There has been some that want to expose the CIA, the KKK, and the USA connection. The CIA done covert actions before. The White House and Congress have legitimized the Ku Klan Klan to operate globally. That is because the CIA is nothing more than an Invisible Empire of the KKK that once did massive terror attacks in the South and Midwest. The CIA did terrorism globally just like the Klan burned crosses (which disrespects Christianity). The CIA today is committing many crimes against foreigners. The Klan then and now did crimes against minorities, Americans of color, immigrants, etc. The Klan acted as viligantes acted as above the law. While, the CIA is an agnet of the Americans doing crimes under the guise of the law or national security. The CIA's crimes are in violation of the Constitution and it's funded heavily by Congress. The Ku Klux Klan was founded shortly after the end of the U.S. Civil War. Klansman concealed their identities behind flowing white robes and white hoods as they terrorized the newly emancipated blacks to keep them from voting or to drive them from their property. The CIA have many people that have no fear of the consequences of their actions (as Plato's Republic described so-called moral people). The CIA's acts are similar to the Hitler's Gestapo, and Stalin's NKVD. Some Presidents have authorized criminal acts without public discussion before. One example is how LBJ ordered the CIA to meddle in Chile's election to help Eduardo Frei become president. If the American people knew about it in high levels, they would oppose it. The CIA for decades used different tactics of violating voting rights of people or elections in Italy, Lebanon, Indonesia, The Philippines, Japan, Nepal, Laos, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Portugal, Australia, Jamaica, Panama, Nicaragua, Haiti, among other countries. This was proven by the book "Rogue State" as written by William Blum. Eisenhower allowed the CIA to kill people in Iran in 1953 and Nixon allowed the CIA to support the evil coup d'etat in 1973. Similar actsions have occured in Cuba, Ghana, Indonesia, Guatemala, East Germany, etc. Then, hundreds of military bases are built worldwide to spread Western empire power. Is it any wonder Americans so often ask the question, “Why do they hate us?” As historian Arnold Toynbee wrote in 1961, “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway; and, since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been more numerous than the rich, Rome’s policy made for inequality, for injustice, and for the least happiness of the greatest number.” The Klan and the CIA act in secret. The Klan and CIA have other similarities that threaten humanity. Both should be condemned and opposed.
Some want President Barack Obama to promote good science by promoting adult stem cell research.
Obama said that he will base funding decisions on evidence and restore science in its rightful palce. A widely heralded scientific breakthrough gives him the chance to turn his airy rhetoric into solid action. President Barack Obama and other politicans who minimize the value of early human life are trying to make us support the dangerous, non-effective action of embryonic stem cell research. This issue is a new wedge issue. For years, many of these self-righteous politicans have hurled stones at their pro-life opponents who advocated ethical adult stem cell research accusing them of cruelly standing in the way of cures. Senator John Edwards in his vice Presidential campaign back in 2004 said that: "...People like Christopher Reeve will get up out of that wheelchair and walk again." Yet, no cures have been found via ESCs. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was wrong to say that embryonic stem cell research hold the biblical power to cure. These claims are false. It's a snake oil campiagn greased the skids for hundreds of millions of federal plus state tax dollars to be dumped into the black hole of embryonic stem cell research during a time of economic crisis. A federal judge on August 23 granted a temporary halting of such illegal and prodigal research. This is based on a lawsuit brought by several adult stem cell researchers, the Christian Medical Association, and others. News reports recently heralded a landmark breakthrough. Scientists are now producing apparently safe, efficient and effective alternatives to human embryonic stem cells, using induced pluripotent stem cells, or iPS cells. Compared to the speculative, controversial and dangerous embryonic stem cell research that Mr. Obama has insisted on funding illegally, iPS cell and adult stem cell research is a cheaper, faster, safer, more efficient and quicker path to real cures for real patients. So, with iPS research, embroyonic stem cell research is obsolete. The President can accept or reject the real evidence. Real science without junk science should be used to help people out. People should have ethical and effective stem cell research as the best hope for real patients.
The New York Times tries to defend assassinations. They believe that the U.S. government can assassinate anyone for any reason whatsoever. NY Times ironically acts like it's for liberalism. America has no right to assassinate whomever it pelases. The only restriction that the Times have is that the President should be required to have his select of murder victims rubber stamped by a secret court like the one that now approves 99.99 percent of all electronic eavesdroppiong requests. The apologia for killing begins with a blatant lie about the U.S. assassination program using missiles fired from CIA operated drone aircraft flying along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. The Times claims, citing official US government sources: “The drone program has been effective, killing more than 400 Al Qaeda militants this year alone, according to American officials, but fewer than 10 noncombatants.” Yet, the Pakistani government officials said that the civilians killed by drone attacks in 2009 alone was more than 700. There is an even higher figure this year as the Obama administration has rained missiles and bombs on the Afghanistan Pakistan border region. There is a report in the Pakistani newspaper called Dawn said that: "...For each Al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorist killed by US drones, 140 innocent Pakistanis also had to die. Over 90 per cent of those killed in the deadly missile strikes were civilians, claim authorities.” So, the Times editors can't be unaware of these well known figures. Their own journalists have reported that the civilian death toll from U.S. missile strikes in Pakistan of some 500 by April 2009 and 100 to 500 more through April 2010. They lie shammelessly and deliberately in order to conceal the significance of their endorsement of blatant and widespread killing. The editorial from the NY Times claims that the U.S. drone missile attacks are legal under international law as apart of self defense. This is rejected by human rights groups and legal experts (except paid apologists for the CIA and the Pentagon). The United States is not at war with Pakistan, Yemen, or Somalia, but U.S. missiles have struck the terriroty of all of these countries and murdered their citizens. In a 29-page report to the United Nations Human Rights Council in June, the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, Philip Alston, rejected the doctrine of “preemptive self-defense” employed by the Bush and Obama administrations, as well as the state of Israel, and declared that a targeted killing outside actual warfare “is almost never likely to be legal.” In an accompanying statement, Alston pointed out the consequences if such a doctrine were to become universal. He declared: “If invoked by other states, in pursuit of those they deem to be terrorists and to have attacked them, it would cause chaos.” The Times concedes, “it is not within the power of a commander in chief to simply declare anyone anywhere a combatant and kill them, without the slightest advance independent oversight.” The editorial argues that such arbitrary killings can be prevented through procedural safeguards of a purely cosmetic character. These would include the Obama administration making public “its standards for putting people on terrorist or assassination lists,” limiting targets to “only people who are actively planning or participating in terror, or who are leaders of Al Qaeda or the Taliban”; capturing instead of killing, where possible; and “oversight outside the administration,” i.e., the aforementioned judicial review by a body like the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Yes, if only the Nazis had followed “proper procedures.” You can't put liberal justificaitons for crimes in U.S. imperialism. You should attack innocent people on foreign soil against those that don't threaten you at all. The Times editorial admitted that the government to kill Anwar al-Awlaki without due process is wrong since he's an American citizen. He's the Muslim cleric who lives in Ymen. Awlaki has been targeted for assassination on criteria that are secret and unreviewable. The Justice Department believes that they have the state secrets privilege to quash a lawsuit brought by the ACLU (on behalf of Awlaki's father) that seeks to compel the govenrment to justify or rescind the death sentence. There has been no public evidence that Awlaki engaged in terrorist acts. Awlaki is an advocate of Islamic fundamentalism. And as the Timesitself admits, “If the United States starts killing every Islamic radical who has called for jihad, there will be no end to the violence.” But the editors are nonetheless willing to place their confidence in the Obama administration, even to the point of giving it powers of life and death over citizens of the US and other countries alike. The Times editorial promotes cynicism. It claims to promote imperiaist barbarism. Open reactionaries like the Wall Street Jounal and FOX News display their lboodlust for imperialism unashamedly. The liberals in the Times show hypocritical moralizing and legalistic deception. The consequences for humanity are the same, which is death unless people stop it.
Hosts from the view walk off the set in response to Bill O'Reilly's extreme comments on Muslims. The discussion was heated since O'Reilly is a polarizing figure. He talked about the Ground Zero Mosque distraction. Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar talk of the set, because of the controversial discussion with Bill O'Reilly. Both Goldberg and Behar were angry, because O'Reilly said that Muslims attacked us on September 11, 2001. In his mind, this is the reason that the mosque shouldn't be build near Ground Zero even though Muslims died in 9/11 as victims of the attacks. Also, Muslims didn't attack us in 9/11, but radical extreme with help from the governmental/intellligence community (since that community helped to create the modern al-Qaeda network in the first place. O'Reilly ignores how the FBI worked with one hijacker, how British Intelligence helped to found plus fund the Muslim Brotherhood, how Mossad agents weredancing and cheering when the attack occured, how NORAD stood down, or how the CIA tracked the hijackers and did nothing about it). O'Reilly even admitted that Muslims have the right to build the community center, but they still shouldn't do it which is contradictory. Bill O'Reilly doesn't believe in private property rights in the case of Muslims near ground Zero. He opposed the First Amendment before by once saying that who oppose the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq to shut up. In September 2010, Bill O'Reilly tried to connect the Ground Zero imam Feisal Abdul Rauf to the truth movement by linking him to Faiz Khan. Khan was a Muslim scholar an educator who was a first responder on September 11, 2001. Khan participated in 2 two memorial services for the victims of 9/11 (and is involved with the NY group Muslims Against Terrorism). Feisal Abdul Rauf worked with the FBI on its "counterterrorism" effort in March of 2003 and has engaged in conversations with the Council on Foreign Relations. O'Reilly said that he would restrict Khan's freedom of movement for the crime of declaring 9/11 as an inside job. Khan should not be allowed with ten miles of Ground Zero according to Bill OReilly (he's a teleprompter reader). Of course, Bill O'Reilly is no friend of the Bill of Rights. I wouldn't walked of the stage, but I see where Goldberg and Behar was coming from. An authoritarian like Bill O'Reilly embrace disgraceful views and people like that should be opposed by the pen and by words.
Secret Societies are real. Freemasonry is definitely a group that has tenets that are contrary to mainstream Christianity as people already realize. God in Masonry is very much either impersonal or valuely called the Great Architect of the Universe. Yet, God in Christianity is the Father (Jesus Christ is called God in Christianity. The Holy Spirit is God) and he's very personal toward his creation. Masonry views Jesus in many instances as a teacher equal to Muhammad, Buddha, and Zoroaster, yet not the Messiah of the world. Freemasonry uses deception in its lower degrees, while omitting its true agenda, which is only shown in its highest degees. Albert Pike admitted this fact too and he was a 33rd Degree Freemason. Freemasonry teaches that man is brought into the Light by doing rituals like blood oaths and other occult ceremonies. Yet, the Bible, especially in the New Testament, says that God saves man alone through faith via grace. Freemasonry is portrayed as the foundation of all religion and it is built on Naturalism, a system of belief that makes human nature and human reason supreme in all things. Dr. Father Francisco (a Jesuit) was a Freemason and supported the Revolution in Costa Rica. There has been new information on the Zeeitgeist movement and the Venus Project. The Venus Project members admits to have UN connections. Roxanne Meadows is from the The VenusProject.com. Roxanne said that: "...We have made personal contacts with some people who are in the U.N." Ken Keyes wrote a whole book called "Planethood" that wanted the U.N. to fix the planet under the guise of an one world government for the Earth. Fresco attended to a Congress called "Inspirational Days" in June of 2010. The meeting was organized by globalist Mikhail Gorbachev's foundation called Green Cross International. The Clube of Budapest was created by Ervin Laszio and Aurelio Peccei, also founder of the Club of Rome. Ervin attended to the congress and talked as a main speaker with Jacque Fresco. Roxanne admitted that: "We spent time with Laszlo." Laszlo seemed to not have much interest. She said that she wanted an audience with Gorbachev. Jacque supported the UN Charter. She said that she meet at the Queen Beatrix's Palace to talk about the 10th anniversary of the U.N. Earth Charter. Such groups have pro-eugenics ideologies. So, the Venus Project is supported by many members of the elite. So, the Venus Project and the Zeitgeist movement are movements that are supported by the elite since the elite hated mainstream Christianity (and national sovereignity).
By Timothy
No comments:
Post a Comment