| Question Everything!Everything!! |
Welcome to Truth, FREEDOM OR ANARCHY,Campaign of Conscience. , is an alternative media and news site that is dedicated to the truth, true journalism and the truth movement. The articles, ideas, quotes, books and movies are here to let everyone know the truth about our universe. The truth will set us free, it will enlighten, inspire, awaken and unite us. Armed with the truth united we stand, for peace, freedom, health and happiness for all
Question Everything!
MEN OF PEACE
"I don't know how to save the world. I don't have the answers or The Answer. I hold no secret knowledge as to how to fix the mistakes of generations past and present. I only know that without compassion and respect for all Earth's inhabitants, none of us will survive - nor will we deserve to." Leonard Peltier
Monday, June 29, 2015
Be the Best Saboteur You Can Be
Be the Best Saboteur You Can Be
1. There is no conservative party
Governor Haley and Al Sharpton
There is a Republican Party. The purpose of the party and its politicians, much like that of its Democratic counterpart, is to obtain money and privileges for its major donors. That doesn't mean that its members don't have other ideals and agendas, but Republican politicians who rise high enough come from an urban and suburban establishment that is more liberal than its base.
Expecting them to care as much about your issues as you do is unrealistic.
They will only do the right thing insofar as it helps them
A. Get control of money
B. Advance their careers
C. Become popular
And this is a good thing. It means that they're controllable. It means that the Democrats are also controllable. And this is how the left took over the Democratic Party.
The only way to interact with the large body of politicians is through the carrot and the stick. The "destructive" Republican saboteurs the establishment complains about, whatever their motives, are serve as the stick, undermining and sabotaging efforts to conduct business as usual.
The only way conservatives can get anything done now is by threatening business as usual.
Washington D.C. is never going to be the solution, but to the extent that its business as usual is threatened, sabotaged and held hostage, it will have trouble putting its boot on ordinary people. Until the Republican establishment changes its ways, populist saboteurs are the best conservative weapon.
Don't expect them to do the right thing. Don't be disappointed when they don't. And certainly don't expect them to solve all this.
The only way they will ever do the right thing is if you have leverage over them.
2. Fight the small stuff
You don't have to think in terms of a national movement. You don't even have to think in terms of an organization. Those are things that we need, but you can fight the left in small ways at home.
I'm not talking about Sign X or donate to Y.
Just obstruct any liberal initiative, policy or program in your community. It doesn't matter what. It doesn't matter if it's innocuous. It doesn't matter if you agree with it.
Undermine it on principle. If you can, vote it down. Encourage others to vote it down. If you can't, look for ways to tie it in red tape by attaching other agendas to it.
The left wins its biggest victories at the planning stage. Its activists come early and stay late. They propose their plans, rig meetings, use kids and the elderly as human shields, and get their way. They are not used to any real opposition. Particularly the kind that doesn't bluster, but finds ways to tie their proposals in knots, to make them expensive and drag them out as long as possible.
Oppose them when you can. Concern troll them when you can't.
If you don't have that kind of position, think of the origins of the term 'sabotage'. Workers threw their shoes into machines and stopped the machine. Don't do anything illegal. Don't do anything that will get you fired.
But if you have the opportunity to make a liberal program work badly, if you have a legal way to put more stress on it, to tie up the energy and time of the people running it, to make it worse... do it.
We're the underdogs. We're the political guerrillas. This is not our system. It's their system.
Our job is to make it run as badly as possible.
Henry David Thoreau wrote that there's always injustice in government just as there's always friction in a machine. It's when injustice becomes dominant in government, then friction has its own machine.
The left's friction is now the machine. Get your shoes in the machine. It already runs badly, make it run worse. It already costs too much, make it cost more. You are now the friction. With enough friction, the machine breaks down.
That's part of what the left did to us. It dragged down our government and culture. It poked a thousand holes in everything. It made it too tiresome and wearying to go on doing this and that. Morale withered, confidence broke down and the left took over.
Now it's their turn to be on the receiving end.
I'm not going to give the Mario Savio speech...
"There's a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart that you can't take part! You can't even passively take part! And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus -- and you've got to make it stop! And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it -- that unless you're free the machine will be prevented from working at all!"
That's for younger people. It's for a mass movement.
But you can wear down the machine in a thousand different ways without risk. You don't have to throw your bodies on the gears. You just have to be a wholly legal burden on it and a pain in the ass of the people running it... and especially the people planning it.
The big stuff begins with the little stuff. When you fight the little stuff, the big stuff starts breaking down.
3. Deny legitimacy to the system
Liberals like to crow that ObamaCare is the law of the land. Now it's gay marriage. Tomorrow it'll be a ban on the Dukes of Hazzard.
All that implies legitimacy, order, a legal system. And that's not what we have.
What we have is a Supreme Court and a White House that acts with brazen illegality. ObamaCare was illegally passed. It was illegally preserved.
No matter how many judges sign off on it, it has no legitimacy. It will never have any legitimacy.
America is built on the simple premise that no system can be more legitimate than its natural laws and founding premises. It does not matter how many judges or politicians try to suspend the First or Second Amendments. All they are doing is removing their own legitimacy.
When a system acts illegally, then its dictates are not the law of the land, they are the law of force.
ObamaCare is coercion. Forcing people to participate in gay marriages is coercion. The FHA ruling is coercion. We may be compelled into compliance, but compulsion is all it is. It isn't law or justice.
The distinction is important.
When we follow the law, we do so because it is right. When we are coerced, we are at gunpoint by an illegitimate system. Those who compel us are not any different than criminals.
Not only is the system illegitimate, but it is also inconsistent, though it claims there is equality under the law, is favors some at the expense of others.
The system is not only illegal, it is also hypocritical and corrupt. That must be emphasized at every turn.
Liberals maintain a narrative that their way is the inevitable path of progress. We know the truth. Their way has been tried and it failed a thousand times. The only thing inevitable is their eventual failure. Their systems will always be abusive, dishonest and corrupt.
They will always turn undemocratic no matter how they start out. They will always turn to coercion.
When we act and when we talk it is vitally important that we distinguish between the legitimate laws we follow and the illegitimate laws we comply with.
This may seem like a technicality, but it's a technicality that tyrannies have fallen on.
Every liberal victory is not a triumph. It is another pile of dirt on their own graves. It is another straw on the back of the camel. It is another demonstration that they are corrupt and illegitimate. Their latest victories were gained by abusing the process. They will in the long run lose them just as criminals eventually lose their loot. They have not defeated us. They have corrupted themselves.
4. We're not done
Every conservative these days seems to have a tipping point for when America will end. None of them are real.
This country was built out of a tiny fraction of the territory and population it holds today. It was built by a handful of people organizing and rousing a movement that spread to a minority of the population at the time.
If the revolution were happening today, it would look a lot like the way it looked then, with major cities in the hands of the establishment and the Loyalists and a handful of farmers that even their formally trained commanders held in contempt fighting against them and the might of an empire.
That's not coincidence. It's the whole of human history.
During the Revolutionary War, the entire rebel population of America would be outnumbered by the residents of Manhattan today.
Demographically outnumbered? They had it worse.
Economic collapse? They had it worse.
America isn't over until it's over. It will take a long time to happen. At some point the country will be completely unrecognizable, but that's relative. Would Washington have recognized America in 1952? Or even 1882? America has always been changing. We can't change it back, but we can change it to.
That's the real battle.
Contrary to what some conservatives like to believe, the left did not suddenly show up here in 1963 or 1905 and disrupt a formerly peaceful country. The left has always been here. It's a part of us.
No people and no country are untouched by evil. It's only a matter of what form it takes. But in any form, we know it by its destructive instincts, its facade of righteousness that poorly conceals a lust for power. Americans have fought it before. Americans have won.
It's big now, but it's not nearly as big as we think.
5. A little rhyme and reason
I'll close with a few selected lines from a children's nursery rhyme from the days of the big bad USSR that once threatened the world, before folding under the pressure of its people who found the courage to stand up to it.
It's written for children... but like much that was written in the USSR, it had a message for adults.
The Monster Cockroach
Kornei Chukovsky
To the picnic they all come,
Munching candy and cake,
In a very merry mood,
For a day at the lake.
Then suddenly they grow numb and still!
Who's that coming down the hill?!
A fierce and dreadful Roach!
A mean cock-cock-Cockroach!
"Don't you dare to approach!"
He roars, he rages:
"I'll lock you in cages!
And swallow you ALL
"Or with a twitch of my mustache,
I'll turn you all to succotash!"
Alas! Not one dares to fight,
Every bird and beast take flight!
Now the Lion climbs a hill;
From there he speaks his royal will:
"We must regain our happy land!
Against the brute we'll take a stand!"
"And to the warrior who fears not this foe,
Who this monster will overthrow,
To him I'll give a juicy bone
And the finest pine cone!"
The creatures in one eager crowd,
Surge forth and cry out loud:
"We do not fear this nasty foe,
With tooth and claw
We'll lay him low!"
And they all rush to do battle-
Birds, fish, fowl, and cattle.
But the Roach moves his mustache
And bellows: "SUCCOTASH!"
One and all they beat a retreat.
The enemy they don't defeat!
Into the fields and woods they dash-
Terrorized by the Roach's mustache!
The Lion shouts: "What a disgrace!
Come back! Come out and show your face!
Pin the enemy with your horns-
Bulls, rhinoceros, unicorns!"
But each in his hiding place stays,
And wails: "Horns aren't cheap these days..."
And our skin is precious too-
What you ask we cannot do!"
Caught in nettles the crocodiles twitch,
And the elephants get caught in a ditch.
Lo! All that's heard now
Is the flow of tears;
All that's seen now
Is the trembling of their ears!
To the Cockroach they all yield-
He's now lord o'er wood and field.
He struts about among them,
Rubbing his tummy,
Looks at their young ones
And says: "How very yummy!"
The poor, poor parents
Are in distress.
Their dear babes
They hug and caress:
For what mother could give up her child,
Her baby tame or her baby wild?!
So that the monster could devour
Her precious crumb, her little flower!
So mommies and daddies moan and cry
As they bid their infants good-bye!
But now we see another picture:
a flighty flying nimble creature-
A carefree Sparrow lands with a trill
right there on the Roach's hill,
And for a moment all are mute
Fearing the mustachioed brute:
"A monster?! Where?!
"It's a roach, a roach, a wee-bit roach,
A little beetle you fear to approach.
Look! It's a midge a mite,
A bug that can't even bite!
For our trouble we're to blame!
What a shame!
What a shame!"
The Hippo then comes forth
With slow pace and a worried face,
Muttering in an anxious way:
"Please go away, go away!
Your words will make him very mad,
He may think of something very bad!
Then the Hippo falls still,
Surprised by a sudden trill...
The sparrow bends her dainty neck
Peck, peck, peck-
Not a smidgen, not a speck!
The roach is swallowed in a flash,
All of him and his mustache!
by Daniel Greenfield
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
1. There is no conservative party
Governor Haley and Al Sharpton
There is a Republican Party. The purpose of the party and its politicians, much like that of its Democratic counterpart, is to obtain money and privileges for its major donors. That doesn't mean that its members don't have other ideals and agendas, but Republican politicians who rise high enough come from an urban and suburban establishment that is more liberal than its base.
Expecting them to care as much about your issues as you do is unrealistic.
They will only do the right thing insofar as it helps them
A. Get control of money
B. Advance their careers
C. Become popular
And this is a good thing. It means that they're controllable. It means that the Democrats are also controllable. And this is how the left took over the Democratic Party.
The only way to interact with the large body of politicians is through the carrot and the stick. The "destructive" Republican saboteurs the establishment complains about, whatever their motives, are serve as the stick, undermining and sabotaging efforts to conduct business as usual.
The only way conservatives can get anything done now is by threatening business as usual.
Washington D.C. is never going to be the solution, but to the extent that its business as usual is threatened, sabotaged and held hostage, it will have trouble putting its boot on ordinary people. Until the Republican establishment changes its ways, populist saboteurs are the best conservative weapon.
Don't expect them to do the right thing. Don't be disappointed when they don't. And certainly don't expect them to solve all this.
The only way they will ever do the right thing is if you have leverage over them.
2. Fight the small stuff
You don't have to think in terms of a national movement. You don't even have to think in terms of an organization. Those are things that we need, but you can fight the left in small ways at home.
I'm not talking about Sign X or donate to Y.
Just obstruct any liberal initiative, policy or program in your community. It doesn't matter what. It doesn't matter if it's innocuous. It doesn't matter if you agree with it.
Undermine it on principle. If you can, vote it down. Encourage others to vote it down. If you can't, look for ways to tie it in red tape by attaching other agendas to it.
The left wins its biggest victories at the planning stage. Its activists come early and stay late. They propose their plans, rig meetings, use kids and the elderly as human shields, and get their way. They are not used to any real opposition. Particularly the kind that doesn't bluster, but finds ways to tie their proposals in knots, to make them expensive and drag them out as long as possible.
Oppose them when you can. Concern troll them when you can't.
If you don't have that kind of position, think of the origins of the term 'sabotage'. Workers threw their shoes into machines and stopped the machine. Don't do anything illegal. Don't do anything that will get you fired.
But if you have the opportunity to make a liberal program work badly, if you have a legal way to put more stress on it, to tie up the energy and time of the people running it, to make it worse... do it.
We're the underdogs. We're the political guerrillas. This is not our system. It's their system.
Our job is to make it run as badly as possible.
Henry David Thoreau wrote that there's always injustice in government just as there's always friction in a machine. It's when injustice becomes dominant in government, then friction has its own machine.
The left's friction is now the machine. Get your shoes in the machine. It already runs badly, make it run worse. It already costs too much, make it cost more. You are now the friction. With enough friction, the machine breaks down.
That's part of what the left did to us. It dragged down our government and culture. It poked a thousand holes in everything. It made it too tiresome and wearying to go on doing this and that. Morale withered, confidence broke down and the left took over.
Now it's their turn to be on the receiving end.
I'm not going to give the Mario Savio speech...
"There's a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart that you can't take part! You can't even passively take part! And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus -- and you've got to make it stop! And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it -- that unless you're free the machine will be prevented from working at all!"
That's for younger people. It's for a mass movement.
But you can wear down the machine in a thousand different ways without risk. You don't have to throw your bodies on the gears. You just have to be a wholly legal burden on it and a pain in the ass of the people running it... and especially the people planning it.
The big stuff begins with the little stuff. When you fight the little stuff, the big stuff starts breaking down.
3. Deny legitimacy to the system
Liberals like to crow that ObamaCare is the law of the land. Now it's gay marriage. Tomorrow it'll be a ban on the Dukes of Hazzard.
All that implies legitimacy, order, a legal system. And that's not what we have.
What we have is a Supreme Court and a White House that acts with brazen illegality. ObamaCare was illegally passed. It was illegally preserved.
No matter how many judges sign off on it, it has no legitimacy. It will never have any legitimacy.
America is built on the simple premise that no system can be more legitimate than its natural laws and founding premises. It does not matter how many judges or politicians try to suspend the First or Second Amendments. All they are doing is removing their own legitimacy.
When a system acts illegally, then its dictates are not the law of the land, they are the law of force.
ObamaCare is coercion. Forcing people to participate in gay marriages is coercion. The FHA ruling is coercion. We may be compelled into compliance, but compulsion is all it is. It isn't law or justice.
The distinction is important.
When we follow the law, we do so because it is right. When we are coerced, we are at gunpoint by an illegitimate system. Those who compel us are not any different than criminals.
Not only is the system illegitimate, but it is also inconsistent, though it claims there is equality under the law, is favors some at the expense of others.
The system is not only illegal, it is also hypocritical and corrupt. That must be emphasized at every turn.
Liberals maintain a narrative that their way is the inevitable path of progress. We know the truth. Their way has been tried and it failed a thousand times. The only thing inevitable is their eventual failure. Their systems will always be abusive, dishonest and corrupt.
They will always turn undemocratic no matter how they start out. They will always turn to coercion.
When we act and when we talk it is vitally important that we distinguish between the legitimate laws we follow and the illegitimate laws we comply with.
This may seem like a technicality, but it's a technicality that tyrannies have fallen on.
Every liberal victory is not a triumph. It is another pile of dirt on their own graves. It is another straw on the back of the camel. It is another demonstration that they are corrupt and illegitimate. Their latest victories were gained by abusing the process. They will in the long run lose them just as criminals eventually lose their loot. They have not defeated us. They have corrupted themselves.
4. We're not done
Every conservative these days seems to have a tipping point for when America will end. None of them are real.
This country was built out of a tiny fraction of the territory and population it holds today. It was built by a handful of people organizing and rousing a movement that spread to a minority of the population at the time.
If the revolution were happening today, it would look a lot like the way it looked then, with major cities in the hands of the establishment and the Loyalists and a handful of farmers that even their formally trained commanders held in contempt fighting against them and the might of an empire.
That's not coincidence. It's the whole of human history.
During the Revolutionary War, the entire rebel population of America would be outnumbered by the residents of Manhattan today.
Demographically outnumbered? They had it worse.
Economic collapse? They had it worse.
America isn't over until it's over. It will take a long time to happen. At some point the country will be completely unrecognizable, but that's relative. Would Washington have recognized America in 1952? Or even 1882? America has always been changing. We can't change it back, but we can change it to.
That's the real battle.
Contrary to what some conservatives like to believe, the left did not suddenly show up here in 1963 or 1905 and disrupt a formerly peaceful country. The left has always been here. It's a part of us.
No people and no country are untouched by evil. It's only a matter of what form it takes. But in any form, we know it by its destructive instincts, its facade of righteousness that poorly conceals a lust for power. Americans have fought it before. Americans have won.
It's big now, but it's not nearly as big as we think.
5. A little rhyme and reason
I'll close with a few selected lines from a children's nursery rhyme from the days of the big bad USSR that once threatened the world, before folding under the pressure of its people who found the courage to stand up to it.
It's written for children... but like much that was written in the USSR, it had a message for adults.
The Monster Cockroach
Kornei Chukovsky
To the picnic they all come,
Munching candy and cake,
In a very merry mood,
For a day at the lake.
Then suddenly they grow numb and still!
Who's that coming down the hill?!
A fierce and dreadful Roach!
A mean cock-cock-Cockroach!
"Don't you dare to approach!"
He roars, he rages:
"I'll lock you in cages!
And swallow you ALL
"Or with a twitch of my mustache,
I'll turn you all to succotash!"
Alas! Not one dares to fight,
Every bird and beast take flight!
Now the Lion climbs a hill;
From there he speaks his royal will:
"We must regain our happy land!
Against the brute we'll take a stand!"
"And to the warrior who fears not this foe,
Who this monster will overthrow,
To him I'll give a juicy bone
And the finest pine cone!"
The creatures in one eager crowd,
Surge forth and cry out loud:
"We do not fear this nasty foe,
With tooth and claw
We'll lay him low!"
And they all rush to do battle-
Birds, fish, fowl, and cattle.
But the Roach moves his mustache
And bellows: "SUCCOTASH!"
One and all they beat a retreat.
The enemy they don't defeat!
Into the fields and woods they dash-
Terrorized by the Roach's mustache!
The Lion shouts: "What a disgrace!
Come back! Come out and show your face!
Pin the enemy with your horns-
Bulls, rhinoceros, unicorns!"
But each in his hiding place stays,
And wails: "Horns aren't cheap these days..."
And our skin is precious too-
What you ask we cannot do!"
Caught in nettles the crocodiles twitch,
And the elephants get caught in a ditch.
Lo! All that's heard now
Is the flow of tears;
All that's seen now
Is the trembling of their ears!
To the Cockroach they all yield-
He's now lord o'er wood and field.
He struts about among them,
Rubbing his tummy,
Looks at their young ones
And says: "How very yummy!"
The poor, poor parents
Are in distress.
Their dear babes
They hug and caress:
For what mother could give up her child,
Her baby tame or her baby wild?!
So that the monster could devour
Her precious crumb, her little flower!
So mommies and daddies moan and cry
As they bid their infants good-bye!
But now we see another picture:
a flighty flying nimble creature-
A carefree Sparrow lands with a trill
right there on the Roach's hill,
And for a moment all are mute
Fearing the mustachioed brute:
"A monster?! Where?!
"It's a roach, a roach, a wee-bit roach,
A little beetle you fear to approach.
Look! It's a midge a mite,
A bug that can't even bite!
For our trouble we're to blame!
What a shame!
What a shame!"
The Hippo then comes forth
With slow pace and a worried face,
Muttering in an anxious way:
"Please go away, go away!
Your words will make him very mad,
He may think of something very bad!
Then the Hippo falls still,
Surprised by a sudden trill...
The sparrow bends her dainty neck
Peck, peck, peck-
Not a smidgen, not a speck!
The roach is swallowed in a flash,
All of him and his mustache!
by Daniel Greenfield
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
Obama: Rockefeller’s man in the White House close to total victory
Obama: Rockefeller’s man in the White House close to total victory
(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)
http://marketplace.mybigcommerce.com/the-matrix-revealed-vol-1-mp3s-pdfs-by-jon-rappoport-mega-info/
Tutored and mentored by David Rockefeller’s intellectual flunkey, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Barack Obama is close to winning his two gold stars for victory—and make no mistake about it, these were his two assignments from the First Globalist Family of Rockefeller:
Obamacare and Obamatrade.
Obamacare was and is a Rockefeller strategy for enforcing the pharmaceutical brand of medicine his ancestors pioneered early in the 20th century.
The US Supreme Court has just papered over an obvious loophole and contradiction in the law, to keep Obamacare intact: “the state exchanges vs. federal exchanges.” No problem. No issue. Suddenly, for the Court, the “original intent” of the law is the prime consideration—whereas original intent has been derided, bombarded, crushed, and ignored when it comes to that little document called the US Constitution.http://www.infowars.com/supreme-court-upholds-all-obamacare-subsidies-in-win-for-obama/
Obama has also won vaunted, slam-dunk, “fast-track authority” on the three Globalist trade bills that will shortly arrive for Congressional approval, including the horrific TPP, which will grant Big Pharma more profits, as well as greater exemption in the matter of poisoning populations with their drugs.
Hope and change? Yes we can? Faded slogans for the kiddies who, with deplorable, gullible, glazed-over grins, helped put this Globalist front man in the White House.
Will they ever learn? Not a chance.
So…once again, I present my article, written several years ago, during the lead-up to the original Congressional vote that put Obamacare into the books as a binding law.
This is what mainstream reporters didn’t disclose and will never disclose.
The Devastating Truth behind Obamacare:
“I want my Obamacare! I want my Obamacare!”
It’s vital to look at the real meaning of this sinister plan. It’s all about the toxic effects of mainstream medicine. That’s what the sold-out press is refusing to examine.
A year ago, I discussed the case of a young Michigan boy, whose parents had been taken to court three times to force them to submit their child to intensely toxic chemo treatments—despite these facts:
The boy’s latest scans revealed no sign of cancer; the drugs that would be forced on him can cause cancer; the drugs have not been approved to treat children.
And I warned: this is what waits for you and your children, up the line.
The “share and care” humanitarian mask will be peeled away. The US Dept. of Health and Human Services will create, as ordered, a complete list of approved treatments for every disease-label under the sun. And everyone in the insurance plan will be forced to take what the doctor tells them to take.
For a bonus, unapproved treatments will be banned. People and practitioners who try to use alternative treatments will find themselves in trouble.
This is the hidden agenda of Obamacare. This is what it will morph into in the future.
I’m not dreaming or fantasizing. I’ve been following and reporting on the medical cartel for 30 years, and I know the mindset of these people, these doctors, these bureaucrats, these pharmaceutical string-pullers behind the scenes. Obamacare is right up their alley. It’s about control, so it’s an answer to their prayers.
So what do we know about their mainstream medicine, the hospital-based drug-addled modern version?
On July 26, 2000, the Journal of the American Medical Association published a landmark paper by Dr. Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), “Is US health really the best in the world?” In it, Starfield revealed what many people inside the medical establishment already knew: every year, like clockwork, the medical system was killing huge numbers of people.
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2014/02/09/the-starfield-revelations/
Each year in the US, as Dr. Starfield reported, there are:
12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;
7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;
20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;
80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;
106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.
The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000 (a conservative estimate).
This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in America, behind heart disease and cancer.
In the wake of Starfield’s devastating report, other facts came to light: 2.1 million people in America, every year, are hospitalized as a result of reactions to FDA-approved medicines. Annually, 36 million serious adverse reactions to those drugs occur.
So, inclusive health coverage for many more Americans under the Obama Plan means these horrendous figures will rise.
This is the dirty secret.
Obama and his allies are promoting a medical system that is the third leading cause of death in America. It’s that stark and it’s that simple.
The Obama Plan involves appointing an “expert panel” to decide what treatments Americans should be given for what diseases, under the new regime.
Only a certified idiot would assume that, over time, alternative non-mainstream therapies would survive such an ongoing vetting. Hope may spring eternal, but common sense makes it easy to grasp the realities on the ground.
In the long run, alternative therapies will be edged out. Those that remain will be permitted for a narrow range of conditions, or as adjuncts to standard drug treatments and surgery.
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2015/06/17/the-great-tpp-deathtrap-for-india-china/
Chiropractors and acupuncturists, who are temporarily basking in the notion that Obama “really cares,” are in for a very rude awakening. Their careers and practices will be significantly reduced. Not today, not tomorrow, but it will happen.
Doctors, under the Plan, will be telling patients they may not take nutritional supplements while in treatment. This will assume the status of an irreversible edict. In many cases, “while in treatment” will mean years.
What happens to a person, conscripted into the mandated Insurance Plan, who is told by his doctor that he should/must receive a vaccine? Suppose this person says no? What are the consequences? Will he then be labeled a defector? What penalties will he suffer?
Does a diagnosis of cancer imply a patient must submit to chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery? Can these treatments be forced upon him?
Perhaps, in the early days of the Plan, nothing untoward will happen. But then, as time passes, and the system assumes tighter and tighter controls, the hand of government will close around the recalcitrant patient’s neck.
“Take this vaccine. Take this chemo drug. If you don’t, you’re in violation of the rules.”
Doctors, who are an integral part of the Plan, will surely be punished if they give unapproved (alternative) treatments to patients.
And in order to make the Plan operate on a day-to-day basis, the records and bookkeeping data of every health-care practitioner in America will be tracked on government computer networks.
http://drugtopics.modernmedicine.com/formulary-journal/news/ny-may-delay-mandatory-epcs-e-prescribing-1-year?page=full
Every person in America will have a traceable and trackable medical ID package. Government-issued. There is no way around it. The monitoring apparatus can’t work without it.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/federal-biosurveillance-plan-seeking-direct-access-americans
Orwellian consequences lie up the road in the field of psychiatric practice. In case you hadn’t noticed, the invention of “disorders” by committee is the preferred method for “discovering” more and more mental illnesses.
Yet, the science is completely fraudulent. For evidence, consult the many works of psychiatrist Peter Breggin, who has done more than any other person to expose the guts of his own profession. (breggin.com) Breggin establishes that mental disorders are not authoritatively diagnosed by a chemical or biological test. Conclusive tests do not exist. And worse, in this undefined and arbitrary territory, the drugs that follow diagnoses are killers: for example, 300,000 cases of motor brain damage, as a result of the administration of major tranquilizers.
Under the Obama Plan, you can bet your bottom dollar that psychiatric care will eventually become mandatory. A patient suddenly diagnosed with clinical depression or bipolar disease will be told he must take the drugs—and suffer their adverse effects.
Very young children will be given more and more debilitating and dangerous brain drugs.
Under the Obama Plan, it will be very convenient to declare new pandemics every few seasons, because these phony non-epidemics provide an opportunity to herd the sheep into clinics and remind them who is running the show. Go here, take this vaccine; go there, take that drug; the epidemic is endangering the herd, and you must help your brothers and sisters.
Yes, under the Obama Plan, there will be more declared health emergencies, and they will serve to cement the citizen to his new role as eternal patient in the medical march along bleak streets of the future.
Can you perceive the loss of individual freedom implicit in this universal system of health control?
The widespread (and false) assumption is that more medical care for more people is a good thing. That’s what the politicians and the press tell us. That’s what the medical bureaucrats and the drug companies tell us. This is the central piece of brainwashing.
It’s a bald-faced lie. It’s a death-dealing lie.
And now the American people are saddled with it.
Unless the current rebellion against Obamacare expands all over the country.
By Jon Rappoport
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)
http://marketplace.mybigcommerce.com/the-matrix-revealed-vol-1-mp3s-pdfs-by-jon-rappoport-mega-info/
Tutored and mentored by David Rockefeller’s intellectual flunkey, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Barack Obama is close to winning his two gold stars for victory—and make no mistake about it, these were his two assignments from the First Globalist Family of Rockefeller:
Obamacare and Obamatrade.
Obamacare was and is a Rockefeller strategy for enforcing the pharmaceutical brand of medicine his ancestors pioneered early in the 20th century.
The US Supreme Court has just papered over an obvious loophole and contradiction in the law, to keep Obamacare intact: “the state exchanges vs. federal exchanges.” No problem. No issue. Suddenly, for the Court, the “original intent” of the law is the prime consideration—whereas original intent has been derided, bombarded, crushed, and ignored when it comes to that little document called the US Constitution.http://www.infowars.com/supreme-court-upholds-all-obamacare-subsidies-in-win-for-obama/
Obama has also won vaunted, slam-dunk, “fast-track authority” on the three Globalist trade bills that will shortly arrive for Congressional approval, including the horrific TPP, which will grant Big Pharma more profits, as well as greater exemption in the matter of poisoning populations with their drugs.
Hope and change? Yes we can? Faded slogans for the kiddies who, with deplorable, gullible, glazed-over grins, helped put this Globalist front man in the White House.
Will they ever learn? Not a chance.
So…once again, I present my article, written several years ago, during the lead-up to the original Congressional vote that put Obamacare into the books as a binding law.
This is what mainstream reporters didn’t disclose and will never disclose.
The Devastating Truth behind Obamacare:
“I want my Obamacare! I want my Obamacare!”
It’s vital to look at the real meaning of this sinister plan. It’s all about the toxic effects of mainstream medicine. That’s what the sold-out press is refusing to examine.
A year ago, I discussed the case of a young Michigan boy, whose parents had been taken to court three times to force them to submit their child to intensely toxic chemo treatments—despite these facts:
The boy’s latest scans revealed no sign of cancer; the drugs that would be forced on him can cause cancer; the drugs have not been approved to treat children.
And I warned: this is what waits for you and your children, up the line.
The “share and care” humanitarian mask will be peeled away. The US Dept. of Health and Human Services will create, as ordered, a complete list of approved treatments for every disease-label under the sun. And everyone in the insurance plan will be forced to take what the doctor tells them to take.
For a bonus, unapproved treatments will be banned. People and practitioners who try to use alternative treatments will find themselves in trouble.
This is the hidden agenda of Obamacare. This is what it will morph into in the future.
I’m not dreaming or fantasizing. I’ve been following and reporting on the medical cartel for 30 years, and I know the mindset of these people, these doctors, these bureaucrats, these pharmaceutical string-pullers behind the scenes. Obamacare is right up their alley. It’s about control, so it’s an answer to their prayers.
So what do we know about their mainstream medicine, the hospital-based drug-addled modern version?
On July 26, 2000, the Journal of the American Medical Association published a landmark paper by Dr. Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), “Is US health really the best in the world?” In it, Starfield revealed what many people inside the medical establishment already knew: every year, like clockwork, the medical system was killing huge numbers of people.
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2014/02/09/the-starfield-revelations/
Each year in the US, as Dr. Starfield reported, there are:
12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;
7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;
20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;
80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;
106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.
The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000 (a conservative estimate).
This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in America, behind heart disease and cancer.
In the wake of Starfield’s devastating report, other facts came to light: 2.1 million people in America, every year, are hospitalized as a result of reactions to FDA-approved medicines. Annually, 36 million serious adverse reactions to those drugs occur.
So, inclusive health coverage for many more Americans under the Obama Plan means these horrendous figures will rise.
This is the dirty secret.
Obama and his allies are promoting a medical system that is the third leading cause of death in America. It’s that stark and it’s that simple.
The Obama Plan involves appointing an “expert panel” to decide what treatments Americans should be given for what diseases, under the new regime.
Only a certified idiot would assume that, over time, alternative non-mainstream therapies would survive such an ongoing vetting. Hope may spring eternal, but common sense makes it easy to grasp the realities on the ground.
In the long run, alternative therapies will be edged out. Those that remain will be permitted for a narrow range of conditions, or as adjuncts to standard drug treatments and surgery.
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2015/06/17/the-great-tpp-deathtrap-for-india-china/
Chiropractors and acupuncturists, who are temporarily basking in the notion that Obama “really cares,” are in for a very rude awakening. Their careers and practices will be significantly reduced. Not today, not tomorrow, but it will happen.
Doctors, under the Plan, will be telling patients they may not take nutritional supplements while in treatment. This will assume the status of an irreversible edict. In many cases, “while in treatment” will mean years.
What happens to a person, conscripted into the mandated Insurance Plan, who is told by his doctor that he should/must receive a vaccine? Suppose this person says no? What are the consequences? Will he then be labeled a defector? What penalties will he suffer?
Does a diagnosis of cancer imply a patient must submit to chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery? Can these treatments be forced upon him?
Perhaps, in the early days of the Plan, nothing untoward will happen. But then, as time passes, and the system assumes tighter and tighter controls, the hand of government will close around the recalcitrant patient’s neck.
“Take this vaccine. Take this chemo drug. If you don’t, you’re in violation of the rules.”
Doctors, who are an integral part of the Plan, will surely be punished if they give unapproved (alternative) treatments to patients.
And in order to make the Plan operate on a day-to-day basis, the records and bookkeeping data of every health-care practitioner in America will be tracked on government computer networks.
http://drugtopics.modernmedicine.com/formulary-journal/news/ny-may-delay-mandatory-epcs-e-prescribing-1-year?page=full
Every person in America will have a traceable and trackable medical ID package. Government-issued. There is no way around it. The monitoring apparatus can’t work without it.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/federal-biosurveillance-plan-seeking-direct-access-americans
Orwellian consequences lie up the road in the field of psychiatric practice. In case you hadn’t noticed, the invention of “disorders” by committee is the preferred method for “discovering” more and more mental illnesses.
Yet, the science is completely fraudulent. For evidence, consult the many works of psychiatrist Peter Breggin, who has done more than any other person to expose the guts of his own profession. (breggin.com) Breggin establishes that mental disorders are not authoritatively diagnosed by a chemical or biological test. Conclusive tests do not exist. And worse, in this undefined and arbitrary territory, the drugs that follow diagnoses are killers: for example, 300,000 cases of motor brain damage, as a result of the administration of major tranquilizers.
Under the Obama Plan, you can bet your bottom dollar that psychiatric care will eventually become mandatory. A patient suddenly diagnosed with clinical depression or bipolar disease will be told he must take the drugs—and suffer their adverse effects.
Very young children will be given more and more debilitating and dangerous brain drugs.
Under the Obama Plan, it will be very convenient to declare new pandemics every few seasons, because these phony non-epidemics provide an opportunity to herd the sheep into clinics and remind them who is running the show. Go here, take this vaccine; go there, take that drug; the epidemic is endangering the herd, and you must help your brothers and sisters.
Yes, under the Obama Plan, there will be more declared health emergencies, and they will serve to cement the citizen to his new role as eternal patient in the medical march along bleak streets of the future.
Can you perceive the loss of individual freedom implicit in this universal system of health control?
The widespread (and false) assumption is that more medical care for more people is a good thing. That’s what the politicians and the press tell us. That’s what the medical bureaucrats and the drug companies tell us. This is the central piece of brainwashing.
It’s a bald-faced lie. It’s a death-dealing lie.
And now the American people are saddled with it.
Unless the current rebellion against Obamacare expands all over the country.
By Jon Rappoport
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
A Culture Shattered: Part 3,4,5
A Culture Shattered: Part 3
Reimaging Campaign (1990s)
By Debra Rae
http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/2015/06/a-culture-shattered-part-i.html
http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/2015/06/a-culture-shattered-part-2.html
By the 1990s, commonly held cultural definitions had succumbed to political correctness. Belief that diverse cultures can thrive independently of one another in a single, unified society, pluralism served as bridge between absolute truth and relativism. Having progressed from biblical, to modern, to postmodern worldviews, America was nothing if not inclusive.
• 1990s — Reimaging the Military to be Kinder, Gentler
One of President Clinton’s first policies was Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell in the armed forces. Barney Frank introduced an act that decriminalized sodomy in the military, and the Pentagon cleared homosexuals for service. Over time, army briefings classified evangelical Christians and Catholics as religious extremists, and a military brief directed officers to pay close attention, not to troops seeking homosexual gratification, but rather to troops who supported groups said not to share army values — namely, the American Family Association and the Family Research Council.
• 1990s — Reimaging the Marketplace of Ideas using Victim-Victimizer Theory
While the family-friendly Truth in Love Project and Love Won Out Seminar were met with outrage, the Los Angeles Unity-and-Diversity Festival drew accolades. Moreover, the WA Times launched an impactful Human Rights Campaign media blitz acknowledging bisexuality as the “in thing” among teens. Expanding the victim-victimizer theory, Dan Rather portrayed homosexuals as the nation’s most endangered species, and a 60 Minutes participant characterized critics of the gay revolution as “nuts.” Added to the influx of homosexual comedy within the mainstream, publication of Out magazine, Dial-a-Porn services, and gay-favoring ad debuts on national television, close to thirty openly gay characters regularly appeared on primetime TV. In the semblance of inclusiveness, Ellen DeGeneres famously came out, and Roseanne aired a lesbian kiss; in contrast, some years later, traditionalism was deemed so controversial, a marriage-friendly Super Bowl ad was rejected as unfit for public consumption. Really?
• 1990s — Reimaging Public Education to Restructure Society
The National Education Association promoted training to eliminate sexual orientation stereotyping. Tailoring tactics to public schools, gay groups self-identified as “victims.” At a time when schools fell desperately short in academics, the NEA called for a Lesbian and Gay History Month (October) and gay-friendly lessons — e.g., Children of the Rainbow curriculum. No longer Dick and Jane, first graders read Heather Has Two Mommies and Daddy’s Roommate.
Targeting “questioning” youth, the United Way granted four thousand dollars for public school placement of gay-themed Alyson Publications — King and King, for one. On Valentines' Day, four self-identified avengers for “lesbian survival and visibility” handed out explicit pink leaflets to elementary-aged students, and the Sexual Minority Advocacy Council promoted Alyson books for ages five and up in the Seattle School District.
While abstinence programs were ridiculed as archaic, teens had easy access to the blatantly gay WA Blade magazine, not to mention school-based health care clinics ever sensitive to lifestyle-specific concerns. Though only 2.8% of men and 1.4% of women were gay, junior- and senior- high schools offered pro-gay Project 10-type counseling programs. The ten stands for Kinsey’s falsification that gays represented ten percent of the population. So effective was the reimaging campaign in public schools that a Zogby poll reported that two-thirds of America’s high school seniors favored legalization of gay marriage. Clearly, the dialectic had worked.
For the Days of Diversity, Santa Rosa high schools attended a weeklong, extra-curricular program. Fortified by hoopla promising gay-gene research, fourteen sessions urged students to embrace homosexual civil rights. Featuring workshops for twelve-year-olds (and above) on “Sex Options,” “Eroticizing Safer Sex,” and the “Wonderful World of Latex,” the New York Department of Education likewise sponsored a youth conference funded by the Gay Men’s Health Crisis. Displaying rainbow flags, Disney recognized public support of Gay Days and Gay Pride Month (June), marked by gay-themed rings, pins, wristbands, flags, and banners. No more Barbi and Ken; Adam and Steve took center stage.
Dr. Judith Reisman, Ph.D., reported that instructors at New York University assigned “nude body” workshops in which students were instructed to fondle same-sex peers and, for extra credit, to visit a homosexual bar. Compliments of Hot, Sexy, and Safer, Inc., sizzling college classes incorporated “safe sex” instruction. Touting “respect” for diversity (tolerance), liberal hecklers rudely disrupted conservatives Ralph Reed (at NW University) and Pat Buchanan (at Syracuse University), denigrating conservative guest speakers as homophobic, misogynistic, anti-Semitic, and racist. Touted tolerance was, at its best, selective.
• 1990s — Reimaging Government and Law to Favor a Protected Class
First to reach out specifically to the gay political community, President Clinton promised not only to tolerate, but also to advocate on behalf of sexual orientation differences. The President appointed twenty-nine gays to influential positions in his administration and, doing so, established the nation’s first AIDS czar. Claiming June as their own, the LGBT community observed the month with programs, ceremonies, and activities, all sanctioned by Clinton who, by Presidential proclamation, instigated the first annual Gay and Lesbian Pride Month. At taxpayers' expense, a gay dance party rocked the federal building in Washington, D.C. The grateful homosexual lobby reciprocated by gracing the Clintons with millions of dollars in donations.
This was the decade of civil unions. By staging a mass wedding ceremony, the 1993 Gay Rights' March in D.C. demanded gay entrance into the mainstream; and an APA report stopped short of outwardly endorsing pedophilia (1999). The Gay Manifesto insisted on adult sex with children; and the Governor-sanctioned Podlodowski/Mileur Fund, administered by the Pride Foundation, was first to support America’s same-sex couples with children. In the Psychological Bulletin, three academics relinquished politically incorrect terms as “child abuse or molestation” for the presumably more benign label, “adult-child sex.”
While the Civil Rights Amendment Act (1993) recognized homosexuals as a protected class, DOMA was challenged rigorously in American courts. Policy via ordinance in San Francisco required gay-centricity (no exemption for religious opposition). Hawaii’s Supreme Court ruled in favor of issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples (Boeh v Lewin), and the Aaron McKinney case introduced the gay-panic defense. Warning about the “real threat of violence” against gays, Attorney General Janet Reno broadened the law. While hate-crimes legislation thwarted attacks against gays, gay-rights opponents declined to testify in courts of law for fear of intimidation and threats of personal harm. Off message retaliatory crimes against opponents of the gay agenda failed to qualify as news.
• 1990s — Reimaging Medicine Attune to a High Risk, Yet Politically-Protected Minority
The National Cancer Institute’s federally funded search for a gay gene inspired reimaging in the medical/health arena. A 1993 study supposedly demonstrated genetic determinism for homosexuality; however, vital information that male participants lacked the genetic marker allegedly linked to homosexual behavior was conveniently withheld. Although a 1998 Psychological Reports article shaved an estimated 20-30 years off life expectancy for the average homosexual, and the Executive Director of Exodus International reported that gay men are six times more likely than straight ones to commit suicide, the Surgeon General nonetheless applauded homosexuality as “a wonderful, healthy part of our being.”
In the gay Advocate Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders pronounced the ban on gays in Boy Scouts as having “a negative effect on the mental health of homosexual youth,” and youth representing all lifestyle choices were welcomed into the Girl Scouts. The Center for Population Options exposed negative impact on LGB youth as a result of homophobia. Though scouting is both private and voluntary, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled in August of 1999 that, contrary to their code of honor, Boy Scouts must admit gays.
• 1990s — Reimaging the Church to Mirror Secularism
Predicted by Dr. C. Everett Koop and Dr. Francis Schaeffer in the 1979 book, Whatever Happened to the Human Race, “Things considered unthinkable in the 1970s would be quite thinkable in the 1990s.” And so they were. Worldwide Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence presented themselves as a community-service order of “queer” nuns. Theirs was a gay spirituality whose ritual was rooted in faerie paganism and eastern philosophy. Initiates purposed “to ruin all detrimental conditions,” including guilt, even for the guilty. Hence, they “went forth to sin some more” in hopes of expiating stigmatic guilt purportedly placed on them by right-wing religious and political organizations. The fight for gay marriage heated up — first, in Hawaii (1998), debate for which ended in legislators' banning it. Thereafter, Defense of Marriage Acts held the line for traditionalism in thirty states, thus warranting a new round of the dialectic.
By the 1990s, the World Council of Churches had condemned “homophobia”; and a reimaging event, Out Together, featured lesbian Christians. The General Theological Seminary of the Episcopal Church revised its housing policy to permit “committed same-sex couples” to live together in seminary housing, but denied that privilege to heterosexual counterparts, and a confirmed Episcopal Bishop in Minnesota pledged to ordain homosexuals. Evangelical Lutherans endorsed same-sex unions, and attendees at a Presbyterian Layman’s conference performed a lesbian milk-and-honey ritual.
• 1990s — Reimaging the Family to Inclusive Alternatives
In response to changing socio-economic structures, the U.N. proclaimed 1994 the International Year of Families. Not coincidentally, its designated Families Day coincided with GLBT festivals and celebrations in Zurich, San Francisco, Las Vegas, Manchester, Toronto, PA, CA, and NY. Center Voices presented a reading of Three Mothers of Zachary, a series of monologues detailing the life of a gay boy, who ultimately commits suicide. The Gender Identity Project hosted its Trans Prom dance extravaganza for gender-non-conforming people, and NYC Youth Pride Chorus of young LGBT artists presented Lullabies and Wake-Up Calls to jumpstart the Pride season. Of course, Straight Prom dance extravaganzas and the like were out of the question.
Over all, the reimaging campaign of the 1990s proved highly successful. This was the decade of a kinder, gentler military, verbal and social engineering, celebrated diversity, the diapraxed church, and cultural supremacy for a high-risk, politically protected minority.
More to follow in Part 4 of 5.
A Culture Shattered: Part 4
Legitimizing the Antithesis (2000s)
By Debra Rae
For breaking through the thick congressional wall on behalf of gay rights, President Obama was dubbed the nation’s “first gay president.” Indeed, he hosted Gay Pride events at the White House, helped bring an end to Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell, signed hate crimes legislation, and mandated visitation rights for partners of LGBT patients. Obama went so far as to appoint the first transgender in an American presidential administration — Amanda Simpson, Senior Technical Advisor to the Department of Commerce.
Although the California Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of an amendment which says, “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California,” gays continued to demand extraordinarily large representation in public and even private arenas. A Zogby-GLCensus Partners poll of over 1500 participants identified legal recognition of same-sex marriage as a primary goal. Accordingly, in reversing his previously held position on marriage, President Obama lent unbridled support for same-sex marriage, likely the most socially fundamental issue of the twenty-first century.
The US Supreme Court unanimously approved a Wisconsin hate-crimes statute (Wisconsin v Mitchell, 2000), and its Lawrence ruling overturned Texas' same-sex, anti-sodomy law. The Lawrence decision also rendered unenforceable what thirteen other state laws prohibited. In 2003 when the Massachusetts Supreme Court advanced the notion that gay marriage extended civil rights to disadvantaged groups (Goodrich v the Massachusetts Department of Public Health), even authentic advocates of the civil rights movement (Alveda King, for one) were incensed. The growing number of ex-gays proved that homosexuals likely possess no unchangeable characteristics. What’s more, far from disadvantaged, the gay community boasted incomes forty-one percent above the national average. Not robed judges, but God alone grants natural, unalienable rights.
A fair-minded person’s exercise of freedom of conscience is not hatred, bigotry, discrimination, or extremism, yet Senator Ted Kennedy likened said vitriol to “terrorism.” Fact is, San Francisco documented fewer cases of anti-gay violence than gay-to-gay domestic violence; but media spokesperson Paul Begala fingered “extremist, hate mongering conservative” groups — you know, the American Family Association and the Family Research Council — as brutal murderers.
• 2000s — Legitimization in the Media
Surprise, surprise! NBC’s Will and Grace exposed ex-gays as hypocrites, and the gay media strategy paid big dividends with daytime soap operas. Movies as Brokeback Mountain glamorized homosexuality, and Boyz magazine showcased it. Generous grants from the tax-funded National Endowment of the Arts supported the Los Angeles Gay-Lesbian Film Festival, Lesbian Visual Arts, and the San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus — and retold the Passion Play from a gay perspective. Vocal opponents of taxpayers' funding what the Bible calls “confusion,” “vile,” and “reprobate” were attacked, not necessarily for their ideas, but rather on a personal level. Following a yearlong gay activist “search and destroy” campaign, talk radio’s Dr. Laura Schlessinger was hounded off her conservative television show.
• 2000s — Legitimization in the Marketplace of Ideas
As the number of same-sex households soared, especially in Vermont and Delaware, freedom of conviction faced increasing opposition. “Miss Manners” of lesbianism Kathy Belge called it “just plain vindictive” should heterosexuals even suggest countering gay- with straight- pride events. Though tax moneys supported gay pride, heterosexual pride was unthinkably offensive. Canada’s Parliament sanctioned a law to criminalize speech even thought to be “anti-gay.” This, of course, begged the question, “Who decides?” You can bet it wasn’t Ann Coulter! Liberal monism prevailed. When two heterosexual women declined a lesbian as their roommate, the Madison Equal Opportunities Commission ignored their concerns by ordering the women to write a letter of apology, pay an exorbitant fine, and complete “sensitivity training.”
• 2000s — Legitimization in the Work Place
Despite voters' registered opposition to gay marriage, ACT-UP and OUT activists for homosexual rights chanted, marched, and invaded businesses and government offices, Microsoft caved to gay rights, corporations introduced diversity training, and more than half of the US’s largest corporations extended health insurance to employees' same-sex domestic partners. Wal-Mart pressured suppliers to give homosexuals preferential treatment — then, rolled out the red carpet in favor of gay marriage. In opposing Missouri’s efforts to license gays as foster parents, a Christian social worker was outright fired.
• 2000s — Legitimization in Education
Education emerged as the movement’s top industry (social services following), and American Airlines spread the love as official carrier of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Teachers' network. Polls conducted even by liberal newspapers like The Boston Globe revealed opposition to gay marriage by as much as a two-to-one margin, yet public universities, high schools, and grade schools marginalized “we, the people” by openly championing the diversity agenda.
In school common areas, gay-friendly visual imagery portrayed the culture in favorable light, and Candlewick Press published the bizarrely explicit It’s Perfectly Normal by Robie H. Harris. Lesbian activists representing the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) advanced the FLASH curriculum and demanded that LGBT youth be singled out for specific — i.e., special — protection under school disciplinary codes. “Safe Zone” requirements forced teachers to validate lifestyles they privately opposed.
A GLSEN summer workshop taught gay sex techniques to curious high school students, and some tax-funded Gay-Straight Alliances advanced the pro-gay agenda via booster clubs. GLSEN-promoted, daylong National Days of Silence not only disrupted the educational process of some eight thousand American schools, but also denied nonparticipating students their legitimate right to a “least restrictive educational environment.”
In New York City, the Harvey Milk Public School focused on needs of homo- and bi- sexual students, the transgendered and questioning youth; and Chicago’s school board introduced new, anti-discrimination language into its books. When a school in Massachusetts celebrated “To B GLAD Day,” parents were not told that the acronym stood for “Transgender, Bisexual, Gay, and Lesbian Day” and would feature workshops about “Life Outside the Gender Norm,” “Being Gay in the Professional World,” and “Fighting Homophobia.” It’s no wonder that two-thirds of our nation’s high school seniors polled were shown to favor legalization of homosexual marriage. Even more favored homosexual adoptions, and fully ninety percent favored “hate crimes” laws that exceed protections afforded other groups.
San Francisco State University offered dozens of classes on gay issues, not to mention an undergraduate minor in LGBT studies. While Dartmouth featured studies in “Queer Theory” and “Queer Texts,” Brown offered “Unnatural Acts: Introduction to Lesbian and Gay Literature”; and Stanford students studied “Homosexuals, Heretics, Witches, and Werewolves.” George Mason University even elected a GT homecoming queen!
• 2000s — Legitimization in Government
While Massachusetts' Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshal went so far as to characterize homosexuality as “a superior form of love,” Nebraska’s ACLU sued over a constitutional amendment affirming traditional marriages. The New York-based Lambda Legal Defense demanded approval, not just permission for civil unions. Vermont was first in line to recognize “marriage lite,” and Washington D.C. approved a bill recognizing same-sex marriages in other states. California law required companies that do business with the state to subsidize homosexual relationships. President Obama revoked conscience protection for health workers; and his AIDS Czar, Jeffrey Crowley, promoted free comprehensive health care for gays. The Local Law Enforcement Act (2000) expanded the scope of what’s considered a “hate crime,” and groundwork was laid for criminal pursuit of Bible-honoring Christian preachers. Under scrutiny of the Canadian Radio-TV and Telecommunications Commission, Canadians were forbidden to oppose or criticize the movement, and the Swedish parliament passed a constitutional amendment making it a crime to teach that homosexual behavior is immoral.
• 2000s — Legitimization on the Net
For not offering dating services to gays and lesbians, homosexual Eric McKinley from New Jersey sued the dating site www.eHarmony.com in March 2005. As part of the settlement, e-Harmony was forced to provide a new website, called “Compatible Partners,” pay the state fifty thousand dollars to cover the cost of the investigation, and an additional five thousand dollars for McKinley, likewise given a year’s free membership. Nice work, if you can get it.
• 2000s — Legitimization in Church
A report from the US Census Bureau identified what is characterized as a “post-family society,” also known as the “post-Christian society,” evidenced in gay-friendly Bible translations that radically retold Scriptures. In a gay newspaper, Steve Warren made the disconcerting admission that gays have on their side “the spirit of the age.” Mahatma Gandhi’s grandson referenced the “religious language” of lesbianism and “the sacred masculine.” Gay spirituality groups as Flesh and Spirit Community, Gay Mystics, Gay Spirit Culture Project, Q-Spirit, and the like identified Gay Pride with its own unique brand of interfaith spirituality, one which everyone must tolerate and even celebrate.
In the US, Reformed Judaism was the first major mainstream religion to adopt a national policy sanctioning homosexuality. By joining a mainline denomination — namely, the United Church of Christ — the world’s largest homosexual church (Cathedral of Hope in Texas) sought legitimization, seemingly successfully. Founder and CEO of Sojourners Jim Wallis included same-sex couples in the effort to strengthen marriage, and Presbyterians voted against mandatory fidelity in traditional marriage and chastity in singleness for its clergy and lay office holders. V. Gene Robinson was the first Anglican clergyman to live in an openly homosexual relationship, and, upon “marrying” her lesbian partner, Karen Dammann retained ministerial credentials in the United Methodist Church.
Traditionalists didn’t fare so well. For displaying a sign that read “Stop Immorality, Stop Homosexuality, Stop Lesbianism, Jesus is Our Lord,” Harry Hammond was convicted in a British court of law and, for distributing Christian tracts, Dale McAlpine served a jail sentence. Neither parroted the right kind of state-approved speech and, for that, they paid.
• 2000s — Legitimization in the Global Village
By the 2000s the gay agenda was firmly established in the Global Village. The UN and other global entities applauded sustainable, zero-population growth gay unions. CEDAW guaranteed the right for lesbians to marry. Iceland’s Prime Minister was among the first to marry her lesbian partner and, when President Obama publicly supported gay marriage, incoming French Socialist President François Hollande followed his lead. China’s policy granted “no approval, no disapproval, and no promotion”; however, in 2001 the Ministry of Health in China officially removed homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses. Although Israel recognized same-sex marriages performed in foreign jurisdictions, the Knesset defeated a bill to legalize them. On the other hand, Canada was on board with the agenda in redefining marriage as “the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others.”
Speaking at the World Day for Cultural Diversity, Dialogue and Development, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon demanded that diversity be acknowledged and celebrated. In popular culture, diversity spoke—not merely to acceptance of multiple ethnic cultures — but to “tolerance,” specifically as it relates to gays — their sexual orientation, gender identity, or expression; government recognition of same-sex relationships, anti-discrimination/sodomy laws, equal age of consent for same-sex activity, LGBT adoption and military service.
More to follow in Part 5 of 5.
A Culture Shattered: Part 5
Era of Enforcement (2010s)
By Debra Rae
By the 2010s advocacy groups had successfully lifted the stigma against other-oriented lifestyles, and gays had successfully joined the ranks of blacks and Native Americans in their shared pleas for emancipation. Harvey Milk Day was officially celebrated to acknowledge Milk’s contributions to an agenda so entrenched that, like it or not, independent thinkers were obliged to join the celebration — or else.
• 2010s — Enforcement in Education
The 2010s marked the first time an accrediting agency for higher education demanded a report from a private Christian college, forced to give account of its rules concerning homosexuality. On the global level, the UN Alliance of Civilizations partnered with the UNESCO to initiate a campaign to “Do ONE Thing” for diversity (but only the right “one thing”). I’m reminded of a junior high teacher in the Bronx who prayed with her students following the untimely death of a classmate. For this “one thing,” she lost her job. Similarly, while pursuing a master’s degree in counseling at Augusta State University, grad student Jennifer Keeton agreed with many professionals (and former gays) that homosexuality is not biological, but rather a lifestyle choice. For this, Keeton faced expulsion unless she attended sensitivity training, participated in the local gay pride parade, read gay-friendly material, and submitted a monthly two-page reflection on how the program influenced her beliefs.
• 2010s — Enforcement in the Arts
In April 2010 the non-profit Foundation for Sex Positive Culture hosted the Seattle Erotic Art Festival to welcome predominantly female-identified, sex-positive individuals — i.e., queer, transgender, kinky, bi- and poly- sex service workers. “Targeting colleges and universities with the messages, "Whore Pride” and “Out loud and Proud,” the SWOT (Sex Workers Outreach Team) claimed to “build community” by decriminalizing sex workers. Think about it. Heroine-using sex workers in East Africa engage in the practice of “flash-blood” (or “flush-blood”) by deliberately self-injecting another addict’s blood — this, to share the high or to stave off pangs of withdrawal. Do we really want to decriminalize sex workers who put clients at risk for AIDS and who knows what?
• 2010s — Enforcement in Religion
By the 2010s, many religionists engaged in alternative lifestyles. Rabbi Steven Greenberg self-identified as the world’s first openly gay Orthodox rabbi, and a partnered lesbian, Episcopal cleric Mary Glasspool, followed Robinson’s lead in “coming out.” Astonishingly, former president of Exodus International, Alan Chambers issued a public apology to the LGBT community. “For quite some time,” he lamented, “We’ve been imprisoned in a worldview that’s neither honoring toward our fellow human beings, nor biblical.” In repudiating the organization’s core mission at its 38th annual meeting, Chambers undermined its good work and, in turn, empowered radical activists by his change of heart.
The American Foundation for Equal Rights made a case that religious hostility fueled the campaign behind Proposition 8. Two experts retained by same-sex marriage proponents argued that religion had been used to justify discrimination against African Americans and women, as well as gays. That the court allowed internal communications of churches into evidence astonished a lawyer for the Proposition 8 campaign. He believed this to be a “major expression of religious bigotry.”
Leading the fight for marriage equality, the Foundation feigned dedication to protect and advance equal rights for every American. Truth be told, advocates presume some to be “more equal” than others. Take, for example, florist Barronell Stutzman, whom the state of Washington harassed and sued. Not for committing some heinous crime, but rather for standing firm on her biblical convictions. A devout Christian, Stutzman declined a long-time client’s request to grace his same-sex wedding with floral arrangements. Though the gay couple graciously accepted her position, this small business owner from Richland, Washington, was blindsided by a broader agenda capsulated in UNESCO’s Declaration on Tolerance and enforced by its minions. Stutzman learned that civil rights of a gay couple trump her own, a lesson likewise learned by British seniors fined for denying privately owned lodging to a same-sex couple. For perceiving homosexuality to be sinful, and thereby offending gays, a Swedish Pentecostal pastor was jailed; and Bible-teaching U.S. Military chaplains faced charges of discrimination.
• 2010s — Enforcement in Government and Law
True, New York University Professor Judith Stacey offers expert testimony of gay marriage benefits, and advocates aren’t all political progressives. Dick Cheney, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Laura Bush endorse marriage “equality,” and Cindy McCain and her daughter, Meghan, serve as willing poster girls for it. But consider this: If one’s sexual preference is defended as a “civil right,” why not condone bestiality-oriented tourists who visit Exit Point Stallions Farm? For having sex with several large-breed dogs at this Whatcom County animal-sex farm, a British visitor was arrested — in my opinion, rightfully so. On behalf of bullied youth, an It Gets Better Project pledged to spread the word. Unfortunately, that message had been lost to Miss California Carrie Prejean once her dream to compete for a Miss USA title was smashed simply because she championed traditional marriage. For similar reasons, two Christian publishing companies were sued; and Chick-fil-A owners faced public bullying.
• 2010s — Enforcement in the Workplace
California’s “Hey, Mister, Nice Dress Law” (AB 196) mandated stiff fines for any business owner who dared to fire a cross-dresser, even in a private store, or where small, highly impressionable children were involved while, in Maine, a veteran newsman (Larry Grard) lost his job for composing a personal email disapproving of gay marriage. Though the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (2013) sounds fair and balanced, ENDA actually affords special rights for homosexuals and transgendered individuals. It forbids employers from factoring into their managerial decisions negative consequences of employee behaviors in the workplace, and it allows federal government to impose on employers what the free market can work out itself. Plus, it makes it illegal for organizations or small businesses with fifteen or more employees to: “fail or refuse to hire (or to discharge) any individual, or otherwise discriminate against any individual because of such individual’s actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity” based on identities that (unlike race or gender) are subjective, self-disclosed, and self-defined.“ Notice the words, "perceived sexual orientation” and “self-defined.”
• 2010s — Enforcement in the Global Village
Recognized as legit by the UN, NAMBLA openly campaigns to eliminate age of consent laws; and in 2011 the State Department spent $300,000 promoting homosexual activism in Cuba, where Raul Castro’s daughter, a trained sexologist, led an “LGBT” parade in Havana and maintained that Uncle Fidel (who locked up homosexuals for being public menaces) was, in fact, a closet gay-rights advocate.
Concluding Thoughts
The first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution (Bill of Rights) delineate specific rights reserved for U.S. citizens and residents. Protected by the Constitution, civil rights include freedom of speech, but apparently no longer for conservative speakers on college campuses, where student hecklers routinely disrupt lectures. Discrimination that interferes with equality of opportunity in education is unlawful yet, in sync with the gay agenda, teachers willfully refuse to speak on the National Day of Silence and thereby halt instruction. Although gays enjoy freedom from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, Christians no longer enjoy the same on the basis of religion. Case in point: At taxpayer expense, one can retell the Passion Play from the gay perspective, but try telling Harvey Milk’s story from a traditionalist’s point of view, and see what that gets you!
Discrimination that interferes with employment is unlawful, yet small business owners, as Barronell Stutzman, are threatened with potential bankruptcy for basing private business decisions on religious convictions. Because ex-NAACP leader Rachel Dolezal identified as black doesn’t make her black anymore than a self-defined gender identity makes it so; but now it is illegal for organizations or small businesses with fifteen or more employees to discriminate based on the whim of some subjective self-identity.
Discrimination that interferes with housing is unlawful, yet two heterosexual women were severely punished for declining to welcome a lesbian roommate into their home when, in reality, it was the lesbian who presumed to interfere with their established household, not the other way around. Immunities are legal protections that prevent hindering another’s enjoyment of life, yet Miss California Carrie Prejean and Boy/Girl Scouts suffered negative impact of viewpoint discrimination merely for applauding a “morally straight” lifestyle.
Looking past their own ambivalence, nine robed justices will settle the matter regarding the constitutional right to gay marriage and associated federal benefits. The threat to churches, schools, and nonprofits will turn on how the Supreme Court rules at the end of June 2015. This matters culturally, demographically, and religiously. Marriage is rightly viewed as a privilege and responsibility, not an arbitrary civil right. In fact, for thousands of years, legal union in marriage has been the norm embraced worldwide by all civilized cultures. Homosexual unions may well be “sustainable,” but failing to meet the required birth rate would imperil our culture and all that’s good about it.
Most importantly, to prohibit personally held convictions of conscience is to violate the Establishment Clause of Free Exercise. Journalist Emily Belz fears, “A decades-long philosophical shift in U.S. law schools and courtrooms is enshrining consensual adult sexual expression as the ultimate American right, even above religious rights.” In less than a decade, the LGBT community’s sway over the political narrative in our country has grown as fast — if not faster — than its membership. Admittedly, the America of my childhood is lost, its culture shattered. This core issue will decide if, in fact, it is lost forever.
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
Reimaging Campaign (1990s)
By Debra Rae
http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/2015/06/a-culture-shattered-part-i.html
http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/2015/06/a-culture-shattered-part-2.html
By the 1990s, commonly held cultural definitions had succumbed to political correctness. Belief that diverse cultures can thrive independently of one another in a single, unified society, pluralism served as bridge between absolute truth and relativism. Having progressed from biblical, to modern, to postmodern worldviews, America was nothing if not inclusive.
• 1990s — Reimaging the Military to be Kinder, Gentler
One of President Clinton’s first policies was Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell in the armed forces. Barney Frank introduced an act that decriminalized sodomy in the military, and the Pentagon cleared homosexuals for service. Over time, army briefings classified evangelical Christians and Catholics as religious extremists, and a military brief directed officers to pay close attention, not to troops seeking homosexual gratification, but rather to troops who supported groups said not to share army values — namely, the American Family Association and the Family Research Council.
• 1990s — Reimaging the Marketplace of Ideas using Victim-Victimizer Theory
While the family-friendly Truth in Love Project and Love Won Out Seminar were met with outrage, the Los Angeles Unity-and-Diversity Festival drew accolades. Moreover, the WA Times launched an impactful Human Rights Campaign media blitz acknowledging bisexuality as the “in thing” among teens. Expanding the victim-victimizer theory, Dan Rather portrayed homosexuals as the nation’s most endangered species, and a 60 Minutes participant characterized critics of the gay revolution as “nuts.” Added to the influx of homosexual comedy within the mainstream, publication of Out magazine, Dial-a-Porn services, and gay-favoring ad debuts on national television, close to thirty openly gay characters regularly appeared on primetime TV. In the semblance of inclusiveness, Ellen DeGeneres famously came out, and Roseanne aired a lesbian kiss; in contrast, some years later, traditionalism was deemed so controversial, a marriage-friendly Super Bowl ad was rejected as unfit for public consumption. Really?
• 1990s — Reimaging Public Education to Restructure Society
The National Education Association promoted training to eliminate sexual orientation stereotyping. Tailoring tactics to public schools, gay groups self-identified as “victims.” At a time when schools fell desperately short in academics, the NEA called for a Lesbian and Gay History Month (October) and gay-friendly lessons — e.g., Children of the Rainbow curriculum. No longer Dick and Jane, first graders read Heather Has Two Mommies and Daddy’s Roommate.
Targeting “questioning” youth, the United Way granted four thousand dollars for public school placement of gay-themed Alyson Publications — King and King, for one. On Valentines' Day, four self-identified avengers for “lesbian survival and visibility” handed out explicit pink leaflets to elementary-aged students, and the Sexual Minority Advocacy Council promoted Alyson books for ages five and up in the Seattle School District.
While abstinence programs were ridiculed as archaic, teens had easy access to the blatantly gay WA Blade magazine, not to mention school-based health care clinics ever sensitive to lifestyle-specific concerns. Though only 2.8% of men and 1.4% of women were gay, junior- and senior- high schools offered pro-gay Project 10-type counseling programs. The ten stands for Kinsey’s falsification that gays represented ten percent of the population. So effective was the reimaging campaign in public schools that a Zogby poll reported that two-thirds of America’s high school seniors favored legalization of gay marriage. Clearly, the dialectic had worked.
For the Days of Diversity, Santa Rosa high schools attended a weeklong, extra-curricular program. Fortified by hoopla promising gay-gene research, fourteen sessions urged students to embrace homosexual civil rights. Featuring workshops for twelve-year-olds (and above) on “Sex Options,” “Eroticizing Safer Sex,” and the “Wonderful World of Latex,” the New York Department of Education likewise sponsored a youth conference funded by the Gay Men’s Health Crisis. Displaying rainbow flags, Disney recognized public support of Gay Days and Gay Pride Month (June), marked by gay-themed rings, pins, wristbands, flags, and banners. No more Barbi and Ken; Adam and Steve took center stage.
Dr. Judith Reisman, Ph.D., reported that instructors at New York University assigned “nude body” workshops in which students were instructed to fondle same-sex peers and, for extra credit, to visit a homosexual bar. Compliments of Hot, Sexy, and Safer, Inc., sizzling college classes incorporated “safe sex” instruction. Touting “respect” for diversity (tolerance), liberal hecklers rudely disrupted conservatives Ralph Reed (at NW University) and Pat Buchanan (at Syracuse University), denigrating conservative guest speakers as homophobic, misogynistic, anti-Semitic, and racist. Touted tolerance was, at its best, selective.
• 1990s — Reimaging Government and Law to Favor a Protected Class
First to reach out specifically to the gay political community, President Clinton promised not only to tolerate, but also to advocate on behalf of sexual orientation differences. The President appointed twenty-nine gays to influential positions in his administration and, doing so, established the nation’s first AIDS czar. Claiming June as their own, the LGBT community observed the month with programs, ceremonies, and activities, all sanctioned by Clinton who, by Presidential proclamation, instigated the first annual Gay and Lesbian Pride Month. At taxpayers' expense, a gay dance party rocked the federal building in Washington, D.C. The grateful homosexual lobby reciprocated by gracing the Clintons with millions of dollars in donations.
This was the decade of civil unions. By staging a mass wedding ceremony, the 1993 Gay Rights' March in D.C. demanded gay entrance into the mainstream; and an APA report stopped short of outwardly endorsing pedophilia (1999). The Gay Manifesto insisted on adult sex with children; and the Governor-sanctioned Podlodowski/Mileur Fund, administered by the Pride Foundation, was first to support America’s same-sex couples with children. In the Psychological Bulletin, three academics relinquished politically incorrect terms as “child abuse or molestation” for the presumably more benign label, “adult-child sex.”
While the Civil Rights Amendment Act (1993) recognized homosexuals as a protected class, DOMA was challenged rigorously in American courts. Policy via ordinance in San Francisco required gay-centricity (no exemption for religious opposition). Hawaii’s Supreme Court ruled in favor of issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples (Boeh v Lewin), and the Aaron McKinney case introduced the gay-panic defense. Warning about the “real threat of violence” against gays, Attorney General Janet Reno broadened the law. While hate-crimes legislation thwarted attacks against gays, gay-rights opponents declined to testify in courts of law for fear of intimidation and threats of personal harm. Off message retaliatory crimes against opponents of the gay agenda failed to qualify as news.
• 1990s — Reimaging Medicine Attune to a High Risk, Yet Politically-Protected Minority
The National Cancer Institute’s federally funded search for a gay gene inspired reimaging in the medical/health arena. A 1993 study supposedly demonstrated genetic determinism for homosexuality; however, vital information that male participants lacked the genetic marker allegedly linked to homosexual behavior was conveniently withheld. Although a 1998 Psychological Reports article shaved an estimated 20-30 years off life expectancy for the average homosexual, and the Executive Director of Exodus International reported that gay men are six times more likely than straight ones to commit suicide, the Surgeon General nonetheless applauded homosexuality as “a wonderful, healthy part of our being.”
In the gay Advocate Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders pronounced the ban on gays in Boy Scouts as having “a negative effect on the mental health of homosexual youth,” and youth representing all lifestyle choices were welcomed into the Girl Scouts. The Center for Population Options exposed negative impact on LGB youth as a result of homophobia. Though scouting is both private and voluntary, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled in August of 1999 that, contrary to their code of honor, Boy Scouts must admit gays.
• 1990s — Reimaging the Church to Mirror Secularism
Predicted by Dr. C. Everett Koop and Dr. Francis Schaeffer in the 1979 book, Whatever Happened to the Human Race, “Things considered unthinkable in the 1970s would be quite thinkable in the 1990s.” And so they were. Worldwide Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence presented themselves as a community-service order of “queer” nuns. Theirs was a gay spirituality whose ritual was rooted in faerie paganism and eastern philosophy. Initiates purposed “to ruin all detrimental conditions,” including guilt, even for the guilty. Hence, they “went forth to sin some more” in hopes of expiating stigmatic guilt purportedly placed on them by right-wing religious and political organizations. The fight for gay marriage heated up — first, in Hawaii (1998), debate for which ended in legislators' banning it. Thereafter, Defense of Marriage Acts held the line for traditionalism in thirty states, thus warranting a new round of the dialectic.
By the 1990s, the World Council of Churches had condemned “homophobia”; and a reimaging event, Out Together, featured lesbian Christians. The General Theological Seminary of the Episcopal Church revised its housing policy to permit “committed same-sex couples” to live together in seminary housing, but denied that privilege to heterosexual counterparts, and a confirmed Episcopal Bishop in Minnesota pledged to ordain homosexuals. Evangelical Lutherans endorsed same-sex unions, and attendees at a Presbyterian Layman’s conference performed a lesbian milk-and-honey ritual.
• 1990s — Reimaging the Family to Inclusive Alternatives
In response to changing socio-economic structures, the U.N. proclaimed 1994 the International Year of Families. Not coincidentally, its designated Families Day coincided with GLBT festivals and celebrations in Zurich, San Francisco, Las Vegas, Manchester, Toronto, PA, CA, and NY. Center Voices presented a reading of Three Mothers of Zachary, a series of monologues detailing the life of a gay boy, who ultimately commits suicide. The Gender Identity Project hosted its Trans Prom dance extravaganza for gender-non-conforming people, and NYC Youth Pride Chorus of young LGBT artists presented Lullabies and Wake-Up Calls to jumpstart the Pride season. Of course, Straight Prom dance extravaganzas and the like were out of the question.
Over all, the reimaging campaign of the 1990s proved highly successful. This was the decade of a kinder, gentler military, verbal and social engineering, celebrated diversity, the diapraxed church, and cultural supremacy for a high-risk, politically protected minority.
More to follow in Part 4 of 5.
A Culture Shattered: Part 4
Legitimizing the Antithesis (2000s)
By Debra Rae
For breaking through the thick congressional wall on behalf of gay rights, President Obama was dubbed the nation’s “first gay president.” Indeed, he hosted Gay Pride events at the White House, helped bring an end to Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell, signed hate crimes legislation, and mandated visitation rights for partners of LGBT patients. Obama went so far as to appoint the first transgender in an American presidential administration — Amanda Simpson, Senior Technical Advisor to the Department of Commerce.
Although the California Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of an amendment which says, “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California,” gays continued to demand extraordinarily large representation in public and even private arenas. A Zogby-GLCensus Partners poll of over 1500 participants identified legal recognition of same-sex marriage as a primary goal. Accordingly, in reversing his previously held position on marriage, President Obama lent unbridled support for same-sex marriage, likely the most socially fundamental issue of the twenty-first century.
The US Supreme Court unanimously approved a Wisconsin hate-crimes statute (Wisconsin v Mitchell, 2000), and its Lawrence ruling overturned Texas' same-sex, anti-sodomy law. The Lawrence decision also rendered unenforceable what thirteen other state laws prohibited. In 2003 when the Massachusetts Supreme Court advanced the notion that gay marriage extended civil rights to disadvantaged groups (Goodrich v the Massachusetts Department of Public Health), even authentic advocates of the civil rights movement (Alveda King, for one) were incensed. The growing number of ex-gays proved that homosexuals likely possess no unchangeable characteristics. What’s more, far from disadvantaged, the gay community boasted incomes forty-one percent above the national average. Not robed judges, but God alone grants natural, unalienable rights.
A fair-minded person’s exercise of freedom of conscience is not hatred, bigotry, discrimination, or extremism, yet Senator Ted Kennedy likened said vitriol to “terrorism.” Fact is, San Francisco documented fewer cases of anti-gay violence than gay-to-gay domestic violence; but media spokesperson Paul Begala fingered “extremist, hate mongering conservative” groups — you know, the American Family Association and the Family Research Council — as brutal murderers.
• 2000s — Legitimization in the Media
Surprise, surprise! NBC’s Will and Grace exposed ex-gays as hypocrites, and the gay media strategy paid big dividends with daytime soap operas. Movies as Brokeback Mountain glamorized homosexuality, and Boyz magazine showcased it. Generous grants from the tax-funded National Endowment of the Arts supported the Los Angeles Gay-Lesbian Film Festival, Lesbian Visual Arts, and the San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus — and retold the Passion Play from a gay perspective. Vocal opponents of taxpayers' funding what the Bible calls “confusion,” “vile,” and “reprobate” were attacked, not necessarily for their ideas, but rather on a personal level. Following a yearlong gay activist “search and destroy” campaign, talk radio’s Dr. Laura Schlessinger was hounded off her conservative television show.
• 2000s — Legitimization in the Marketplace of Ideas
As the number of same-sex households soared, especially in Vermont and Delaware, freedom of conviction faced increasing opposition. “Miss Manners” of lesbianism Kathy Belge called it “just plain vindictive” should heterosexuals even suggest countering gay- with straight- pride events. Though tax moneys supported gay pride, heterosexual pride was unthinkably offensive. Canada’s Parliament sanctioned a law to criminalize speech even thought to be “anti-gay.” This, of course, begged the question, “Who decides?” You can bet it wasn’t Ann Coulter! Liberal monism prevailed. When two heterosexual women declined a lesbian as their roommate, the Madison Equal Opportunities Commission ignored their concerns by ordering the women to write a letter of apology, pay an exorbitant fine, and complete “sensitivity training.”
• 2000s — Legitimization in the Work Place
Despite voters' registered opposition to gay marriage, ACT-UP and OUT activists for homosexual rights chanted, marched, and invaded businesses and government offices, Microsoft caved to gay rights, corporations introduced diversity training, and more than half of the US’s largest corporations extended health insurance to employees' same-sex domestic partners. Wal-Mart pressured suppliers to give homosexuals preferential treatment — then, rolled out the red carpet in favor of gay marriage. In opposing Missouri’s efforts to license gays as foster parents, a Christian social worker was outright fired.
• 2000s — Legitimization in Education
Education emerged as the movement’s top industry (social services following), and American Airlines spread the love as official carrier of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Teachers' network. Polls conducted even by liberal newspapers like The Boston Globe revealed opposition to gay marriage by as much as a two-to-one margin, yet public universities, high schools, and grade schools marginalized “we, the people” by openly championing the diversity agenda.
In school common areas, gay-friendly visual imagery portrayed the culture in favorable light, and Candlewick Press published the bizarrely explicit It’s Perfectly Normal by Robie H. Harris. Lesbian activists representing the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) advanced the FLASH curriculum and demanded that LGBT youth be singled out for specific — i.e., special — protection under school disciplinary codes. “Safe Zone” requirements forced teachers to validate lifestyles they privately opposed.
A GLSEN summer workshop taught gay sex techniques to curious high school students, and some tax-funded Gay-Straight Alliances advanced the pro-gay agenda via booster clubs. GLSEN-promoted, daylong National Days of Silence not only disrupted the educational process of some eight thousand American schools, but also denied nonparticipating students their legitimate right to a “least restrictive educational environment.”
In New York City, the Harvey Milk Public School focused on needs of homo- and bi- sexual students, the transgendered and questioning youth; and Chicago’s school board introduced new, anti-discrimination language into its books. When a school in Massachusetts celebrated “To B GLAD Day,” parents were not told that the acronym stood for “Transgender, Bisexual, Gay, and Lesbian Day” and would feature workshops about “Life Outside the Gender Norm,” “Being Gay in the Professional World,” and “Fighting Homophobia.” It’s no wonder that two-thirds of our nation’s high school seniors polled were shown to favor legalization of homosexual marriage. Even more favored homosexual adoptions, and fully ninety percent favored “hate crimes” laws that exceed protections afforded other groups.
San Francisco State University offered dozens of classes on gay issues, not to mention an undergraduate minor in LGBT studies. While Dartmouth featured studies in “Queer Theory” and “Queer Texts,” Brown offered “Unnatural Acts: Introduction to Lesbian and Gay Literature”; and Stanford students studied “Homosexuals, Heretics, Witches, and Werewolves.” George Mason University even elected a GT homecoming queen!
• 2000s — Legitimization in Government
While Massachusetts' Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshal went so far as to characterize homosexuality as “a superior form of love,” Nebraska’s ACLU sued over a constitutional amendment affirming traditional marriages. The New York-based Lambda Legal Defense demanded approval, not just permission for civil unions. Vermont was first in line to recognize “marriage lite,” and Washington D.C. approved a bill recognizing same-sex marriages in other states. California law required companies that do business with the state to subsidize homosexual relationships. President Obama revoked conscience protection for health workers; and his AIDS Czar, Jeffrey Crowley, promoted free comprehensive health care for gays. The Local Law Enforcement Act (2000) expanded the scope of what’s considered a “hate crime,” and groundwork was laid for criminal pursuit of Bible-honoring Christian preachers. Under scrutiny of the Canadian Radio-TV and Telecommunications Commission, Canadians were forbidden to oppose or criticize the movement, and the Swedish parliament passed a constitutional amendment making it a crime to teach that homosexual behavior is immoral.
• 2000s — Legitimization on the Net
For not offering dating services to gays and lesbians, homosexual Eric McKinley from New Jersey sued the dating site www.eHarmony.com in March 2005. As part of the settlement, e-Harmony was forced to provide a new website, called “Compatible Partners,” pay the state fifty thousand dollars to cover the cost of the investigation, and an additional five thousand dollars for McKinley, likewise given a year’s free membership. Nice work, if you can get it.
• 2000s — Legitimization in Church
A report from the US Census Bureau identified what is characterized as a “post-family society,” also known as the “post-Christian society,” evidenced in gay-friendly Bible translations that radically retold Scriptures. In a gay newspaper, Steve Warren made the disconcerting admission that gays have on their side “the spirit of the age.” Mahatma Gandhi’s grandson referenced the “religious language” of lesbianism and “the sacred masculine.” Gay spirituality groups as Flesh and Spirit Community, Gay Mystics, Gay Spirit Culture Project, Q-Spirit, and the like identified Gay Pride with its own unique brand of interfaith spirituality, one which everyone must tolerate and even celebrate.
In the US, Reformed Judaism was the first major mainstream religion to adopt a national policy sanctioning homosexuality. By joining a mainline denomination — namely, the United Church of Christ — the world’s largest homosexual church (Cathedral of Hope in Texas) sought legitimization, seemingly successfully. Founder and CEO of Sojourners Jim Wallis included same-sex couples in the effort to strengthen marriage, and Presbyterians voted against mandatory fidelity in traditional marriage and chastity in singleness for its clergy and lay office holders. V. Gene Robinson was the first Anglican clergyman to live in an openly homosexual relationship, and, upon “marrying” her lesbian partner, Karen Dammann retained ministerial credentials in the United Methodist Church.
Traditionalists didn’t fare so well. For displaying a sign that read “Stop Immorality, Stop Homosexuality, Stop Lesbianism, Jesus is Our Lord,” Harry Hammond was convicted in a British court of law and, for distributing Christian tracts, Dale McAlpine served a jail sentence. Neither parroted the right kind of state-approved speech and, for that, they paid.
• 2000s — Legitimization in the Global Village
By the 2000s the gay agenda was firmly established in the Global Village. The UN and other global entities applauded sustainable, zero-population growth gay unions. CEDAW guaranteed the right for lesbians to marry. Iceland’s Prime Minister was among the first to marry her lesbian partner and, when President Obama publicly supported gay marriage, incoming French Socialist President François Hollande followed his lead. China’s policy granted “no approval, no disapproval, and no promotion”; however, in 2001 the Ministry of Health in China officially removed homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses. Although Israel recognized same-sex marriages performed in foreign jurisdictions, the Knesset defeated a bill to legalize them. On the other hand, Canada was on board with the agenda in redefining marriage as “the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others.”
Speaking at the World Day for Cultural Diversity, Dialogue and Development, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon demanded that diversity be acknowledged and celebrated. In popular culture, diversity spoke—not merely to acceptance of multiple ethnic cultures — but to “tolerance,” specifically as it relates to gays — their sexual orientation, gender identity, or expression; government recognition of same-sex relationships, anti-discrimination/sodomy laws, equal age of consent for same-sex activity, LGBT adoption and military service.
More to follow in Part 5 of 5.
A Culture Shattered: Part 5
Era of Enforcement (2010s)
By Debra Rae
By the 2010s advocacy groups had successfully lifted the stigma against other-oriented lifestyles, and gays had successfully joined the ranks of blacks and Native Americans in their shared pleas for emancipation. Harvey Milk Day was officially celebrated to acknowledge Milk’s contributions to an agenda so entrenched that, like it or not, independent thinkers were obliged to join the celebration — or else.
• 2010s — Enforcement in Education
The 2010s marked the first time an accrediting agency for higher education demanded a report from a private Christian college, forced to give account of its rules concerning homosexuality. On the global level, the UN Alliance of Civilizations partnered with the UNESCO to initiate a campaign to “Do ONE Thing” for diversity (but only the right “one thing”). I’m reminded of a junior high teacher in the Bronx who prayed with her students following the untimely death of a classmate. For this “one thing,” she lost her job. Similarly, while pursuing a master’s degree in counseling at Augusta State University, grad student Jennifer Keeton agreed with many professionals (and former gays) that homosexuality is not biological, but rather a lifestyle choice. For this, Keeton faced expulsion unless she attended sensitivity training, participated in the local gay pride parade, read gay-friendly material, and submitted a monthly two-page reflection on how the program influenced her beliefs.
• 2010s — Enforcement in the Arts
In April 2010 the non-profit Foundation for Sex Positive Culture hosted the Seattle Erotic Art Festival to welcome predominantly female-identified, sex-positive individuals — i.e., queer, transgender, kinky, bi- and poly- sex service workers. “Targeting colleges and universities with the messages, "Whore Pride” and “Out loud and Proud,” the SWOT (Sex Workers Outreach Team) claimed to “build community” by decriminalizing sex workers. Think about it. Heroine-using sex workers in East Africa engage in the practice of “flash-blood” (or “flush-blood”) by deliberately self-injecting another addict’s blood — this, to share the high or to stave off pangs of withdrawal. Do we really want to decriminalize sex workers who put clients at risk for AIDS and who knows what?
• 2010s — Enforcement in Religion
By the 2010s, many religionists engaged in alternative lifestyles. Rabbi Steven Greenberg self-identified as the world’s first openly gay Orthodox rabbi, and a partnered lesbian, Episcopal cleric Mary Glasspool, followed Robinson’s lead in “coming out.” Astonishingly, former president of Exodus International, Alan Chambers issued a public apology to the LGBT community. “For quite some time,” he lamented, “We’ve been imprisoned in a worldview that’s neither honoring toward our fellow human beings, nor biblical.” In repudiating the organization’s core mission at its 38th annual meeting, Chambers undermined its good work and, in turn, empowered radical activists by his change of heart.
The American Foundation for Equal Rights made a case that religious hostility fueled the campaign behind Proposition 8. Two experts retained by same-sex marriage proponents argued that religion had been used to justify discrimination against African Americans and women, as well as gays. That the court allowed internal communications of churches into evidence astonished a lawyer for the Proposition 8 campaign. He believed this to be a “major expression of religious bigotry.”
Leading the fight for marriage equality, the Foundation feigned dedication to protect and advance equal rights for every American. Truth be told, advocates presume some to be “more equal” than others. Take, for example, florist Barronell Stutzman, whom the state of Washington harassed and sued. Not for committing some heinous crime, but rather for standing firm on her biblical convictions. A devout Christian, Stutzman declined a long-time client’s request to grace his same-sex wedding with floral arrangements. Though the gay couple graciously accepted her position, this small business owner from Richland, Washington, was blindsided by a broader agenda capsulated in UNESCO’s Declaration on Tolerance and enforced by its minions. Stutzman learned that civil rights of a gay couple trump her own, a lesson likewise learned by British seniors fined for denying privately owned lodging to a same-sex couple. For perceiving homosexuality to be sinful, and thereby offending gays, a Swedish Pentecostal pastor was jailed; and Bible-teaching U.S. Military chaplains faced charges of discrimination.
• 2010s — Enforcement in Government and Law
True, New York University Professor Judith Stacey offers expert testimony of gay marriage benefits, and advocates aren’t all political progressives. Dick Cheney, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Laura Bush endorse marriage “equality,” and Cindy McCain and her daughter, Meghan, serve as willing poster girls for it. But consider this: If one’s sexual preference is defended as a “civil right,” why not condone bestiality-oriented tourists who visit Exit Point Stallions Farm? For having sex with several large-breed dogs at this Whatcom County animal-sex farm, a British visitor was arrested — in my opinion, rightfully so. On behalf of bullied youth, an It Gets Better Project pledged to spread the word. Unfortunately, that message had been lost to Miss California Carrie Prejean once her dream to compete for a Miss USA title was smashed simply because she championed traditional marriage. For similar reasons, two Christian publishing companies were sued; and Chick-fil-A owners faced public bullying.
• 2010s — Enforcement in the Workplace
California’s “Hey, Mister, Nice Dress Law” (AB 196) mandated stiff fines for any business owner who dared to fire a cross-dresser, even in a private store, or where small, highly impressionable children were involved while, in Maine, a veteran newsman (Larry Grard) lost his job for composing a personal email disapproving of gay marriage. Though the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (2013) sounds fair and balanced, ENDA actually affords special rights for homosexuals and transgendered individuals. It forbids employers from factoring into their managerial decisions negative consequences of employee behaviors in the workplace, and it allows federal government to impose on employers what the free market can work out itself. Plus, it makes it illegal for organizations or small businesses with fifteen or more employees to: “fail or refuse to hire (or to discharge) any individual, or otherwise discriminate against any individual because of such individual’s actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity” based on identities that (unlike race or gender) are subjective, self-disclosed, and self-defined.“ Notice the words, "perceived sexual orientation” and “self-defined.”
• 2010s — Enforcement in the Global Village
Recognized as legit by the UN, NAMBLA openly campaigns to eliminate age of consent laws; and in 2011 the State Department spent $300,000 promoting homosexual activism in Cuba, where Raul Castro’s daughter, a trained sexologist, led an “LGBT” parade in Havana and maintained that Uncle Fidel (who locked up homosexuals for being public menaces) was, in fact, a closet gay-rights advocate.
Concluding Thoughts
The first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution (Bill of Rights) delineate specific rights reserved for U.S. citizens and residents. Protected by the Constitution, civil rights include freedom of speech, but apparently no longer for conservative speakers on college campuses, where student hecklers routinely disrupt lectures. Discrimination that interferes with equality of opportunity in education is unlawful yet, in sync with the gay agenda, teachers willfully refuse to speak on the National Day of Silence and thereby halt instruction. Although gays enjoy freedom from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, Christians no longer enjoy the same on the basis of religion. Case in point: At taxpayer expense, one can retell the Passion Play from the gay perspective, but try telling Harvey Milk’s story from a traditionalist’s point of view, and see what that gets you!
Discrimination that interferes with employment is unlawful, yet small business owners, as Barronell Stutzman, are threatened with potential bankruptcy for basing private business decisions on religious convictions. Because ex-NAACP leader Rachel Dolezal identified as black doesn’t make her black anymore than a self-defined gender identity makes it so; but now it is illegal for organizations or small businesses with fifteen or more employees to discriminate based on the whim of some subjective self-identity.
Discrimination that interferes with housing is unlawful, yet two heterosexual women were severely punished for declining to welcome a lesbian roommate into their home when, in reality, it was the lesbian who presumed to interfere with their established household, not the other way around. Immunities are legal protections that prevent hindering another’s enjoyment of life, yet Miss California Carrie Prejean and Boy/Girl Scouts suffered negative impact of viewpoint discrimination merely for applauding a “morally straight” lifestyle.
Looking past their own ambivalence, nine robed justices will settle the matter regarding the constitutional right to gay marriage and associated federal benefits. The threat to churches, schools, and nonprofits will turn on how the Supreme Court rules at the end of June 2015. This matters culturally, demographically, and religiously. Marriage is rightly viewed as a privilege and responsibility, not an arbitrary civil right. In fact, for thousands of years, legal union in marriage has been the norm embraced worldwide by all civilized cultures. Homosexual unions may well be “sustainable,” but failing to meet the required birth rate would imperil our culture and all that’s good about it.
Most importantly, to prohibit personally held convictions of conscience is to violate the Establishment Clause of Free Exercise. Journalist Emily Belz fears, “A decades-long philosophical shift in U.S. law schools and courtrooms is enshrining consensual adult sexual expression as the ultimate American right, even above religious rights.” In less than a decade, the LGBT community’s sway over the political narrative in our country has grown as fast — if not faster — than its membership. Admittedly, the America of my childhood is lost, its culture shattered. This core issue will decide if, in fact, it is lost forever.
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
Central Bank of Central Banks Warns That World is Unprepared to Fight Global Crash
Central Bank of Central Banks Warns That World is Unprepared to Fight Global Crash
According to the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the shadowy “central bank of central banks,” the world as it stands is incapable of combating another global financial crash – a crash that there is every reason to think is coming.
That’s because the economy remains in the hands of the Federal Reserve and other central banks.
The financial wizards in THIS VIDEO went so far to say that “we are all slaves to the central banks.” It wasn’t exactly hyperbole.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_Xh5qwnLeA
According to the BIS, central banks have already “used up their ammunition” by driving interests to below zero, freezing investment for the important stuff like production and infrastructure, and instead fueling huge bubbles for wonder kids on Wall Street to play in.
Now, everything is basically teetering on the edge until the music stops. According to the BIS, it will soon be time to pay the piper – as “persistent ultra-low rates” are poised to unleash destruction upon the economy like King Kong set loose on Manhattan:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11704051/The-world-is-defenseless-against-the-next-financial-crisis-warns-BIS.html
The BIS report described the threat of a new bust in advanced economies as a “main risk”, with many reaching the top of the economic cycle.
The economies worst hit by the last crisis are now suffering the costs of persistent ultra-low rates, the organisation said, which could “inflict serious damage on the financial system”, sapping banks and weakening their balance sheets and their ability to lend.
And worse, the advanced countries will be unable to fight back against the serious consequences, according to their 2015 annual report:
• The world will be unable to fight the next global financial crash as central banks have used up their ammunition trying to tackle the last crises.
• Central banks have backed themselves into a corner after repeatedly cutting interest rates to shore up their economies.
• Central banks may have contributed [to the coming crisis] by fuelling costly financial booms and busts and delaying adjustment.”
In past years, the BIS has painted a clear picture of the bleak financial landscape brought on by central bank policy since the 2008 crisis.
[...]
It warned in 2013 that:
Fresh action from central banks to kick-start growth may do more harm than good, by distorting financial markets and jeopardising stability.
“Unfortunately, central banks cannot do more without compounding the risks they have already created.” (source)http://www.bis.org/press/p130623.htm
[...]
In 2014, it found that central banks have failed to achieve a recovery, and are incapable of doing so:
Robust, self-sustaining growth still eludes the global economy… Central banks cannot solve the structural problems that are preventing a return to strong and sustainable growth.
“Most of all, central banks cannot enact the structural economic and financial reforms needed to return economies to the real growth paths authorities and their publics both want and expect.”
“What central bank accommodation has done during the recovery is to borrow time … But the time needs to be used wisely, as the balance between benefits and costs is deteriorating.” (source)
Given the unique insider position of the Bank for International Settlements in the global financial power structure, these are foreboding words to be met with mature concern. This is a tacit admission that the powers that be know the next big crisis is around the corner, and they are ready to watch us drown in it – this time, without reaching down to offer us up.
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
You can read more from Mac Slavo at his site SHTFplan.com, where this article first appeared.
According to the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the shadowy “central bank of central banks,” the world as it stands is incapable of combating another global financial crash – a crash that there is every reason to think is coming.
That’s because the economy remains in the hands of the Federal Reserve and other central banks.
The financial wizards in THIS VIDEO went so far to say that “we are all slaves to the central banks.” It wasn’t exactly hyperbole.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_Xh5qwnLeA
According to the BIS, central banks have already “used up their ammunition” by driving interests to below zero, freezing investment for the important stuff like production and infrastructure, and instead fueling huge bubbles for wonder kids on Wall Street to play in.
Now, everything is basically teetering on the edge until the music stops. According to the BIS, it will soon be time to pay the piper – as “persistent ultra-low rates” are poised to unleash destruction upon the economy like King Kong set loose on Manhattan:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11704051/The-world-is-defenseless-against-the-next-financial-crisis-warns-BIS.html
The BIS report described the threat of a new bust in advanced economies as a “main risk”, with many reaching the top of the economic cycle.
The economies worst hit by the last crisis are now suffering the costs of persistent ultra-low rates, the organisation said, which could “inflict serious damage on the financial system”, sapping banks and weakening their balance sheets and their ability to lend.
And worse, the advanced countries will be unable to fight back against the serious consequences, according to their 2015 annual report:
• The world will be unable to fight the next global financial crash as central banks have used up their ammunition trying to tackle the last crises.
• Central banks have backed themselves into a corner after repeatedly cutting interest rates to shore up their economies.
• Central banks may have contributed [to the coming crisis] by fuelling costly financial booms and busts and delaying adjustment.”
In past years, the BIS has painted a clear picture of the bleak financial landscape brought on by central bank policy since the 2008 crisis.
[...]
It warned in 2013 that:
Fresh action from central banks to kick-start growth may do more harm than good, by distorting financial markets and jeopardising stability.
“Unfortunately, central banks cannot do more without compounding the risks they have already created.” (source)http://www.bis.org/press/p130623.htm
[...]
In 2014, it found that central banks have failed to achieve a recovery, and are incapable of doing so:
Robust, self-sustaining growth still eludes the global economy… Central banks cannot solve the structural problems that are preventing a return to strong and sustainable growth.
“Most of all, central banks cannot enact the structural economic and financial reforms needed to return economies to the real growth paths authorities and their publics both want and expect.”
“What central bank accommodation has done during the recovery is to borrow time … But the time needs to be used wisely, as the balance between benefits and costs is deteriorating.” (source)
Given the unique insider position of the Bank for International Settlements in the global financial power structure, these are foreboding words to be met with mature concern. This is a tacit admission that the powers that be know the next big crisis is around the corner, and they are ready to watch us drown in it – this time, without reaching down to offer us up.
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
You can read more from Mac Slavo at his site SHTFplan.com, where this article first appeared.
If the Foundations Be Destroyed, What Can the Righteous Do?
If the Foundations Be Destroyed, What Can the Righteous Do?
Progressives have no foundation for how they selectively choose to accept their carnal “moral” boundaries because they love their sin and hate God’s law of Nature. Christian conservatives on the other hand are solid in their foundation as defined by Biblical moral virtue and “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” An example of this difference is “Why does America love Justice Ginsburg and Loathe Clarence Thomas?”
http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/24/why-does-america-love-ruth-bader-ginsburg-and-loathe-clarence-thomas
Progressives are quick to lay claim to this second phrase in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.”
However, the premise for this phrase is purposely excluded, ignored, avoided, and boycotted by progressives, which lays out the foundation for how “Rights” are to be “entitled” in the preceding opening first phrase: “When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”
The questions therefore, that has yet to be asked and satisfactorily answered by many of the pundits on both sides of the marriage issue is this: How can the premise for how “Rights” are to be “entitled” be excluded from the edict itself? What do “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” imply? What “truth” is “self-evident? What are "certain unalienable Rights” that are not to be violated? Is the definition of unalienable not important? Meaning prohibiting violation; secure from destruction, infringement, or desecration, incapable of being violated; incorruptible; unassailable. Are not those “certain unalienable Rights” predicated on “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God?” If not, what then is the supposed progressive foundation for “Rights?”
Perhaps the five despotic justices who are bent on imposing this progressive politically correct carnal dogma of promoting sin possess a wisdom that supersedes that of the founders who established the legal system they swore to uphold? Perhaps also, “We the People” have capitulated and surrendered to this Marxist-like tyranny that has hijacked the Republic. The last two rulings by the court are yet more indicators that the “experiment” is over and the warnings from the founders and others such as Abraham Lincoln, are seeing their fears come to fruition: “America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.”
http://earstohear.net/op-eds/istheexperimentover.html
http://earstohear.net/separation/warnings.html
It is now up to “We the people” to elect Constitutionalists in order to replace these despots. Yet who is going to provide the necessary inspiration to “illuminate the minds” of “We the People?” Will Americas follow the same destructive path of the Israelites in the Old Testament for defying God, which was written for “our example?” (1 Corinthians 10:5-8).
“If the foundations be destroyed, what Can The Righteous Do?” (Psalms 11): “In the LORD put I my trust: how say ye to my soul, Flee as a bird to your mountain? For, lo, the wicked bend their bow, they make ready their arrow upon the string, that they may privily (secretly, in the dark) shoot at the upright in heart. If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do? The LORD is in his holy temple, the LORD’S throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men. The LORD tries the righteous: but the wicked and him that loves violence his soul hates. Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, and an horrible tempest: this shall be the portion of their cup. For the righteous LORD loves righteousness; his countenance doth behold the upright.”
2 Chronicles 7:14
“If my people…" Citizens of the Kingdom of God:http://earstohear.net/kingdom/kingdomofgod.html
”…which are called by My Name,…“ Christians;http://earstohear.net/kingdom/calling.html
”…shall humble themselves,…“ Worthy?http://earstohear.net/kingdom/worthy.html
”…and pray, and seek my face,…“ Power of God required:
http://earstohear.net/kingdom/power_of_god_scriptures.html
"and turn from their wicked ways;…" Repent (choose this day whom you will serve, self & flesh or God & Spirit?)http://earstohear.net/kingdom/repent.html
”…then will I hear from heaven,…“ If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me.
http://earstohear.net/kingdom/evil.html
”…and will forgive their sin,…“ And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
http://earstohear.net/kingdom/salvation.html
”…and will heal their land.“ Righteousness exalts a nation, But sin is a reproach to any people.
http://earstohear.net/separation/warnings.html
Thomas Jefferson: "Cherish, therefore, the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention. Do not be too severe upon their errors, but reclaim them by enlightening them. If once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress, and Assemblies, Judges, and Governors, shall all become wolves." "The most effectual means of preventing the perversion of power into tyranny are to illuminate … the minds of the people at large, and more especially to give them knowledge of those facts which history exhibits, that … they may be enabled to know ambition under all its shapes, and prompt to exert their natural powers to defeat its purposes.”
If Christians, possessing Biblical moral virtue, do not become more aggressive in confronting progressive political correctness and illuminating the minds of “We the people,” then like Israel, can we not expect God to “turn His face” from America?
http://earstohear.net/kingdom/evil.html
By Gary Kelly
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
Progressives have no foundation for how they selectively choose to accept their carnal “moral” boundaries because they love their sin and hate God’s law of Nature. Christian conservatives on the other hand are solid in their foundation as defined by Biblical moral virtue and “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” An example of this difference is “Why does America love Justice Ginsburg and Loathe Clarence Thomas?”
http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/24/why-does-america-love-ruth-bader-ginsburg-and-loathe-clarence-thomas
Progressives are quick to lay claim to this second phrase in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.”
However, the premise for this phrase is purposely excluded, ignored, avoided, and boycotted by progressives, which lays out the foundation for how “Rights” are to be “entitled” in the preceding opening first phrase: “When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”
The questions therefore, that has yet to be asked and satisfactorily answered by many of the pundits on both sides of the marriage issue is this: How can the premise for how “Rights” are to be “entitled” be excluded from the edict itself? What do “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” imply? What “truth” is “self-evident? What are "certain unalienable Rights” that are not to be violated? Is the definition of unalienable not important? Meaning prohibiting violation; secure from destruction, infringement, or desecration, incapable of being violated; incorruptible; unassailable. Are not those “certain unalienable Rights” predicated on “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God?” If not, what then is the supposed progressive foundation for “Rights?”
Perhaps the five despotic justices who are bent on imposing this progressive politically correct carnal dogma of promoting sin possess a wisdom that supersedes that of the founders who established the legal system they swore to uphold? Perhaps also, “We the People” have capitulated and surrendered to this Marxist-like tyranny that has hijacked the Republic. The last two rulings by the court are yet more indicators that the “experiment” is over and the warnings from the founders and others such as Abraham Lincoln, are seeing their fears come to fruition: “America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.”
http://earstohear.net/op-eds/istheexperimentover.html
http://earstohear.net/separation/warnings.html
It is now up to “We the people” to elect Constitutionalists in order to replace these despots. Yet who is going to provide the necessary inspiration to “illuminate the minds” of “We the People?” Will Americas follow the same destructive path of the Israelites in the Old Testament for defying God, which was written for “our example?” (1 Corinthians 10:5-8).
“If the foundations be destroyed, what Can The Righteous Do?” (Psalms 11): “In the LORD put I my trust: how say ye to my soul, Flee as a bird to your mountain? For, lo, the wicked bend their bow, they make ready their arrow upon the string, that they may privily (secretly, in the dark) shoot at the upright in heart. If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do? The LORD is in his holy temple, the LORD’S throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men. The LORD tries the righteous: but the wicked and him that loves violence his soul hates. Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, and an horrible tempest: this shall be the portion of their cup. For the righteous LORD loves righteousness; his countenance doth behold the upright.”
2 Chronicles 7:14
“If my people…" Citizens of the Kingdom of God:http://earstohear.net/kingdom/kingdomofgod.html
”…which are called by My Name,…“ Christians;http://earstohear.net/kingdom/calling.html
”…shall humble themselves,…“ Worthy?http://earstohear.net/kingdom/worthy.html
”…and pray, and seek my face,…“ Power of God required:
http://earstohear.net/kingdom/power_of_god_scriptures.html
"and turn from their wicked ways;…" Repent (choose this day whom you will serve, self & flesh or God & Spirit?)http://earstohear.net/kingdom/repent.html
”…then will I hear from heaven,…“ If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me.
http://earstohear.net/kingdom/evil.html
”…and will forgive their sin,…“ And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
http://earstohear.net/kingdom/salvation.html
”…and will heal their land.“ Righteousness exalts a nation, But sin is a reproach to any people.
http://earstohear.net/separation/warnings.html
Thomas Jefferson: "Cherish, therefore, the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention. Do not be too severe upon their errors, but reclaim them by enlightening them. If once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress, and Assemblies, Judges, and Governors, shall all become wolves." "The most effectual means of preventing the perversion of power into tyranny are to illuminate … the minds of the people at large, and more especially to give them knowledge of those facts which history exhibits, that … they may be enabled to know ambition under all its shapes, and prompt to exert their natural powers to defeat its purposes.”
If Christians, possessing Biblical moral virtue, do not become more aggressive in confronting progressive political correctness and illuminating the minds of “We the people,” then like Israel, can we not expect God to “turn His face” from America?
http://earstohear.net/kingdom/evil.html
By Gary Kelly
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
The Mutilators
The Mutilators
It seems to be in the nature of evil that it is not only destructive, but self-destructive as well. An obvious example would be the Muslim suicide bombers who are forever asking “Why is it so hot here? And why are my virgins so ugly?” Islam is a death cult, its followers so twisted by hate that they seek to destroy, not just everyone who does not agree with them, but themselves as well. But the allies and facilitators of Islam are the leftists, and they, too, and all the groups they support, are self-destructive.
The baby butchers, for example, defend abortion by implying that the child in the womb is not a separate person, but part of the mother’s body, and insisting that women’s bodies should be controlled by themselves and no one else. Women, they say, have a right to choose — so long as they choose to murder their infants. But if the child is merely part of the mother’s body, is not abortion a form of self-mutilation? Since Roe vs. Wade in 1973, some 58,000,000 babies have been murdered in the U.S. alone, and over one billion worldwide. This is an appalling death toll, surpassing even the “achievements” of Hitler and Stalin. If we count only the infants murdered after the first trimester, babies who are beginning to look like the little people they are, Americans have killed six million, equal to Hitler’s murder of the Jews. Worldwide, the total after the first trimester is 100 million. Aside from the near-unforgiveable evil of this ultimate betrayal of children by their mothers, what have these women done to themselves?
Leftists worship homosexuals and lesbians; many leftists are themselves sexual perverts. Just over two percent of the population, a shrill, strident, demanding minority, seek to overturn Judeo-Christian morality and destroy marriage and the family, a cherished goal of the left since the time of Adam Weishaupt. Homosexuals are portrayed as gentle souls, free of the “hang ups” of traditional machismo. The facts paint a different picture — but leftists have no use for facts. Aside from their penchant for sadomasochism and domestic violence, it is noteworthy that a disproportionate number of homosexuals have been among America’s worst serial killers. Jeffrey Dahmer, pervert and cannibal, killed some 17 men, and ate parts of them. John Wayne Gacy raped, tortured, and murdered at least 33 young men and boys. Call me old fashioned, but I don’t quite approve of the slow torture murder of teenage boys. Dean Corll did the same for at least 27 young boys — did they cry out for their mothers as their agonized screams became exhausted sobs and moans? But hey, who are we to judge, right? Bisexual Henry Lee Lucas boasted of hundreds of murders, but may have killed “only” a handful of people. Juan Corona raped and murdered at least 25 men. At least one of the known female serial killers, Aileen Wornos, was a lesbian; information on most of them is unavailable. I personally interviewed one, Dorothea Puente, but I cannot say if she was lesbian or straight.
But these gentle, persecuted saints not only harm others; they are extremely self-destructive. Their rates of drug abuse, alcoholism, and suicide are far above average, and their average life span is far below. In addition to AIDS, these carelessly promiscuous people suffer from a host of other STDs, as well as gay bowel syndrome and fecal contamination. Who would have guessed?
But when it comes to outright self-mutilation, the transsexuals are the champions; they are adored by leftists and their self-destruction will be financed by our King Hussein’s “health care” plan, which, ultimately, will leave the elderly, the disabled, and the chronically ill to die (to save money, don’t you know). There have always been men who imagined that they were women, and women who wanted to be men, and castration was always possible for the men. But the first real male to female surgery was carried out in Berlin in 1931 (two years before Hitler came to power). The enlightened Mullahs of Iran have given sex change operations their blessing. In the US the procedure is called sex reassignment surgery (SRS), and includes genital reconstruction surgery (GRS). In 2008 the American Medical Association’s House of Delegates declared that it would be “discrimination” for any doctor to refuse to perform such an operation, and the American Psychological Association (you know, the people who prescribe dangerous psychoactive drugs for children) agrees. The AMA advocated that public health plans should pay for the procedure, and Obamacare will do just that. Of course, the new “men” cannot make a woman pregnant, and the new “women” cannot bear children, and, as with the “gays,” suicide is common among these mutilated creatures.
But even newer frontiers are opening up. The latest group who will soon have special rights and protection are the “transabled,” physically healthy people who want to be crippled, blind, or paralyzed. And there are plenty of doctors who seem to have no use for the “do no harm” part of the Hippocratic Oath. How long before this, too, is covered by Obamacare? How long before medical facilities and doctors will be forced to perform the amputations and eye-gougings, and the severing of nerves? How long before the self-mutilated are entitled to lifetime disability benefits?
And the current craze for tattoos, piercings, burnings, and even major plastic surgery to make people look like (for example) cats is part of this. I am old enough to remember when few men and almost no women were tattooed; now it is common for formerly attractive young women to be covered in ink and have multiple body parts pierced. No studies have been done, but I suspect that most of these people are Obama supporters. Just a hunch. Such is the engineered decline of Western Civilization that Americans increasingly resemble primitive tribal people from the Amazon or the Congo, the people with lip plugs, deformed ears, and wooden duck bills. And — count on it — this is just the beginning.
By William Stoecker
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
It seems to be in the nature of evil that it is not only destructive, but self-destructive as well. An obvious example would be the Muslim suicide bombers who are forever asking “Why is it so hot here? And why are my virgins so ugly?” Islam is a death cult, its followers so twisted by hate that they seek to destroy, not just everyone who does not agree with them, but themselves as well. But the allies and facilitators of Islam are the leftists, and they, too, and all the groups they support, are self-destructive.
The baby butchers, for example, defend abortion by implying that the child in the womb is not a separate person, but part of the mother’s body, and insisting that women’s bodies should be controlled by themselves and no one else. Women, they say, have a right to choose — so long as they choose to murder their infants. But if the child is merely part of the mother’s body, is not abortion a form of self-mutilation? Since Roe vs. Wade in 1973, some 58,000,000 babies have been murdered in the U.S. alone, and over one billion worldwide. This is an appalling death toll, surpassing even the “achievements” of Hitler and Stalin. If we count only the infants murdered after the first trimester, babies who are beginning to look like the little people they are, Americans have killed six million, equal to Hitler’s murder of the Jews. Worldwide, the total after the first trimester is 100 million. Aside from the near-unforgiveable evil of this ultimate betrayal of children by their mothers, what have these women done to themselves?
Leftists worship homosexuals and lesbians; many leftists are themselves sexual perverts. Just over two percent of the population, a shrill, strident, demanding minority, seek to overturn Judeo-Christian morality and destroy marriage and the family, a cherished goal of the left since the time of Adam Weishaupt. Homosexuals are portrayed as gentle souls, free of the “hang ups” of traditional machismo. The facts paint a different picture — but leftists have no use for facts. Aside from their penchant for sadomasochism and domestic violence, it is noteworthy that a disproportionate number of homosexuals have been among America’s worst serial killers. Jeffrey Dahmer, pervert and cannibal, killed some 17 men, and ate parts of them. John Wayne Gacy raped, tortured, and murdered at least 33 young men and boys. Call me old fashioned, but I don’t quite approve of the slow torture murder of teenage boys. Dean Corll did the same for at least 27 young boys — did they cry out for their mothers as their agonized screams became exhausted sobs and moans? But hey, who are we to judge, right? Bisexual Henry Lee Lucas boasted of hundreds of murders, but may have killed “only” a handful of people. Juan Corona raped and murdered at least 25 men. At least one of the known female serial killers, Aileen Wornos, was a lesbian; information on most of them is unavailable. I personally interviewed one, Dorothea Puente, but I cannot say if she was lesbian or straight.
But these gentle, persecuted saints not only harm others; they are extremely self-destructive. Their rates of drug abuse, alcoholism, and suicide are far above average, and their average life span is far below. In addition to AIDS, these carelessly promiscuous people suffer from a host of other STDs, as well as gay bowel syndrome and fecal contamination. Who would have guessed?
But when it comes to outright self-mutilation, the transsexuals are the champions; they are adored by leftists and their self-destruction will be financed by our King Hussein’s “health care” plan, which, ultimately, will leave the elderly, the disabled, and the chronically ill to die (to save money, don’t you know). There have always been men who imagined that they were women, and women who wanted to be men, and castration was always possible for the men. But the first real male to female surgery was carried out in Berlin in 1931 (two years before Hitler came to power). The enlightened Mullahs of Iran have given sex change operations their blessing. In the US the procedure is called sex reassignment surgery (SRS), and includes genital reconstruction surgery (GRS). In 2008 the American Medical Association’s House of Delegates declared that it would be “discrimination” for any doctor to refuse to perform such an operation, and the American Psychological Association (you know, the people who prescribe dangerous psychoactive drugs for children) agrees. The AMA advocated that public health plans should pay for the procedure, and Obamacare will do just that. Of course, the new “men” cannot make a woman pregnant, and the new “women” cannot bear children, and, as with the “gays,” suicide is common among these mutilated creatures.
But even newer frontiers are opening up. The latest group who will soon have special rights and protection are the “transabled,” physically healthy people who want to be crippled, blind, or paralyzed. And there are plenty of doctors who seem to have no use for the “do no harm” part of the Hippocratic Oath. How long before this, too, is covered by Obamacare? How long before medical facilities and doctors will be forced to perform the amputations and eye-gougings, and the severing of nerves? How long before the self-mutilated are entitled to lifetime disability benefits?
And the current craze for tattoos, piercings, burnings, and even major plastic surgery to make people look like (for example) cats is part of this. I am old enough to remember when few men and almost no women were tattooed; now it is common for formerly attractive young women to be covered in ink and have multiple body parts pierced. No studies have been done, but I suspect that most of these people are Obama supporters. Just a hunch. Such is the engineered decline of Western Civilization that Americans increasingly resemble primitive tribal people from the Amazon or the Congo, the people with lip plugs, deformed ears, and wooden duck bills. And — count on it — this is just the beginning.
By William Stoecker
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
Lost Innocence
Lost Innocence
When I was a young married woman and a new mommy, a movie came to our small Nebraska town.
It had been talked about and advertised on a popular radio station. The wait had been long since the movie was held over again and again due to its popularity, but now it had arrived. My husband was eager to see it and so we went to the drive-in where it was playing.
It was to be a scary movie. I knew that.
Right away, the movie depicted a murder and then the murderers said that they would rape the female survivor. I was horrified and disturbed. I felt physically ill and asked to leave. My husband told me just to close my eyes. I did but I could still hear the sounds and I began shaking and felt like I was either going to throw up or pass out. Infant Sara was on my lap sleeping, but my alarm ran through her like an electric current, and soon she was fussing and crying.
Disgusted, my husband drove us home with me in tears.
That night I could not sleep without the light on. I was still in shock and terror.
I think back on that young woman, so distraught, so traumatized.
Fast forward forty years.
I find that very little shocks me now, not much can disturb me — and today I am grieving for the desensitizing of my own heart.
I suppose it is good that I am able to handle shock better than I did so long ago.
I could probably view that movie now without batting an eye.
There is a loss of innocence, an acceptance of brutality, and a numbness to the horror of cruelty and violence, that disturbs me now. And like an electric current of alarm, it is flowing through me today.
I mourn my lost innocence. I mourn my insensitivity.
I am praying for heart tenderizer — for me, for you, for our culture before we become incapable of feeling much of anything.
Ephesians 4:18, New International Version (NIV): “They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts.”
By Rona Swanson
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
When I was a young married woman and a new mommy, a movie came to our small Nebraska town.
It had been talked about and advertised on a popular radio station. The wait had been long since the movie was held over again and again due to its popularity, but now it had arrived. My husband was eager to see it and so we went to the drive-in where it was playing.
It was to be a scary movie. I knew that.
Right away, the movie depicted a murder and then the murderers said that they would rape the female survivor. I was horrified and disturbed. I felt physically ill and asked to leave. My husband told me just to close my eyes. I did but I could still hear the sounds and I began shaking and felt like I was either going to throw up or pass out. Infant Sara was on my lap sleeping, but my alarm ran through her like an electric current, and soon she was fussing and crying.
Disgusted, my husband drove us home with me in tears.
That night I could not sleep without the light on. I was still in shock and terror.
I think back on that young woman, so distraught, so traumatized.
Fast forward forty years.
I find that very little shocks me now, not much can disturb me — and today I am grieving for the desensitizing of my own heart.
I suppose it is good that I am able to handle shock better than I did so long ago.
I could probably view that movie now without batting an eye.
There is a loss of innocence, an acceptance of brutality, and a numbness to the horror of cruelty and violence, that disturbs me now. And like an electric current of alarm, it is flowing through me today.
I mourn my lost innocence. I mourn my insensitivity.
I am praying for heart tenderizer — for me, for you, for our culture before we become incapable of feeling much of anything.
Ephesians 4:18, New International Version (NIV): “They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts.”
By Rona Swanson
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
On Lowering the Flag
On Lowering the Flag
After a massacre like the one at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, our immediate reaction is to do something. Something, for politicians, means legislation. And for Democratic politicians, this means gun control.
It’s the all-purpose, go-to, knee-jerk solution. Within hours of the massacre, President Obama was lamenting the absence of progress on gun control. A particular Democratic (and media) lament was Congress' failure to pass anything after Sandy Hook.
But the unfortunate fact is that the post-Sandy Hook legislation would have had zero effect on the events in Charleston. Its main provisions had to do with assault weapons; Dylann Roof was using a semiautomatic pistol.
You can pass any gun law you want. The 1994 assault weapons ban was allowed to expire after 10 years because, as a Justice Department study showed, it had no effect. There’s only one gun law that would make a difference: confiscation. Everything else is for show.
And in this country, confiscation is impossible. Constitutionally, because of the Second Amendment. Politically, because doing so would cause something of an insurrection. And culturally, because Americans cherish — cling to, as Obama once had it — their guns as a symbol of freedom. You can largely ban guns in Canada where the founding document gives the purpose of confederation as the achievement of “peace, order and good government.” Harder to disarm a nation whose founding purpose is “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
With gun control going nowhere, the psychic national need post-Charleston to nonetheless do something took a remarkable direction: banishment of the Confederate flag, starting with the one flying on the grounds of the statehouse in Columbia, then spreading like wildfire to consume Confederate flags, symbols, statues and even memorabilia everywhere — from the Alabama state capitol to eBay and Amazon.
Logically, the connection is tenuous. Yes, Roof does pose with the Confederate flag, among other symbols of racism, on his website. But does anyone imagine that if the South Carolina flag had been relegated to a museum, the massacre would not have occurred?
Politically, the murders created a unique moment. Gov. Nikki Haley was surely sincere in calling for the Confederate flag’s removal. But she also understood that the massacre had created a moment when the usual pro-Confederate flag feeling — and, surely, expressions of it — would be largely suppressed, presenting the opportunity to achieve something otherwise politically unachievable.
But there’s a deeper reason for this rush to banish Confederate symbols, to move them from the public square to the museum. The trigger was not just the massacre itself, but even more tellingly, the breathtaking display of nobility and spiritual generosity by the victims' relatives. Within 48 hours of the murder of their loved ones, they spoke of redemption and reconciliation and even forgiveness of the killer himself. It was an astonishingly moving expression of Christian charity.
Such grace demands a response. In a fascinating dynamic, it created a feeling of moral obligation to reciprocate in some way. The flag was not material to the crime itself, but its connection to the underlying race history behind the crime suggested that its removal from the statehouse grounds — whatever the endlessly debated merits of the case — could serve as a reciprocal gesture of reconciliation.
The result was a microcosm of — and a historical lesson in — the moral force of the original civil rights movement, whose genius was to understand the effect that combating evil with good, violence with grace would have on a fundamentally decent American nation.
America was indeed moved. The result was the civil rights acts. The issue today is no longer legal equality. It is more a matter of sorting through historical memory.
The Confederate flags would ultimately have come down. That is a good thing. They are now coming down in a rush. The haste may turn out to be problematic.
We will probably overshoot, as we are wont to do, in the stampede to eliminate every relic of the Confederacy. Not every statue has to be smashed, not every memory banished. Perhaps we can learn a lesson from Arlington National Cemetery, founded by the victorious Union to bury its dead. There you will find Section 16. It contains the remains of hundreds of Confederate soldiers grouped around a modest, moving monument to their devotion to “duty as they understood it” — a gesture by the Union of soldierly respect, without any concession regarding the taintedness of their cause.
Or shall we uproot them as well?
By Charles Krauthammer
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
After a massacre like the one at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, our immediate reaction is to do something. Something, for politicians, means legislation. And for Democratic politicians, this means gun control.
It’s the all-purpose, go-to, knee-jerk solution. Within hours of the massacre, President Obama was lamenting the absence of progress on gun control. A particular Democratic (and media) lament was Congress' failure to pass anything after Sandy Hook.
But the unfortunate fact is that the post-Sandy Hook legislation would have had zero effect on the events in Charleston. Its main provisions had to do with assault weapons; Dylann Roof was using a semiautomatic pistol.
You can pass any gun law you want. The 1994 assault weapons ban was allowed to expire after 10 years because, as a Justice Department study showed, it had no effect. There’s only one gun law that would make a difference: confiscation. Everything else is for show.
And in this country, confiscation is impossible. Constitutionally, because of the Second Amendment. Politically, because doing so would cause something of an insurrection. And culturally, because Americans cherish — cling to, as Obama once had it — their guns as a symbol of freedom. You can largely ban guns in Canada where the founding document gives the purpose of confederation as the achievement of “peace, order and good government.” Harder to disarm a nation whose founding purpose is “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
With gun control going nowhere, the psychic national need post-Charleston to nonetheless do something took a remarkable direction: banishment of the Confederate flag, starting with the one flying on the grounds of the statehouse in Columbia, then spreading like wildfire to consume Confederate flags, symbols, statues and even memorabilia everywhere — from the Alabama state capitol to eBay and Amazon.
Logically, the connection is tenuous. Yes, Roof does pose with the Confederate flag, among other symbols of racism, on his website. But does anyone imagine that if the South Carolina flag had been relegated to a museum, the massacre would not have occurred?
Politically, the murders created a unique moment. Gov. Nikki Haley was surely sincere in calling for the Confederate flag’s removal. But she also understood that the massacre had created a moment when the usual pro-Confederate flag feeling — and, surely, expressions of it — would be largely suppressed, presenting the opportunity to achieve something otherwise politically unachievable.
But there’s a deeper reason for this rush to banish Confederate symbols, to move them from the public square to the museum. The trigger was not just the massacre itself, but even more tellingly, the breathtaking display of nobility and spiritual generosity by the victims' relatives. Within 48 hours of the murder of their loved ones, they spoke of redemption and reconciliation and even forgiveness of the killer himself. It was an astonishingly moving expression of Christian charity.
Such grace demands a response. In a fascinating dynamic, it created a feeling of moral obligation to reciprocate in some way. The flag was not material to the crime itself, but its connection to the underlying race history behind the crime suggested that its removal from the statehouse grounds — whatever the endlessly debated merits of the case — could serve as a reciprocal gesture of reconciliation.
The result was a microcosm of — and a historical lesson in — the moral force of the original civil rights movement, whose genius was to understand the effect that combating evil with good, violence with grace would have on a fundamentally decent American nation.
America was indeed moved. The result was the civil rights acts. The issue today is no longer legal equality. It is more a matter of sorting through historical memory.
The Confederate flags would ultimately have come down. That is a good thing. They are now coming down in a rush. The haste may turn out to be problematic.
We will probably overshoot, as we are wont to do, in the stampede to eliminate every relic of the Confederacy. Not every statue has to be smashed, not every memory banished. Perhaps we can learn a lesson from Arlington National Cemetery, founded by the victorious Union to bury its dead. There you will find Section 16. It contains the remains of hundreds of Confederate soldiers grouped around a modest, moving monument to their devotion to “duty as they understood it” — a gesture by the Union of soldierly respect, without any concession regarding the taintedness of their cause.
Or shall we uproot them as well?
By Charles Krauthammer
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
Having Dispensed With God, Leftists Now Aim for Christians
Having Dispensed With God, Leftists Now Aim for Christians
1-2-3-4-5. Five leftist lawyers, currently abusing their authority as Supreme Court Justices, unleashed their activism upon the U.S. Constitution Friday and created a non-existent right to same-sex marriage. The Fourteenth Amendment may provide equal protection under the law, but by applying it to expand the definition of marriage the Court has created a constitutional crisis in America. The First and Tenth Amendments, which respectively promise freedom of individual religion and award jurisdiction to the States of all powers not enumerated in the Constitution, have now been placed in direct conflict with the Fourteenth Amendment.
http://patriotpost.us/articles/36045
“Love Wins”? Not here it doesn’t, nor does anything but the will of five judicial despots, followed by the bullying mob rule of the Left and its Rainbow Mafia. Need proof?
In 2008, before the Saul Alinsky-ite Barack Obama and his Chicagoland gang occupied the White House and began “fundamentally transforming” our nation, there was debate, dissent and dialogue about all sorts of issues, including those issues fomented by the hard Left in order to label the response of the Christian Right as extremist.
In 2008, homosexual couples could enter into a legal, binding contract for shared property, power of attorney for making health care decisions, probate of wills, etc., and were, in most cases, receiving health care benefits from employers. These same homosexual couples were consummating their relationship in the privacy of their own domicile without harassment.
In 2008, Christians could speak their opinions and stand on their faith while understanding their voice was respected in the public square.
In 2015, however, those same Christians are in grave danger of losing legal standing because their beliefs are pitted against a brand new, heretofore undiscovered constitutional right. Tolerance is only for those who agree with the mob-rule Left.
What changed in seven years?
If you ask a moderate Republican, he or she might say, “Elections have consequences,” and shrug, since they never viewed this as meaningful anyway. If you ask the Bible-believing Democrats who voted for Ronald Reagan, they shudder at the exchange of timeless principles for sexual license. If you ask a libertarian, you might get the response that devout Christians are the “recalcitrant minority.” But if you ask someone who identifies as Christian first, American second, and is conservative politically, you’ll hear sorrow for a nation that worships the secular triune of me, myself and I rather than our Creator.
Millions of votes cast around the country to support the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman have now been nullified. How will this tyrannical disregard for the enumerated powers of the Constitution play out in the everyday lives of Christians?
In your place of worship, there’s now a government-approved theology that the God-rejecting Left expects to be preached. Whereas Bible-centric congregations stand on Holy Scripture, which does not include one single advocacy of sexual sin or perversion, the homosexual agenda demands that this view be rejected. One of the five black-robed tyrants, Justice Anthony Kennedy — considered the “swing vote” — laughingly attempted to reassure those whose lives revolve around their faith in the Judeo-Christian God by writing, “Those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned.”
Get that? We can advocate our opposition, but there is little legal standing in such a weak word. As Chief Justice John Roberts put it, “The majority graciously suggests that religious believers may continue to ‘advocate’ and ‘teach’ their views of marriage. The First Amendment guarantees, however, the freedom to ‘exercise’ religion. Ominously, that is not a word the majority uses.”
Let’s not forget the Christian bakers, florists, photographers and other business owners who have been financially ruined and litigiously challenged by the Rainbow Mafia. Already, Christians have been forced to either comply with the government-approved theology or face persecution.
What about the tax-exempt status of Christian organizations such as schools, faith-based charities, hospitals and other institutions with religious beliefs?
The Obama administration has already indicated this provision as a likely stick to enforce the mandatory bowing to the altar of government-sanctioned faith. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, arguing conjured-up rights before the Supreme Court back in April, tipped their hand in response to an inquiry by Justice Samuel Alito. “It’s certainly going to be an issue,” Verrilli promised. “I don’t deny that. I don’t deny that, Justice Alito. It is going to be an issue.”
Chad Griffin, president of the Human (read: Homosexual) Rights Campaign, likewise said, “No question, the work is not done. … We still have a long ways to go.”
Cultural icons like Star Trek actor George Takei, who is homosexual, made the same veiled threat after the ruling. Some, he said, are “going to try to use the shroud of religious freedom” to disobey the Court’s decree. “I believe in religious freedom, and people who argue that are entitled to their freedom,” Takei said. “But” — yes, there was bound to be a “but” — “they do not have the freedom to impose their religious values on to others.”
Yet that’s exactly what the Court and the Rainbow Mafia are doing. The mob-rule Left, characteristically using its ends to justify any means, is wielding its political and legal prowess acquired over the last seven years to openly oppress Judeo-Christians.
Yet there are glimmers of hope that will endure.
Cultural and casual Christians, the ones who believe philanthropy and showing up for a holiday service is their only necessary spiritual response, will quickly self-identify and want to change the subject. Eventually, these fair-weather believers will either deepen their faith or more explicitly abandon it to avoid social stigma or name-calling.
But the greatest outcome of this conflict threatening the Liberty of the faithful and devout will be the growth of strength and community. Think of redwoods, trees that soar to heights of over 350 feet and can live thousands of years. These natural giants have roots of only five to 13 feet deep, but spread outward to 100 feet, interlocking with the roots of neighboring trees in the grove. Unseen bonds within these titans of the forest provide stability and support when the storms howl.
As Russell Moore, president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, reminds us, “[T]he church often thrives when it is in sharp contrast to the cultures around it.”http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/06/26/why-the-church-should-neither-cave-nor-panic-about-the-decision-on-gay-marriage/
And Congress isn’t idle. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID) introduced the First Amendment Defense Act, which Lee writes “would prevent any agency from denying a federal tax exemption, grant, contract, accreditation, license, or certification to an individual or institution for acting on their religious belief that marriage is a union between one man and one woman.”
http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/29/congress-plan-defend-first-amendment-rights-courts-marriage-ruling/
This battle has been won through activism and deception. The war, however, is not over.
By Robin Smith
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
1-2-3-4-5. Five leftist lawyers, currently abusing their authority as Supreme Court Justices, unleashed their activism upon the U.S. Constitution Friday and created a non-existent right to same-sex marriage. The Fourteenth Amendment may provide equal protection under the law, but by applying it to expand the definition of marriage the Court has created a constitutional crisis in America. The First and Tenth Amendments, which respectively promise freedom of individual religion and award jurisdiction to the States of all powers not enumerated in the Constitution, have now been placed in direct conflict with the Fourteenth Amendment.
http://patriotpost.us/articles/36045
“Love Wins”? Not here it doesn’t, nor does anything but the will of five judicial despots, followed by the bullying mob rule of the Left and its Rainbow Mafia. Need proof?
In 2008, before the Saul Alinsky-ite Barack Obama and his Chicagoland gang occupied the White House and began “fundamentally transforming” our nation, there was debate, dissent and dialogue about all sorts of issues, including those issues fomented by the hard Left in order to label the response of the Christian Right as extremist.
In 2008, homosexual couples could enter into a legal, binding contract for shared property, power of attorney for making health care decisions, probate of wills, etc., and were, in most cases, receiving health care benefits from employers. These same homosexual couples were consummating their relationship in the privacy of their own domicile without harassment.
In 2008, Christians could speak their opinions and stand on their faith while understanding their voice was respected in the public square.
In 2015, however, those same Christians are in grave danger of losing legal standing because their beliefs are pitted against a brand new, heretofore undiscovered constitutional right. Tolerance is only for those who agree with the mob-rule Left.
What changed in seven years?
If you ask a moderate Republican, he or she might say, “Elections have consequences,” and shrug, since they never viewed this as meaningful anyway. If you ask the Bible-believing Democrats who voted for Ronald Reagan, they shudder at the exchange of timeless principles for sexual license. If you ask a libertarian, you might get the response that devout Christians are the “recalcitrant minority.” But if you ask someone who identifies as Christian first, American second, and is conservative politically, you’ll hear sorrow for a nation that worships the secular triune of me, myself and I rather than our Creator.
Millions of votes cast around the country to support the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman have now been nullified. How will this tyrannical disregard for the enumerated powers of the Constitution play out in the everyday lives of Christians?
In your place of worship, there’s now a government-approved theology that the God-rejecting Left expects to be preached. Whereas Bible-centric congregations stand on Holy Scripture, which does not include one single advocacy of sexual sin or perversion, the homosexual agenda demands that this view be rejected. One of the five black-robed tyrants, Justice Anthony Kennedy — considered the “swing vote” — laughingly attempted to reassure those whose lives revolve around their faith in the Judeo-Christian God by writing, “Those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned.”
Get that? We can advocate our opposition, but there is little legal standing in such a weak word. As Chief Justice John Roberts put it, “The majority graciously suggests that religious believers may continue to ‘advocate’ and ‘teach’ their views of marriage. The First Amendment guarantees, however, the freedom to ‘exercise’ religion. Ominously, that is not a word the majority uses.”
Let’s not forget the Christian bakers, florists, photographers and other business owners who have been financially ruined and litigiously challenged by the Rainbow Mafia. Already, Christians have been forced to either comply with the government-approved theology or face persecution.
What about the tax-exempt status of Christian organizations such as schools, faith-based charities, hospitals and other institutions with religious beliefs?
The Obama administration has already indicated this provision as a likely stick to enforce the mandatory bowing to the altar of government-sanctioned faith. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, arguing conjured-up rights before the Supreme Court back in April, tipped their hand in response to an inquiry by Justice Samuel Alito. “It’s certainly going to be an issue,” Verrilli promised. “I don’t deny that. I don’t deny that, Justice Alito. It is going to be an issue.”
Chad Griffin, president of the Human (read: Homosexual) Rights Campaign, likewise said, “No question, the work is not done. … We still have a long ways to go.”
Cultural icons like Star Trek actor George Takei, who is homosexual, made the same veiled threat after the ruling. Some, he said, are “going to try to use the shroud of religious freedom” to disobey the Court’s decree. “I believe in religious freedom, and people who argue that are entitled to their freedom,” Takei said. “But” — yes, there was bound to be a “but” — “they do not have the freedom to impose their religious values on to others.”
Yet that’s exactly what the Court and the Rainbow Mafia are doing. The mob-rule Left, characteristically using its ends to justify any means, is wielding its political and legal prowess acquired over the last seven years to openly oppress Judeo-Christians.
Yet there are glimmers of hope that will endure.
Cultural and casual Christians, the ones who believe philanthropy and showing up for a holiday service is their only necessary spiritual response, will quickly self-identify and want to change the subject. Eventually, these fair-weather believers will either deepen their faith or more explicitly abandon it to avoid social stigma or name-calling.
But the greatest outcome of this conflict threatening the Liberty of the faithful and devout will be the growth of strength and community. Think of redwoods, trees that soar to heights of over 350 feet and can live thousands of years. These natural giants have roots of only five to 13 feet deep, but spread outward to 100 feet, interlocking with the roots of neighboring trees in the grove. Unseen bonds within these titans of the forest provide stability and support when the storms howl.
As Russell Moore, president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, reminds us, “[T]he church often thrives when it is in sharp contrast to the cultures around it.”http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/06/26/why-the-church-should-neither-cave-nor-panic-about-the-decision-on-gay-marriage/
And Congress isn’t idle. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID) introduced the First Amendment Defense Act, which Lee writes “would prevent any agency from denying a federal tax exemption, grant, contract, accreditation, license, or certification to an individual or institution for acting on their religious belief that marriage is a union between one man and one woman.”
http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/29/congress-plan-defend-first-amendment-rights-courts-marriage-ruling/
This battle has been won through activism and deception. The war, however, is not over.
By Robin Smith
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Joseph F Barber- http://josephfreedomoranarchy.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
