of being arrested. Some in the mainstream media are even trying to prevent them from even seeing protestors. Civil liberties groups are challenging this disgrace of a policy in the court system. Such cages were found in the 2004 DNC at Boston. Conditions were so appalling that U.S. District Court Judge Douglas P. Woodlock referred to the designated protest zone as a “grim, mean, and oppressive space,” which had the overall feel of an “internment camp.” These things not only prevents real free speech, but limits debates for a chance of real change to be enacted in this country. No one I know would advance a free speech zone in the area of where the "I Have Dream speech" (orated by Dr. Martin Luther King) existed in 1963 at Washington, D.C. Caging folks' right to speak is not part of real liberty at all. It's apart of a tyrannical policy restricting protestors the right to confront the government. If you don't have free speech, you don't have liberty. It's as simple as that. There is another story of a Christian defending himself against a criminal. This story takes place in 1993. It's found in the book entitled "Shooting Back." Charl van Wyk is the missionary working for Frontline Fellowship ministries. Charl describes a story on his encounter with heavily armed terrorists who attacked his church back in 1993. He utilized his .38 special once again to fought off an attempted hijacking by returning fire. This other attack occured in Cape Town, South Africa. He was traveling to record a radio program with creation science lecturer Philip Stott for the Reclaiming Africa for Christ Biblical Worldview Summit. van Wyk said that he shouted at the criminals when they were threatening the life of his Uncle Philip. Van Wyk opened fire and the men fled. Later, other third party criminals returned fire who were covering the previous criminals from a distance. Charl and his friends took cover and drove their vehicle as fast as possible. Charl van Wyk survived. These events prove that sometimes self defense is needed for survival. Now, this doesn't mean that violence is the answer to every situation. Sometimes you can solve a problem by utilizing peace. In some conflicts, dialogue and communication is sufficiently necessary to allievate critical situations. Although in life threatening events, self defense may be the only option to make sure you're alive.
Medical freedom is great to perserve. Recently, there has been sad cases of many newsreporters dying like Peter Jennings in 2005, Tony Snow, and Tim Russert. Each of them relied either on chemotherapy or pharmaceuticals in order to help them. Tony Snow before he died unfortunately ridiculed and mocked alternative medicine. He criticized things like aloe vera. Tony Snow experienced chemotherapy. Frankily, even mainstream doctors know of its risk factors (like permanetly damaging your immune system because chemo is nothing than using poisons). Really, substances like supplements and aloe vera are more than just alternative medicine. They are common, traditional medicines that assisted human beings for thousands of years. Today, most of the medical industry's medicines are only approved or has been supported by the establishment. What is obvious that medical freedom is still limited in some circles in America. Alan Stang wrote that someone flew into Germany to recieve colon cancer treatment. So called allopatic drugs are highly profitable and Big Pharma is getting rich by them. There is nothing wrong with utilizing natural remedies in order to allow the body to heal itself. On many occasions real alternative medicine has been suppressed by the government. It's a monopoly system. Stang cited another example of an Oklahoma lady asked by the hospital to sign a form not to carry anything to help her of her metastatic bone cancer. That isn't representative of real freedom. Real freedom is allowing the patient any medicine possible to help fight against an illness or disease. The deal is that alternative medicine and all forms of medicine should be accessed by all citizens. Lynn Berry from Natural News wrote about more benefits of drinking green tea. A recent study (reported on the ScienceDaily site) has found green tea decreases the risk factors involved in heart disease. Lynn wrote that green tea can improve the lining of the circulatory system via improving the endothelial cells (if they aren't working well then atherosclerosis can hold increasing cardiovascular problems). A team of researchers at the Athens Medical School (Greece) led by Dr. Nikolaos Alexopoulos conducted a trail dealing with green tea. They found that drinking green tea can increase dilation or higher blood flow. Higher blood flow is a good thing. Green tea has stronger antioxidants since it has less oxidisation during processing. Another study found that green tea can help with oral hygiene. Further related research has found that green tea helps overcome the resistance of certain bacteria to antibiotics. Dr. Mervat Kassem from the Faculty of Pharmacy at Alexandria University in Egypt found that drinking green tea at the same time as taking the antibiotics improved the efficiency of the drugs to kill the bacteria including the strain of superbugs. Andrew Porter from London Telegraph on Monday, at July 21, 2008 focused on Jacqui Smith. Jacqui Smith was warned by the first group to be given ID cards that these cards will not improve security. Many workers in the UK are given compulsory ID cards. These workers want to come to Jacqui Smith in order to make known of their own concerns urgently. Airport workers were chosen as the first people to have to carry them. The government is deteremined to control forth with the ID cards. The Home Secretary is facing opposition from unions and opposition parties. Frances O'Grady (the deputy general secretary of the TUC) wrote a letter to Miss Smith that these proposal won't enchance security arrangements. The note admits that security important to perserve. The burdens on business and employees by these means according to Frances O'Grady will result with notorious civil liberty concerns. The Unite union have attacked the plans also. This union represents some airport workers. They've said that it is wrong that workers should face a £30 charge for an identity card before they can apply for an airside pass. Some estimates put the cost of the ID card scheme at £18 billion over 10 years. The Home Office puts the cost at nearer £6 billion. Damian Green (who is the Shadow Immigration Minister) said that more opposition would exist as the ID card scheme comes closer into existence. He admits that the government is witnessing a huge blow to their plans because the first group carrying the ID system are opposing it. It's ironic that this ID scheme is similar to Real ID Act. The Real ID Act was passed in the USA in 2005. It centralized licenses all across America federally plus uses biometrics to monitor our personal information. It's definitely against our privacy and civil libertarian groups (including real conservatives and liberals) have opposed it. Mark Rauterkus wrote that the Real ID Act (plus the the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania or the LPPa) could be a threat to gun rights. Mark's reasoning is that since the Real ID forces biometrics to control transactions, it can restrict ownership of guns or the actions to do simple banking. The DHS or the Department of Homeland Security even want more rules in the Real ID Act without approval from Congress according to Mark. The Real ID Act goes on to make a de facto gun registration system. If you don't have it being an adult, you might not travel to certain places or own a gun. Civil liberties are being violated not only in the Third World or places like China and North Korea. It's occuring in Western nations like the US, UK, etc.
Barack Obama's foreign policy meetings have recieved positive media coverage. It's no secret that much of the media like Katie Couric and others wish that Obama is the next President of the United States of America. Only God knows who is identity of the new President is. Barack Obama met with foreign leaders like al-Maliki and even General Patraeus. Patraeus and Obama disagreed on the future political policy toward Iraq. The General and Obama discussed about the possibilities about the future in Iraq. Obama acknowledged that the surge decreased violence in Iraq, but a gradual withdraw of combat forces is needed by 2010. Truthfully, Iraq is a nation that still occupied and many liberties we take for granted like gun rights and free speech are suppressed in Iraq. John McCain was angry about this, because he envisions that Obama is taking credit for the surge working. John McCain called Barack Obama's policy as incorrect and false. He went as far as saying that Barack wishes that Iraq would turn into a catastrophe at the expense of Obama winning the Presidential Election. In my opinion, McCain became very personal in his own words. John McCain is angered by the media's positive coverage. Objectivitly, the media has been positive toward Barack Obama except on various occasions on FOX News (here's some examples: ED Hill had to apologize to calling a simple hand gesture a possible terrorist jab, a caption appeared calling Michelle Obama a "Baby Mama", etc.) plus including some of the media coverage of Barack Obama's controversies. This doesn't mean Obama is perfect. Legitimate criticism toward Barack Obama ought to be shown just like legitimate criticism should be shown toward John McCain. Barack Obama also spoke in Jordan about foreign policy issues. In that speech, Barack Obama made his positions clear about focusing more military attention to Afghanistan. Obama spoke in Jordan and is meeting Shimon Peres and Mahmoud Abbas. Lately, there has been anti-Semitism and Jewish baiting even in some Patriot circles. I don't follow that route and I never will. Some of these bigots are correct that new world order interest have a stranglehold in Israel (you can see that with the Rockefellers, the Rothschilds, and the Knights of Malta influence there. Some Freemasons even support a reconstruction of Solomon's Temple in Israel)and many Israeli leaders have done bad policies toward the Palestinians. They are dead wrong that it's Israel's fault all of the time or Jewish people have no right to live in Israel. Frankily, Jewish people lived in Israel for centuries before 1948. Both Jewish people and Arabic people have a right to live in Israel plus be full of their basic human rights. So, I make a distinction between some of the bad policies of the governments of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, etc. and the righteous Jewish, Arabic, and other people in the Middle East region who sincerely want authentic liberty plus freedom over there. It's hypocritical for some individuals to judge Israeli errors, but then they become silent of the atrocities in Pakistan, Sudan, and other places against black people including Christians. So, I'm no hypocrite in this regard.
By Timothy
No comments:
Post a Comment