Knight of Malta King Juan Carlos of Spain signed a law that expands legalized abortions. The signing ceremony was ceremonial in nature, but pro-life groups have criticized him. The Spanish Parliament in some of its members have supported the bill. Human Rights International criticized him about via its President Thomas J. Eutenuer. He said that Juan Carlos should refuse to allow the measure to become law. "The world is watching to see whether Spain's Head of State, Juan Carlos de Borbón, will abdicate his moral leadership of the nation and sign the death warrants of millions more Spanish babies who will be killed by abortion," he told LifeNews.com. "He has already been complicit, by his signature, in the deaths of millions in the first abortion law he signed in 1985." A poll done by Instituto Noxa in October 2009 showed that more Spanish citizens oppose expanding abortion than support its expansion. The Spain Parliament last month approved the final version of a new law that expands abortions and provides no parental consent for teenagers wanting abortions. Strong opposition from pro-life advocates and the Catholic Church couldn't stop the bill, which recieve a 132-126 vote in the Spain Senate. Under the bill, abortions are allowed for any reason to 14 weeks, they are allowed up to 22 weeks if an abortion practitioner certifies a serious threat to the health of the mother, or says the unborn child is disabled. After 22 weeks, abortions are only done in serious cases of fetal disability and in cases where the pregnancy threatens the mother's life. The new bill recieved automatic approval when a majority of senators rejected 3 proposals by conservative parties to veto it, and then rejected 88 amendments to water it down. Abortion was officially allowed in 1985, but only for cases of rape or when a woman's life or health is in danger. Spanish abortion centers had been misusing the health exception to essentially allow any abortions, including late-term abortions, but the new law makes it so they no longer have to worry about running afoul of the law. Socialist Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, who took office in 2004, had been pushing for the abortion expansion. Abortion is certainly evil of course.
John Locke is a figure of economic history. He is one of the godfathers of Austrian Economics. He lived from August 29, 1632 until October 28, 1704. He died when he was 72 years old. He was born in Wrington, Somsertet England and died in Essex, England. He was a famous philosopher and British empricist too. Both of his parents were Puritans. He was right on many issues and wrong on others. Some point to Locke as inspiring the American Revolution with his ideals, but others view the Revolution as a revolutionary shift from political and social issues between British and American vaues. Locke was of the establishment in England. He was a founding investor in the Bank of England. This bank was created back in 1694 that funded imperialism. However, until its 1714 defeat, with the death of Queen Anne, a powerful ``national party'' opposed to imperialism still existed in England, and rallied around the political figures of Jonathan Swift and English patriot Robert Harley. Harley's parliamentary faction launched a series of bold economic and political initiatives, directly counter to the imperialist design. They wanted to limited interest rates to 4%, they wanted to form a Public Accounts Commission of the House of Commons to investigate corrupt practices of the City of London financial district and its agents in government, and some want the bank to be under public authority. Some desired these solutions to give low cost credit to improve farming, construct homes plus factories, and end the money monopoly of the Bank of England. John Locke disagreed with capping interest rates as found his 1691 booklet, which was in favor of usury. Locke believed that no government interference in the economy was a necessity in order for true economic development to be a reality. In history, this hasn't occured. He believed that buying and selling is a source of wealth instead of production. Locke wanted savings to be cut by 25% of more after the economic crisis of 1695 in England. Locke wasn't a real representation of American values. Locke's preamble stated: ``that we may avoid erecting a numerous democracy;'' Locke's ``constitution'' established the eight lords proprietors as a hereditary nobility, with absolute control over their serfs, called ``leet-men'' Also, Locke believed in slavery and British imperialism that tons of Americans even back in he 1700's strongly opposed. From 1672-74, Locke served as secretary of King Charles II's Council of Trade and Foreign Plantations (at the same time profiting from personal investments in trade with the Bahamas). Locke was heavily oppose by the British National Party. This National Party opposed imperialism in England. It was organized around the political figures of Jonathan Swift and English patriot Robert Harley. Harley's parliamentary faction launched a series of bold economic and political initiatives directly counter to the imperialist design. John Locke believed that the government's major purpose was to maintain personal property, yet government should be bigger than that. The government should created by the people not by a select oligarchy. Its role is multifaceted in contributing to the arts (as promoted to his credit Benjamin Franklin. I don't agree with him joining the Hell Fire Club though), science, economy, and other realms pertaining to the general welfare of the people not just the perservation of property. All humans have inalienable rights. This rights can't be taken away since they derive not from the state, but from the hand of God. The inalienable rights which the Declaration asserted were the Leibnizian "right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Locke was so much an oligarch that he believed in crushing help to the poor, he supported child labor (called the working school in his mind), and didn't want real education to the young. Locke believe in Aristole's tabula rasa falsehood or the concept that the human mind is just like paper being without any ideas (and only by experience or by the human senses can human develop their mind). In other words, Locke argued that man is motivated by the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain. Leibniz disagreeed with this view since morality among man doesn't make a man a robot, but a thinking creature with a lot of instrintic value. Leibniz wrote that the human soul isn't empty, but can be awaken on occasions. He believed that the human mind has innate creative power being more skilled than the beasts or animals. He worte that since: "...men become more skilled by finding a thousand new dexterities, whereas deer and hares of the present day do not become more cunning than those of past time.'' He adds ironically: ``This is why it is so easy for men to entrap brutes and so easy for simple empirics to make mistakes.'' The Founding Fathers used Leibniz's views and others to form the Declaration of Independence. It originally had an indictment of King George III for his promotion of slavery against black people (that part of the Constitution was eliminated). Bernard Mandeville promoted laissez fair policies and that vice (plus others evils) were necessary foundations of a propserous state, which I don't subscribe to at all. Bernard was a Dutch doctor who was a suspected member of the Hell Fire Club. Sir Francis Dashwood once head the oraganization. The Hell Fire Club's membership engaged in gluttony, drunkenness, and orgies and practiced the "Do As Thou Wilt" satanic philosophy that later inspired Aleister Crowley. Mandeville became a champion of this influential underground network of upper class hedonists through his poem The Grumbling Hive published in 1705 and it was released again as part of his book The Fable of the Bees in 1714 . Mandeville believed that: "private vice makes public virtue." This is contrary to the moral principle that you don't mix good and evil to promote virtue. The group Adam Smith's 1776 "Wealth of Nations" promoted laissez faire economics as well. Smith believed in a strong national defense, but the work believed that private entereneurs can do almost any commercial transaction that they desired without government interference whatsoever. Smith promotion of self interest ignores the commandment of Jesus Christ of having concern for God first and your fellow human beings second. The Constitution says that Congress promotes economic growth by regulating currency, having post offices, legitimate taxes, and other parts of internal infrastructure in a country. Lord Shellburne, Jeremy Bentham, John Locke , and Adam Smith believed in similar philosophies. They feel that a mythical god-like forces of the markets can solve all problems in an economy without an intervention whatsoever. They promoted a radical form of British free markets and free trade. Shelburne also commissioned Smith's work on an apologia for Free Trade. Bentham had written with contempt in October 1776, against the defense of human rights in America's July 4, 1776 Declaration of Independence: "This they 'hold to be' a 'truth self-evident.' At the same time, to secure these rights they are satisfied that Government should be instituted. They see not ... that nothing that was ever called Government ever was or ever could be exercised but at the expense of one or another of those rights, that ... some one or other of those pretended unalienable rights is alienated ... In these tenets they have outdone the extravagance of all former fanatics." Bentham was so extreme that he wrote in support of pedastry or pedophilia. In a 1787 pamphlet called, "In Defense of Usury", attacking all restrictions on the lenders' right to take the highest interest rates they could get away with. I don't defend usury at all. So, John Locke & Adam Smith wwere a slick decpetion in not only promoting a faulty economic system, but their doctrines that contradict the American creed of liberty, justice, and true equality for all people.
The smearing of dissent as violence is common by media puppets by the names of Glenn Beck and Chris Matthews. Every time now there is an attack in America some in the corporate media are quick to blame free speech group that dissent. Some of them lie and say that the lone wolf individuals who carry out violence may be 9/11 Truthers, Tea Party members, or Constitutionalists. Many of these groups are broad and disagree on some issues. The agenda of this smear agenda is to neutralize dissent by using guilt by association. This is differently doen to stop the outrage over the corrupt policies in Washington, D.C. The establishment left and the establishment right are also united in this affair to demonize 9/11 Truth people to promote pro-thought crime legislation too. Many of the fake left groups attack any criticism of Barack Obama as racism. Chris Matthews called the Tea Party movement as racist and called the Oath Keepers violent. Even the Southern Poverty Law Center or the SPLC called groups like We Are Change, who are essentially citizen journalists, and groups including the Constitution Party have also been smeared as equivalent to Neo Nazis and terrorists. That's a lie of course. Dirty tricks by the media has been going on for decades to demonize the government's opponents even if they are peaceful. That is why fusion centers (there’s no law against belief or political speech) in the leaked MIAC report and in the Federal government’s “mother” organization Homeland Security. Both hold veterans and peaceful political groups as potential “domestic terrorists”. Things have become so bad in this country that The People have become indistinguishable from “the enemy” to our civil servants and watchdog authorities. Many of these same groups were named in their report). Glen Beck has criticized ex-White House Czar Van Jones for just questioning the official story of 9/11 and demonized Debra Medina. Beck promotes the view that any dissent that doesn't live up to his neo conservative standard of "truth" is a thougth crime. Beck lied and said that individuals from the 9/11 Truth movement desire to assassinate President Barack Obama. This slander of Patriots is nothing new. A man was tasered for just asking John Kerry about the Skulls and Bones secret societies. He was tasered and arrested illegaly and the media mocked this fascist display of violence on the part of the police. A bombing at Times Square was falsely attributed to 9/11 Truthers and anti-war activists. We Are Change member German “Gary” Talis was set up and charged with ‘attacking a girl in a wheelchair’ after loudly questioning two Bush women outside an event. Witness accounts confirm Talis’ story and he defeated the trumped up charges in court, but was smeared in the media and demonized as a senseless brute. The Simon Weisenthal Center accused Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and its founder Richard Gage of being violent extremists. In the Barack Obama, critics are falsely called racists, terrorists, and extremists if they show even legitimate dissent with his policies. tricks.The Holocaust museum shooting, Ft. Hood shooting, Underwear Bomber, Texas Capital gun firing, Joe Stack’s crash into the Austin IRS building, Pentagon shooting, etc. are all exploited events utilized to crush independent thought. We should challenge the status quo since their lies are being exposed for all to see. People are tired of being lied to. The truth about the new world order, 9/11, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, Operation Ajax, and the global elite is being made manifest globally. Glen Beck recently promoted the lie that our waters aren't contiminated in high level. Flouride, even birth control pills have poisoned our waters for years in New York plus nationwide.
The EU approves a GM potato and people are opposing this measure. Some believe that the introduction of a genetically modified potato in Europe risks the development of human diseases that fail to respond to antibiotics. The German chemical giant BASF this week won approval from the European Commission commercial growing of a starchy potato with a gene that could resist antibiotics useful in the fight against illnesses such as tuberculosis. Farms in germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, and the Czech Republic may plant the potato for industrial use, with part of the tuber fed to cattle, according to BASF. BASF fought a 13 year battle to win approval for Amflora. Yet, other EU member states like Italy and Austria (and anti-GM campaigners) angrily attacked the move. They claimed that it could result in a health disaster. During the regulatory tussle over the potato, the EU's pharmaceutical regulator had expressed concerns about its potential to interfere with the efficacy of antibiotics on infections that develop multiple resistance to other antibiotics (which is a growing problem in human and veterinary medicine). Amflora contains a gene that produce an enzyme which generally confers resistance to several antibiotics, including kanaymcin, neomycin, buitrosin, and gentamicin. The antibiotics could become "extremely important" to treat otherwise multi-resistant infections and tuberculosis, the European Medicines Authority (EMA) warned. Drug resistance is part of the explanation for the resurgence of TB, which infects eight million people worldwide every year. "In the absence of an effective therapy, infectious Multiple Drug Resistant TB patients will continue to spread the disease, producing new infections with MDR-TB strains," an EMA spokesman said. "Until we introduce a new drug with demonstrated activity against MDR strains, this aspect of the TB epidemic could explode at an exponential level." The European Commision approved it (after member states become deadlocaked on the potato's approval) for use in industries such as paper production, saying it would save energy, water, and chemicals. Once the starch has been removed, the skins can be fed animals, whose meat would not have to be labelled as GM. The EC's decision was backed by the European Food Safety Authority (Efsa). The EC said that there was no good reason for withholding approval. Health and consumer policy commissioner John Dalli said that: "... Responsible innovation will be my guiding principle when dealing with innovative technologies." Stringent controls would ensure none of the tubers were left in the ground, ensuring altered genes did not escape into the environment. Opponents fear that bacteria isnide the guts of animals fed the GM potato, whichcan cause human diseases may develop resistance to antibiotics. Some member states were furious. "Not only are we against this decision, but we want to underscore that we will not allow the questioning of member states' sovereignty on this matter," said Italy's Agriculture Minister, Luca Zaia. Austria said it would ban cultivation of the potato within its borders, while France said it would ask an expert panel for further research. Campaigners accused Brussels of failing to follow the precautionary principle. Friends of the Earth's Heike Moldenhauer said that: "...The commissioner whose job is to protect consumers has, in one of his first decisions, ignored public opinion and safety concerns to please the world's biggest chemical company..." Campaigners suspect Brussels in favor of the widespread planting of GM corps despite opposition by some member states. Yesterday, it was also announced its intention to allow states more leeway in backing GM organisms.
By Timothy
No comments:
Post a Comment