Is it true that Jesus never mentioned anything about homosexuality? That He never brought it up, even once? Most of us have heard the line that in the Gospels there’s no record of Jesus condemning homosexuality. There are individuals, especially from the militant homosexual rights movement, who utter this fabrication with all the raw hostility of liberals who think abortion is their God given right.
The “Jesus never mentioned homosexuality” argument is meant to bully people into believing that Jesus actually took a benign attitude towards same-sex acts. Liberal’s reason that if Jesus disapproved of homosexuality, He would have said so. Since He never mentioned gay sex, He didn’t condemn it.
Most people, including some Christians, don’t have a clue what Jesus did or did not say on any given subject, let alone what He thought about same-sex practices, so they fall for the “Jesus never mentioned homosexuality” lie, hook, line and sinker.
So, do homosexual relationships have the approval of Jesus?
At the very heart of the Christian view of God is the Holy Trinity. (This is not an essay on Christian doctrine, so bear with me.) Classical Christianity has believed that God exists in Holy Trinity, or tri-personality — the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Trinity is not three gods in one. Each Person of the Trinity is fully God. They are one in essence with three separate and distinct personalities. All are infinite and eternal. Jesus Christ, the Son, is the Second person of the Trinity. The Son is in perfect union with the Father and the Holy Spirit. They are never, nor could they ever be out of union with one another. Jesus said, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). The deity of the Holy Spirit is also evident. In Acts 5:3-4 Peter told Ananias that by lying to the Holy Spirit, he had lied to God. Dan Corner offers an excellent way to illustrate the Trinity:
“H2O…is common water-two parts hydrogen, one part oxygen. You can freeze H2O and you would have the solid, or ice. You can turn on your faucet and you would have the liquid H2O. You can hear the whistle of H2O that comes out of the tea kettle spout which is steam, but it would still be H2O. H2O can and does exist in solid, liquid and gas. The solid is not the liquid; the liquid is not the gas; and yet all three are of one nature: H2O. And that is exactly how it is with the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Father is not the Son, the Father is not the Holy Spirit, and Jesus is not the Holy Spirit.”
Here’s the crux of the matter. Those who try to make their case by arguing, “Jesus never mentioned homosexuality” are either ignorant of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, or they ignore it for the purpose of supporting a hollow argument.
The late Lehman Strauss offered the following insight into the Apostle Paul’s clear teaching on homosexuality:
“In Romans 1:26-31 twenty-three punishable sins are listed with homosexuality leading the list. Paul wrote, “For this cause God gave them up into vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet” (Romans 1:26, 27). These verses are telling us that homosexuals suffer in their body and personality the inevitable consequences of their wrong doing. Notice that the behaviour of the homosexual is described as a “vile affection” (1:26). The Greek word translated “vile” (atimia) means filthy, dirty, evil, dishonourable. The word “affection” in Greek is pathos, used by the Greeks of either a good or bad desire. Here in the context of Romans it is used in a bad sense. The “vile affection” is a degrading passion, a shameful lust. Both the desire…and the act of homosexuality are condemned in the Bible as sin.”
In Galatians 1:11-12 Paul provides his qualifications to speak for God: “I want you to know brothers that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.” Later he tells how he went to Arabia to be trained “in the school of the Spirit in order that he might receive greater revelations concerning the mysteries of the Gospel of the glorified Christ.”
Paul’s ideas were more than his own speculations. He says his thoughts came directly from the Second and Third members of the Trinity.
What does God the Father say about homosexuality? “Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable” (Leviticus 18:22). By their very nature the Son and the Holy Spirit agree with the Father that for a man to lie with a man is detestable.
“It is significant,” says Harold Janz, “that while virtually nothing is written in ancient literature about female homosexual activity, Paul in Romans 1 does. He treats both homosexuality and lesbianism the same and understands both to be wrong for the same reasons. It is important to note…that Paul echoes the words of the creation account in Romans. He speaks of those who substitute images of the creation for the Creator and go “against nature” in committing unnatural acts with one another. Those who do so, he says, are both females and males, using not the usual Greek words for women and men, but the words used in Genesis, “female” and “male.” Paul is saying that we must look back toward the order that God established in creation to recognize where we’ve gone wrong.”
Those who commit unnatural sexual acts with one another go against God’s moral order for humanity. Sadly, men and women who indulge in moral anarchy don’t give a hoot what God thinks! Essentially they’re saying to Him, “Stay out of my life!
Why would God hang around if He’s not wanted?
God weeps over our indiscretions. He wept over Jerusalem because her people killed the prophets and would not turn to Him. Our disobedience also angers Him. The God who wept over Jerusalem is the same God who destroyed Sodom because most of its citizens were moral degenerates.
In Romans 1:25-28 Paul blames moral depravity on men and women who “exchange the truth of God for a lie,” and those who “did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God.” When you come right down to it, the immoral individuals Paul was talking about dethroned God and deified themselves! Consequently, He punished their sin by delivering them over to it.
“Yet these men speak abusively against whatever they do not understand; and what things they do understand by instinct, like unreasoning animals—these are the very things that destroy them.” (Jude 1:10)
It’s worth noting that the Bible speaks of no “gay” role models. When homosexuality is spoken of it’s always in the negative. Because the Gospels have no record of Jesus mentioning homosexuality the “gay” rights movement would have us believe that He must not have opposed it. From His silence they conclude that sodomy is “normal and healthy.” First of all, sexual relations between a man and a woman exemplify normal behavior. Second, there is nothing healthy about engaging in sodomy. The sexual practices of homosexuals have serious health risks and illnesses.
Although sin shouldn’t be taken lightly, it is imperative for Christians to hate the sin but love the sinner. Even if we disapprove of someone’s lifestyle and/or choices we are expected to treat them with kindness and respect. Bear in mind, though, that withholding what the Bible teaches on homosexuality from someone who’s indulging in risky behavior isn’t loving it’s cowardice, even hateful.
“He who does not love does not know God, for God is love. In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him.” (1 John 4:8-9)
On Solid Rock Resources – many articles on homosexuality
The pathetic attack on religious freedom and the sanctity of individual conscience is a shot heard round the planet. The social desecration that surrounds this immoral culture has a defamed religious czar, named Barack Hussein Obama. Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of Health and Human service is a disgrace. She acts as the High Priestess of the Church for the Police State. No matter what your opinion is of the Catholic Church, one practice surely shows the wisdom of the faith. Women are not ordained as priests.
All the bluster about women’s reproductive rights misses the nature of the issue. America was created as a nation to guarantee religious freedom. According to the gospel of Obama, his bishops wear skirts and jack boots. By ordering an unconstitutional dictate, Sebelius’ heretical doctrine views the First Amendment as expendable. History repeats itself.
Mark Steyn in an article steeped in canon law irony The Church of Obama has it correct.
“The president of the United States has decided to go Henry VIII on the Church’s medieval ass. Whatever religious institutions might profess to believe in the matter of “women’s health,” their pre-eminences, jurisdictions, privileges, authorities, and immunities are now subordinate to a one-and-only supreme head on earth determined to repress, redress, restrain, and amend their heresies. One wouldn’t wish to overextend the analogy: For one thing, the Catholic Church in America has been pathetically accommodating of Beltway bigwigs’ ravenous appetite for marital annulments in a way that Pope Clement VII was disinclined to be vis-à-vis the English king and Catherine of Aragon. But where’d all the pandering get them? In essence President Obama has embarked on the same usurpation of church authority as Henry VIII: As his Friday morning faux-compromise confirms, the continued existence of a “faith-based institution” depends on submission to the doctrinal supremacy of the state.”
The response from Cardinal-Designate Dolan during a CBS 2 interview sums it up.
“The federal government should do what it’s traditionally done since July 4, 1776, namely back out of intruding into the internal life of a church.”
Integrated Catholic Life quotes the Archbishop Dolan further,
“The Catholic Church defends religious liberty, including freedom of conscience, for everyone. The Amish do not carry health insurance. The government respects their principles. Christian Scientists want to heal by prayer alone, and the new health-care reform law respects that. Quakers and others object to killing even in wartime, and the government respects that principle for conscientious objectors. By its decision, the Obama administration has failed to show the same respect for the consciences of Catholics and others who object to treating pregnancy as a disease.”
For a rational and detailed explanation of the pitfalls, view the video ObamaCare: The Facts On Abortion.
Even the most ardent opponent of the Papacy must admit that Western Civilization is based upon the principles of Christian teaching that recognize the unique essence of every human being. That each person has an individual conscience as the focus of behavior and that a belief in God and the revealed word developed our social and legal heritage. The State may have temporal power to impose its will, but does not have legitimate moral authority that violates natural law or the inherent autonomy of each mortal soul.
The Obama gambit is a foolish attempt to wage war directly on the spiritual church doctrine of the Catholic Church. Even the Huffington Post points out in Catholics Rally Against Obama Contraception Mandate the outrage that this assault stirred.
“Dozens of priests took the rare step of reading letters from the pulpit urging parishioners to reach out to Washington and oppose the rule, enacted Jan 20.
The rule requires nearly all employers to provide their employees access to health insurance that covers artificial contraception, sterilization services and the “morning after” birth control pill.
The mandate exempts individual churches but applies to Catholic universities, Catholic-based charities and to groups affiliated with Methodists, Baptists and other denominations.”
The feeble attempt to walk back this mistake with a compromise is symptomatic of a brutal regime that wants to stamp out traditional Christianity, and substitute a state worship in a command and control belief.
The Wall Street Journal provides this account in ObamaCare’s Great Awakening.
“The Affordable Care Act itself is ambiguous about what counts as a religious organization that deserves conscience protection. Like so much else in the rushed bill, this was left to administrative discretion. What the law does cement is the principle that the government will decide for everyone what “health care” must mean. The entire thrust of ObamaCare is to standardize benefits and how they must be paid for and provided, regardless of individual choices or ethical convictions.
Mr. Obama’s allies among Catholic liberals are also professing shock—even the Catholic Health Association’s Sister Carol Keehan, who lobbied for ObamaCare, and Notre Dame’s Father John Jenkins, who invited Mr. Obama to speak on campus in 2009. But if they now claim they were taken for a ride by the secular left, the truth is that they wanted to be deceived in the name of their grander goal of government-enforced equity. The Catholic left was one of ObamaCare’s great enablers.
Speaking of scales from the eyes, we’re eager to hear from former Michigan Congressman Bart Stupak, who for a brief moment led a faction of pro-life Democrats against ObamaCare in 2010. They surrendered when Mr. Obama gave them the fig leaf of an executive order that will supposedly prevent federal funds from subsidizing abortions. Mr. Stupak is now a lobbyist at the D.C. law firm Venable LLP.”
Many political pundits claim that the social issues are no longer important to most of the public. How inept it is to accept that the basis for political decisions need not incorporate the moral issues or Bill of Right axioms. Human freedom is a natural right and is not a concession provided from some obscure government bureaucrat or administrator.
Pat Buchanan has long championed the principles and teaching of Christendom. The Death of the West is not based solely on the decline in birth rates of just European descent families. The suppression or Christian beliefs and the persecution of religious institutions under the 501 C3 extortion scheme to silence preaching and neuter political courage is the core strategy to kill faith in God.
The Business Insider confirms the wisdom in the Catholic viewpoint, Time To Admit It: The Church Has Always Been Right On Birth Control
Today’s injunctions against birth control were re-affirmed in a 1968 document by Pope Paul VI called Humanae Vitae. He warned of four results if the widespread use of contraceptives was accepted:
1.General lowering of moral standards
2.A rise in infidelity, and illegitimacy
3.The reduction of women to objects used to satisfy men.
4.Government coercion in reproductive matters.
So, just to sum up:
It’s a good idea for people to be fruitful and multiply; and
Regardless of how you feel about the Church’s stance on birth control, it’s proven pretty prophetic.
Just how can the secular humanism culture of Obama answer the questions of a young girl in the video, Dear President Obama ?
The strong response of the Catholic bishops is long overdue. The need for a full-blown crusade against the Godless elements in government is the true cause of the 21th century. The social destruction that we witness all around is no accident. The vast majority of Americans are believers in the word of God, no matter what particular faith or denomination they accept.
Liberty is the reward of being faithful to the tenants of the Sermon of the Mount. Hopelies in the expectation that justice will one day be realized. The State and especially the social engineers that reside in the Obama hierarchy seek the systematic dismantling of all constitutional restraint. Religion stands in their way of completing their goal for Totalitarian Collectivism.
What is at stake in your immortal soul, so why would you freely give an undeserved allegiance to a government that wants to eliminate your most precious beliefs and moral standards?
The POTUS is a heretic and a religious outcast. As for his devotion to civil liberties, he is an atheist, since he rejects natural law as the underpinnings of any social contact with government. Natural law comes from God. Obamacare resides in the deepest confines of Dante’s Inferno.
Religious wars may seem passé in an era of thermonuclear annihilation, but the only salvation from the insanity of the global tyrants is to engage in spiritual and political combat with the objective of removing all fascists from bogus power and illegitimate authority. The stage is set for a true Armageddon. It is time to send the arrogant Obama administration straight to hell.
[Book Review by Israel Shamir of Melanie Phillips’ The World Turned Upside Down]
British columnist Melanie Phillips has discovered Captain Hook’s recipe and used it to prepare her recent book: it is a tempting green, but it’s dangerous to eat. Many pages can be swallowed with no ill effect, but once the reader has succumbed to Phillips’ message of spiritual comfort, the sheer poison of her conclusions sets in. The worst part is that this venom is targeted at our best and brightest, in other words, you and me.
Phillips opposes the things we oppose, and she presents our viewpoints very nicely. She rejects New Age, pagan cults, and Madonna’s “Cabbala”; she dislikes mass immigration and regrets the decline of the Church; she defends Catholics who oppose pro-homosexual schooling and adoption policies. She is against vilifying men in the name of protecting women as in the case of Julian Assange. She has baked us a cake that we can really enjoy; it’s just that the icing has been contaminated with the strychnine of Jewish Supremacy. Remember that this same Melanie Phillips was such an inspiration for the mad Norwegian murderer Breivik, who enthused about her and quoted her at length. It is not the fault of a writer, to be sure, when a fan goes off the deep end. But the poison of Breivik’s obsessive Judeophilia, the very thing that attracted him to Phillips, has been layered into her book. If you must read it, take it carefully, in small bites, as a fish nibbles away the tasty worm from the deadly steel hook.
Phillips starts with a reasonable assumption: people should be allowed to have their own opinions and speak their minds even if their traditional outlooks do not conform to post-modern ideas. As long as Phillips calls for greater tolerance for traditions that run afoul of the new hegemony, we will applaud her. Like any great liberal, she empathises with the sorrowful fates of these new dissidents: people who do not believe in Global Warming or Darwinism, who resist the charms of homosexuality, and the silent majority who still trust in God. She does not say they are right, just that they should not be persecuted.
Phillips deals well with arguments concerning Darwin, the man, and his bastard stepchildren, the modern Darwinists. She points out that Darwinism has become a new religion divorced from reason, whose adepts are as fanatic as they come. “The belief that Creation was false did not derive from Darwinism. Darwinism derived from the belief that Creation is false”. Darwinism is not proven, she reminds us; it is a theory that new evidence seems to disprove. She is no creationist; her heart lies withIntelligent Design (ID), a theory that appeals to many believers and doubters alike. The proponents of ID understand how unlikely it is that advanced forms of life developed on this world by pure happenstance. They employ Sherlock Holmes’ famous dictum and accept the improbable truth of an intelligent designer, whether it be our traditional concept of God or something more fashionable – like an extra-terrestrial. ID reaches across the walls that have divided modernists from the beliefs of their ancestors. Phillips points out that scientists have been sacked and their books refused publication because they had the temerity to support ID, or, increasingly, because they rejected Global Warming.
Phillips explains that Global Warming is not a certain fact but a passing fad of a theory, already disproved by many experiments, but notes that even if it were universally accepted it still would not justify the ferocious onslaught against skeptics. However, while Phillips approves of dissidents and deniers of Evolution and Climate Change, her largesse stops well short of offering the same treatment to Holocaust dissidents and deniers. She is as merciless to Holocaust doubters as Dawkins is to Evolution doubters. Phillips will not defend the scientists who deny that HIV causes AIDS. The people who doubt the official version of 9-11 will find no comfort in this book. Phillips ducks the charge of hypocrisy by labelling these theories “conspiratorial”; she refuses conspiracy “nuts” the indulgent attitude she demands for the causes she prefers. And yet Melanie Phillips is quite a denier in her own right. She denies that Bush and Blair once justified the Iraq war by invoking Saddam Hussein’s WMD (though we all remember it); she denies that Israel murdered Muhammad al Durra (though we all saw it); finally, she even denies the very existence of the Israel Lobby in the US (though we all feel its presence). For her, Walt and Mearsheimer’s sober book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy is nothing more than a “modern version of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion”.
In the false dichotomy between science and faith, Phillips maintains that faith is conducive to science. “The universe is orderly”, she quotes, for it was created by God, and therefore it can be explored and its laws summarised. Excellent, we say! She has found a bedrock Logos, a definitive principle that we can apply in every circumstance. Not quite: Jewish particularism is still the tiresome exception to the rule. “It is not religion in general but the Hebrew [sic!] Bible in particular that gave rise to Western science”. She raises science up to God, and then hands it over to the Hebrews, essentially privatising the Holy Book. Why does she single out the Hebrew Tanakh? Why not the Greek Septuagint, or the LatinVulgata? Why not the entire King James Version? Because, explains Phillips, there is a perfect marriage of religion and reason in Judaism. She is apparently completely unaware that the Jews had no idea of science before it came to them through their host nations. Likewise, Jewish ideological and theological advances were as a rule borrowed from their Christian and Muslim neighbours, whether we speak of the rationalist Maimonides or the mystical Cabbalists. In the 15th century, Jewish scientist Abraham Zacuto described how the Jews had picked up their scientific knowledge from the Gentiles. Phillips is too quick to trade history for ideology.
Phillips then confronts the current situation in England. She does not like what she sees: the subversion of the Church of England, the mass immigrations, the drop in educational standards, the unravelling of culture, the waves of divorces and abortions. Who is going to disagree with that? England is certainly in dire straits. Neoliberal policies have undermined the toughest folk on earth: the hard-working, prudent, obedient, stiff-lipped and red-faced Brits; the people who once managed India, once burned down the White House and once stood up to Hitler’s fury. The British backbone, the Yorkshire miners and Sheffield steel workers, has been broken by their Golders Green grocer-at-large, a.k.a. the Iron Lady. Thatcher shuttered UK industries and turned the Isles into a Tortuga-like pirate’s paradise, a place for financiers to relax, unwind and plan their raids. England has become home base to al Fayed and Abramovich and to the millions of immigrants imported to service them.
England has become the most godless society in the world. Buses emblazoned with There’s probably no God cruise London. In the Globe theatre, medieval British plays are still staged (The Mysteries, purported to be a revival of Tony Harrison’s 1977 production) but eerily different: today’s versions are overtly anti-Christian. The Holy Virgin is now represented as a young coloured tart in a short dress. Instead of the Jewish high priest and his coterie, the antagonists are now Christian priests in full dress. Not a single voice of protest has sounded in England. But you can be sure that if director Deborah Bruce had left the rabbis in their traditional places, we’d never have heard the end of it.
For me, it’s a sign of the total victory of the Jewish spirit, a spirit that was extolled by Milton Friedman and rejected by Karl Marx: the spirit of financial capitalism. The Jews have won all their battles: they promoted immigration, supported Thatcher, stood next to Friedman, denied Christ and dismantled the welfare state. The results for the vast majority were awful, as they are every time Jews win. But Melanie Phillips prefers to not assign blame. For her, these common observations are nothing more than ad hominem attacks against Jewry: “The precepts of Judaism, the Hebrew Bible and the Jewish people are the underlying target in the uproar over social, cultural and moral issues, manmade global warming, Darwinism, the Iraq War, and of course Israel”. Her chutzpah does not stop there; she claims that the “bedrock values of Western civilisation rest upon and are deeply intertwined with the teachings and fate of the Jewish people”.
Any little bird will see a tsunami as a personal disaster while dismissing destroyed cities as collateral damage. This is how Phillips sees the world: “Although in the war between materialism and religion the frontline casualty has been Christianity, the real target has been the faith of the Hebrew Bible”. This incredibly myopic statement lays bare her essential philosophy. Phillips is morbidly Judeocentric and narcissistic, both prominent Jewish qualities. If tomorrow’s headline in the Times screams “NUCLEAR HOLOCAUST: TWO BILLION PEOPLE KILLED”, she would fire off a quick letter to the editor objecting to the use of the H-word, for “how can you compare!”
For her, the Jews are always right. If they have a fault, it is that they are too kind, too good and too eager to please. While Phillips makes it clear that Jews are suffering along with the rest of us, she does not seem to understand that many of these Jews actively (and publicly) worked to bring the UK and the US to ruin. Why did they do it? They did it because they did not understand that they would also suffer as society unravels. They thought, as in the Jewish joke, everywhere will be Saturday but the rabbis will remain in a perennial Friday. A tiny minority of Jews came out on top; the rest pay the price for their vocal support of their brethren.
Phillips dedicates a few chapters to the Middle East. She adores the Jewish state, hates Palestinians and Muslims in general. She quotes the same sources Breivik did in his Manifesto and comes to his same conclusions. If you have read Frontline Magazine, you are familiar with this kind of screed. When Phillips opposes modern materialism you might take her for a nice churchy lady from the Home Counties, but when she touches on Islam and Jews she turns into a screaming fury.
Her hatred of Palestinians (why can’t they just go away?) helps us understand her vision of Christianity. Philips is not against Christianity per se (or she would write for a different audience); she imagines for us a thoroughly Judaised, subdued Christianity-for-Goyim, a lower-tier entry-level faith for non-Jews. Adherents of Melanie Phillips’ Christianity-Lite will daily ask the Lord that He permit them to better serve the Jews. She denies Replacement Theology (Supersessionism), even though this is at the root of Christian dogma. She is shocked that Christians consider themselves to be the True Israel. What about the Jews, she shrills. Educated Christians understand that modern-day Jews have no valid claim on the title Israel (the Chosen People of God); they are false pretenders. The title belongs now and forever to the Christian Church [for more, see Cabbala of Power].
The most striking thing in Melanie Phillips’ book is her obsession with the extended Jewish Nation: for her, the absolute centrality of the Jews in this world is a given. She exactly mirrors the atheist (though still Jew-obsessed) thinkers of the late 19th and early 20th centuries that wanted to reform the Jews. Neither seem to understand that for Christians, there is no Jewish Question that needs to be solved, nor should we put them on a pedestal. For us, Jews are not central. They are a powerful faction that generally supports society’s anti-Christian tendencies, without being its centre. Phillips proves beyond a doubt that when Jews start cooking with Christianity, the result is pure poison.
In 2005 a nineteen-year old Canadian woman strangled her newborn baby and threw his tiny body over a fence. Twice a jury found her guilty of second-degree murder. Upon appeal the conviction was overturned and the baby’s killer was given a three-year suspended sentence and will spend no time in jail. She may, however, spend 16 days behind bars for throwing the baby over the fence.
Does that not make your blood boil?
Evidently the Justice’s blood remained tepid while she went about the business of suspending Katrina Effert’s sentence. According to CBC News, Effert, “silently wept as Justice Joanne Veit outlined the reasons for the suspended sentence. Efferts will have to abide by conditions for the next three years but she won’t spend time behind bars for strangling her own son.” (Online source)
After all was said and done, Judge Veit declared, “Naturally, Canadians are grieved by an infant’s death, especially at the hands of the infant’s mother, but Canadians also grieve for the mother.” (Ibid)
I’m not a Canadian but my good sense tells me that not many of them are grieving for the woman who strangled her newborn baby and got off with a slap on the wrist! Where is the justice for the baby boy whose life was cut short? Has the father of the baby received justice for the loss of his son? The baby also had grandparents. CBC News reported that the judge had no pity for them:
In her judgment, the judge rejected arguments from the Crown that the single father and the grandparent also face “the same stresses of the mind” as a mother who kills her own baby.
The fact that Canada has no abortion laws reflects that “while many Canadians undoubtedly view abortion as a less than ideal solution to unprotected sex and unwanted pregnancy, they generally understand, accept and sympathize with the onerous demands pregnancy and childbirth exact from mothers, especially mothers without support,” she writes.
So, was what Efferts did the justifiable act of a desperate woman or was it the killing of a legal person?
Columnist Mark Steyn opined:
[A] superior court judge in a relatively civilized jurisdiction is happy to extend the principles underlying legalized abortion in order to mitigate the killing of a legal person — that’s to say, someone who has managed to make it to the post-fetus stage. How long do those mitigating factors apply? I mean, “onerous demands”-wise, the first month of a newborn’s life is no picnic for the mother. How about six months in? The terrible twos?
Speaking of “onerous demands,” suppose you’re a “mother without support” who’s also got an elderly relative around with an “onerous” chronic condition also making inroads into your time?
And in what sense was Miss Effert a “mother without support”? She lived at home with her parents, who provided her with food and shelter. How smoothly the slick euphemisms — “accept and sympathize . . . onerous demands” — lubricate the slippery slope. (Online source)
I don’t have the slightest idea what went on in Katina Effert’s mind on the day of the homicide. According to reports, she gave conflicting statements to police. Initially she blamed her boyfriend for the killing and she showed no remorse for her crime. During the trial two expert witnesses testified that she was suffering from a mental disturbance at the time of the homicide. The jury obviously didn’t believe the experts and convicted her of second-degree murder — twice. In an effort to deter other mothers from doing the same thing, Effert received a mandatory minimum sentence of life with no parole for 10 years.
Many teenage girls find themselves pregnant. They’re faced with telling the baby’s father, who more often than not is also a teen and is in no way prepared for fatherhood. Even worse these girls must face their parents–or parent–with the news that their child is expecting a child of her own! Pregnant girls become frightened, depressed and desperate. In their desperation many young women resort to having an abortion — but many choose life for their unborn child instead. Some of them opt to keep the baby while others put him or her up for adoption. One thing’s for certain. In this day and age it does not ruin a woman’s life to give birth out of wedlock. In fact it’s becoming the norm. So with all the options available to women it’s unthinkable that Effert would carry her child to term, deliver him alone in her parents’ basement then, when he began to cry, strangle the life out him with her thong underwear, wrap him in a towel, and walk down the path to the back fence and discarded him like a non-refundable container.
The sad fact is that there are people besides the judge who don’t see what Effert did as all that bad because, for them, a human life is expendable if it causes someone inconvenience or hardship. Yet those same people go ballistic over dolphins accidentally getting caught in fisherman’s nets or baby seals getting clubbed to death. Clubbing a baby seal to death is a heinous act. I bring this up because some people show outrage over the mistreatment of animals yet they could care less that innocent pre-born babies are ripped from their mother’s wombs by abortionists!
The Bible tells us that humans are made in God’s image. Dolphins and seals are not. As I pointed out in a piece I wrote titledAmerica’s all out spiritual battle:
Genesis 1:27 tells us that a loving God fashioned human beings in His own image. …We are also created for His glory. (Isaiah 43:7) He has great love for humans. “But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.” (Eph 2: 4-10 NKJ). Jesus said of us, “the very hairs of your head are all numbered” (Mat. 10:30).
God does not cotton to humans destroying His workmanship – those He created and formed…His handiwork. So even if Katrina Effert had opted for an abortion, in God’s eyes she’d be guilty of murder just the same. It doesn’t matter to the Creator if some people believe abortion on demand is a woman’s right… a private decision…her choice. The Bible says, “Naked came I out of my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD.” (Job 1:21)
God is the giver of life and God decides when life ends. Period!
Some women have an abortion for “health reasons” and can choose to abort the baby in the third trimester of pregnancy. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines health as “any condition that might impact her physical, emotional, psychological or financial well being.” You mean WHO says it’s okay to kill a pre-born baby because it puts a financial burden on the mother? In America…in 2011? Yes, Emmylou, a woman has that “right.”
Before you run down to the nearest Planned Parenthood for an abortion, keep in mind that having one can also impact a woman’s emotional and psychological well being. It has that affect on men, too.
Something else you may not know is that, according to science, life begins at conception. So, pro-lifers must urge those who haven’t gotten the message yet to take a look at the scientific evidence. For example, ultrasound technology proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that a tiny human person is growing inside a mother’s womb. He/she is not developing into a person; he/she is already a person albeit an extremely small person, especially during the first-trimester. He/she is not a “blob of tissue” as many pro-aborts insist. Pro-aborts deliberately hide the fact that at10 weeks a fetus bends, stretches, opens and closes her hands, lifts her head, squints, swallows and wrinkles her forehead. More and more people now recognize that women who choose to have an abortion are signing aperson’s death warrant! Still, over 4,000 babies are killed in America every single day. The latest polls show that Americans are finally starting to come to their senses. According to a 2011 Gallup poll “By a 24% margin, 61-37 percent, Americans take the pro-life view that abortions should either be legal under no circumstances or legal only under a few circumstances.”
The reason I bring up abortion is this. If Katrina Effert had chosen abortion right up to the day her baby was born I wouldn’t be writing this piece because it would have been legal to kill him!
By offering excuses for Effert’s actions the judge has taken Canadians down a very slippery slope. “Mark this well,” warned Albert Mohler, “the horrific logic of this judge’s decision will not remain in Canada. Indeed, it did not even start in Canada. Those arguments are already in place in the United States. If we will not defend life in the womb, eventually the dignity of every single human life is thrown over the fence.”
It’s not legal to kill a newborn in America — yet. In Canada, thanks to Judge Veit’s ruling, there are now extenuating circumstances one being the “onerous demands” of pregnancy.
There is good news, though. The good news is that Katrina is not alone in her sin. “For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not.” (Ecc. 7:20) But there’s hope for sinners. 1 Peter 1:3 says, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.” Death is the consequence of sin, Christ’s’ death and resurrection gives hope to anyone who repents of their sins, believes, and puts their trust in Him.
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus (Roman 3:23-26).
The recent debt limit congressional circus must be a new Twilight Zone episode written by a computerized program straight out of central casting. Rod Serling must be turning in his grave. A twenty-first century rewrite of his exceptional Seven Days in May screenplay is certainly in order, this time with a different ending. If there are any confused or co-opted worshipers of the federal government left, what more proof do you need that the bipartisan political criminal class is determined to destroy this nation? Not convinced that this assessment is correct; then you need remediable instruction in arithmetic. Increasing the spending with more borrowed money cannot reduce the debt.
The world financial markets are voting with their money, that the U.S of A. will no longer be the leader of free market enterprise. The flow of hot money into Treasury Bonds is tantamount to feeding the alligator with the hope that eating forged paper will forgo its appetite for flesh. This is the same strategy used to shackle market makers and docile societies into accepting, that the world financial system must be saved from their own greed and pillage, so that the dependent vassals can continue to pay their tribute.
The beltway bottom feeders know just how to scare their pudden-head constituents. With the complicity of the corporate controlled media, the task of getting away with murder has been elevated to a supreme political art form. ‘Pols’ can fool some of the public with all the false causes and bogus reasons for the dysfunctional federal government, but can they escape the distrust in their deal making skills, that never resolve any substantive issues? Even the current New York Times and CBS poll, cannot hide the disgust with an 82% disapproval sentiment.
This level of discontent is expected by anyone who understands the decade’s long destruction of the fundamental nature of the “federalism” form of the separation of powers principle. Many observers recognize the gross offense of adopting a gang of 12 approach for shepherding their flock in Congress to accept the dictums in the Amerika version of the Soviet Politburo.
Cited in The New American, the good Napolitano, Judge Andrew weights in correctly.
“Napolitano raised another — and unassailable — objection to the legislation. Napolitano noted: “This is this Congress binding itself and all future Congresses to a simple up-or-down vote.” In that sense, the new “Super Congress” joint committee is truly revolutionary, and unquestionably unconstitutional. Under the Constitution, no Congress can bind a subsequent Congress with rules of procedure, which is why one of the first acts of every new Congress after an election is for the House and Senate to separately approve new rules.”
Our friends over at Prison Planet quote the indomitable Larry Pratt.
“This is a game changer, they’ve decided that we don’t need the House of Representatives to originate revenue bills, we’ll just have the ‘super 12′ do that,” said Pratt, adding that Barack Obama would become the de facto deciding 13th member.
Legislation decided on by the Super Congress would be immune from amendment and lawmakers would only be able to register an up or down vote, eliminating the ability to filibuster.”
This attempt to relegate the House and Senate to water boy status is clear proof that the first causality of the federal dictatorship is to eat their own noncompliant elements in the legislature. When a NeoCon disinformation and newspeak publication like The Weekly Standard jumps on the bandwagon, you better grab your ankles. “Three Republican Senate sources tell TWS that senators who vote against the deal will be ineligible to serve on the so-called “supercommittee” for deficit reduction that the legislation creates.”
Purity of ideological devotion to the globalist integration of the former Republic is the true test of a collectivist commissar. Two world wars later and several police action conflicts removed, the extension of the garrison empire continues to expand. Name any definitive benefit that the populace gained from all the squander of treasure and the shedding of blood. All the time the bulwark of constitutional limited government is systematically dismantled.
The unfettered growth of government is the only reality that matters to the federal fascists. An economy that relies upon government spending for continuation is a zombie zone of the walking dead. The alternate media presents unending examples of this death march onto reservation of predatory prisons. An isolated cell awaits – with a number in place of your name. The silence of most occupants in the land of the timid breeds the sterile culture of fearful chickens. What more evidence does any citizen need that the federal government is organized and posed to repeat the same atrocities’ that totalitarian regimes committed in the last century?
What makes it much more acute is that a net of surveillance and a draconian database covers the entire globe. The satellite spy in the sky era extends to every aspect of communication, financial transactions and personal activity. The land of the free is now the camp of the interned.
How paradoxical, when you hear the regurgitation from progressive government lovers, that the federal and state agencies provide solutions, when the real irony is that these numb nuts are clueless what true populism represents, much less how to achieve a humane society.
Folks, the enemy have just declared itself as the Washington establishment and you are in the sniper sights of their full spectrum dominance scope. Research to your hearts content all the dire consequences of the despotic cabal that masquerades as your elected representatives. Notwithstanding, the pace of your own personal awakening; without direct and focused action, your fate is sealed.
An entire nation is not helpless resisting tyranny if citizens rebel. Only if you prefer denial to self-respect will the forces of treason prevail. Many Americans are not committed to liberty, and most fear personal responsibility of their own individual obligations. The hoi polloi never change history; they just accept the outcome. Isn’t this a prime reason why the Federal government continues to go on its merry way? The entire apparatus of the illegitimate bureaucracies steers the suppression of the will of the people.
The Obama nightmare is just one more leg in a complex plan to destroy the aims and purpose for fighting the American Revolution. The excessive conduct of federal loyalists loves their abuses of the public trust. When DC continually spends the people’s money and never has to pay back the unlimited loans, the lifestyle of the rich and famous, becomes part of government pensions and perks. There is no gambling risk or prospect of a loss as long as the taxpayer and future generations are providing the stakes.
There has never been a true civil war in this country. The War of Northern Aggressionwas waged precisely to prevent the Southern States from secession. The prospects of an enlightened and dedicated population taking up arms and defeating the military-industrial-security-complex require a miracle . . . turning water into wine. The creatures that dwell in this country are cloned cowards afraid of their own shadow. Forget about armed confrontation. Any attempt using violence plays into the hands of the Gestapo state. However, developing a civilization of respectable civil disobedience is entirely in keeping with the best tradition of Western culture and Judeo-Christian teachings. Doubters can examine the recent book by Chuck and Timothy Baldwin, ROMANS 13: THE TRUE MEANING OF SUBMISSION for validation.
The federal government’s war against the Inherent Autonomy of the individual is the greatest danger to your own sustained existence and the survival of the nation. There is no way to reform a totally corrupt and crooked system of criminals. Families are being added to the extinct species list every day by a government that codifies same sex marriage and encourages abortions. Stating this factual axiom of civilized behavior is an unforgivable taboo to the Statists, who want the power over life and death and the eventual eradication of the family structure.
The core natural right and principle of individual self-defense is sacrosanct. Resistance to a despotic presidency and a crippled congress is a moral imperative. Defending, fighting and dying for the State, especially when that government is targeting you for annihilation, is absurd. The obvious elimination of witnesses to the diversion bin Laden raid illustrates just how ruthless the rogue government acts, even to their own special troops.
“A military helicopter was shot down in eastern Afghanistan, killing 31 U.S. special operation troops, most of them from the elite Navy SEALs unit that killed al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.”
The unceasing slurs against the Tea Party movement by a scared system through the misdirection media and their globalist masters is a sure sign that citizen participation in the political process is an act of resistance against the evil empire. The warfare state has mobilized against the American rebels. As the financial temple collapses and prices escalate, the pressure for “PC” compliance spreads like wildfire. Singling out selected dissenters for retribution requires the rest of the country joining in an uproar of protest.
Your life is at stake, ban together for dynamic resistance and confrontation. There is no other alternative. The Federal Government has started another undeclared war, but this time their homeland security proceeds to eradicate all real patriotic citizens and champions of liberty. This Twilight Zone episode needs a conclusion where the mythical Jordan Lyman ( no matter what name he uses ) is removed and all ensuing presidential treason is justly punished.
Adding to the natural rice industry’s woes after Bayer CropScience contaminated a third of the US rice supply with transgenic rice in 2006, the widespread application of Bayer’s glufosinate and Monsanto’s glyphosate is reducing crop yields, and burning and deforming rice plants that survive. [Image: Glyphosate deforms the growing points on rice plants.]
The Mississippi Rice Council (MRC) has sounded a national alarm over damage caused by aerial drift of glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup, calling for severely restricted aerial application.
MRC president Mike Wagner recently told crop dusters at this year’s Mississippi Agricultural Aviation Association annual meeting that glyphosate is wreaking havoc on the natural rice industry where “non-transgenic rice is planted in a sea of genetically modified crops that are tolerant to glyphosate.”
Wagner reported that, “Rice specialists noticed that rice that had no obvious damage through the growing season would yield and mill poorly and would exhibit the classic trait associated with late glyphosate drift — the kernel would be shaped like a parrot beak instead of its normally elongated, symmetrical shape.”
[Image: Glyphosate causes rice to deform from a cylinder into a parrot beak shape.]
Field studies run in 2007 and 2008 by the University of Arkansas showed reduced rice yield by up to 80% from glyphosate, as well as glufosinate, an herbicide produced by Bayer. On top of reduced yield, both herbicides burned the leaves and stunted the growth of rice plants.
In December, the MRC unanimously recommend an annual cutoff date of June 1 for its aerial application, when yield potential for rice is determined.
“Damage occurring at this time does not allow for an alternate crop to be replanted. Consequently, the farmer has two nooses around his neck: (1) he is stuck with a crop that will generate lower revenues, and (2) he has already incurred nearly all expenses that are associated with that crop,” said Wagner.
Because those expenses range from $650 to $900 per acre, “One can see that any losses can be staggering. This is a losing proposition for our rice industry, and one that continues to occur. Our alarm is warranted.”
In 2010, Louisiana Rice Man noted that the pressure from bacterial panicle blight, leaf scald and leaf smut “was about the worst I have ever seen.” Though he attributes it to abnormally high temperatures, most likely the cause is glyphosate and/or glufosinate, which destroy soil microflora that assist in plant defense.
The 2006 genetic contamination of natural rice resulted in the collapse of the export market to Europe and other nations. Further reductions in the yield of natural rice now threaten the industry with collapse.
Publicizing this information can be difficult at best and career-ending at worst. In the U of Arkansas study cited above, researchers noted that most rice farmers wrongly believe the damage from glufosinate is only cosmetic. Worse, in 2008, the US Dept. of Agriculture announced it would stop publishing information about the amounts and types of agrochemicals sprayed on crops, leaving the public blind to the corporate poisoning of our environment. Since then, we’ve had to rely on sporadic reports, whistle blowers, or independent scientists to warn us of emerging dangers.
Bertram Verhaag’s scenically beautiful film, Science Under Attack, is one of several he produced on biotechnology. (Also see David vs Monsanto, Seeds and Seed Multinationals, and Life Running out of Control.) In Science Under Attack, he interviews scientists whose careers were ruined because they published studies warning of health dangers from genetically modified crops. From smaller brain size in rats fed biotech food, to lowered immunity, organ damage, and infertility, the information is suppressed by the biotech industry and governments beholden to it.
When world-renowned biochemist Arpad Pusztai studied the effect of a GM potato on rats, he found “36 significant differences” between those fed the GM versus non-GM potatoes. The film includes the clip from his career-ending interview on a UK television show in 1999, exposing some of these problems. Those 150 seconds changed his life forever. He and his wife (also a researcher) were both fired, and his reputation smeared.
In a 1998 lawsuit, the Center for Food Safety produced thousands of documents showing that the Food and Drug Administration suppressed its own science reporting that GM crops are not “substantially equivalent” to normal food, refusing to perform the recommended studies.
Ignacio Chapela is another scientist who made world news when he exposed widespread genetic contamination of natural corn in Mexico, which at the time banned GM crops. UC Berkeley tried to fire Chapela three times before he finally took a job in Norway at the Institute of Gene Ecology. This multidisciplinary research institute studies biosafety. Its existence reveals a global scientific rebellion resisting and confronting the technocracy serving only profits.
Earlier this year, in response to scientific suppression concerning GM foods and their associated agrochemicals, the European Union Commissioner for Health and Consumer Policy, John Dalli, promised to overhaul the risk assessment process, providing funding for independent investigation into “toxicological, environmental, allergenic or nutritional aspects.”
Glyphosate, Spontaneous Abortions and Birth Defects
Another scientist warning about glyphosate and featured in the film is Andres Carrasco. In 2010, he released a summary of scientific evidence on genetically modified soy and the herbicide glyphosate, and its impact on humans. In Science Under Attack, Carrasco reports that glyphosate causes brain, intestinal and heart defects in fetuses. (Brain defect image from Poison of the Pampas)
The summary includes a “study on human cells [which] found that all four Roundup formulations tested caused total cell death within 24 hours. These effects were found at dilution levels far below those recommended for agricultural use and corresponding to low levels of residues found in food or feed.”
Of note, “The adjuvants in Roundup increase the toxicity of glyphosate because they enable the herbicide to penetrate human cells more readily.”
In The Poison of the Pampas, a 22-minute news report by journalist Rolando Grana, broadcast in Argentina in April of last year, severe birth defects have been documented in babies whose mothers were exposed to glyphosate during pregnancy. (English subtitles can be activated by clicking on the closed captioning icon: cc. Also see Part 2.)
Industrial scale agrochemicals and GM crops are also linked to the collapse of honeybee populations, which the film Queen of the Sundetails. Indeed, with growing evidence from independent scientists showing harm to animals ingesting GM crops, it’s no wonder many of the speakers in this film are convinced that GM crops contribute to colony collapse disorder (My review here.)
Earlier this year, plant pathologist Don Huber revealed a link between glyphosate and a dangerous new pathogen which is found in nearby soil and in the feed of animals suffering with infertility and spontaneous abortions. The pathogen is present in sudden death syndrome in Monsanto’s Roundup Ready soy and Goss’s wilt in RR corn.In addition to warning the USDA in January, Huber also notified the European Union president and several key ministers in April of the dangers to plants and animals associated with glyphosate. “In layman’s terms, it should be treated as an emergency,” he told the USDA.
The newly discovered submicroscopic organism is “infectious to cattle, pigs, horses, poultry,” Huber told Food Democracy Now! earlier this month in a 20-minute video interview. “It will kill a fertilized egg in 24-48 hours.”
An important aside: Huber has serious concern with genetic contamination of natural alfalfa, which is guaranteed with this open-pollinated perennial crop. Huber predicts, “In five years, you won’t have anything except Roundup Ready alfalfa. Coexistence is not possible,” he says. “When you take a number one forage crop and you place it any kind of jeopardy, we have a tremendous impact on the sustainability of our animal production.”
Ignoring Huber’s dire warnings, the USDA approved the deployment of GM alfalfa this year. This can be seen as nothing other than a deliberate move to destroy the organic beef and dairy industry in the U.S. and Canada. You can send a letter to President Obama asking for an immediate moratorium on GM alfalfa at this Food Democracy Now! action page.
The National Agricultural Aviation Assn. will hold this year’s annual convention in Las Vegas Dec. 5-8 at the Las Vegas Hilton. Crop dusters might appreciate well crafted literature showing the destruction wrought by agrochemicals on human and animal health, as well as the environment.
Several books, including Seeds of Destruction and Corrupt to the Core, along with the film, The Idiot Cycle, lay out the framework for and evidence of a concerted effort to sicken and then treat humanity, while earning obscene profits. When we factor in other recent actions taken by transnational corporations and lawmakers, the conspiracy adopts a more ominous tone.
Authors William Engdahl and Shiv Chopra appear in Emmanuelle Schick Garcia’s powerful film, The Idiot Cycle: What you aren’t being told about cancer. Both writers provide detailed evidence of a corporate-government conspiracy to adulterate the food and water supply with dangerous substances linked to a host of illnesses. The Case Against Fluoride, a book using hundreds of peer-reviewed studies, provides more evidence. In David Gumpert’s Raw Milk Revolution, we get a peek at the US government’s war on the natural dairy industry.
Looking at six companies, Dow Chemical, BASF, Bayer, Dupont, Astrazeneca (Syngenta), and Monsanto, Idiot Cycle exposes corporate-government collusion in the release of carcinogenic chemicals, but also reveals how some of the same chemical companies then profit from treating cancer. It’s a cycle only an idiot would tolerate. Going further, much of the film then addresses genetically modified food and its potentially disastrous effect on health and the environment.
Before making the film, Garcia and her team spent three years on research, and it shows. The film is chock full of disturbing facts. How many people know, for example, which synthetic chemical will cause more cancer than any others? Or that only 5-10% of all cancers are genetically inherited? Or that testicular cancer in young men has increased 50% in every industrial country? In 2002, the film asserts, the top ten drug companies made more money than the top 490 wealthiest US companies combined. At $1,600 a month for cancer-treatment, we can see why it’s called Big Pharma.
Important tidbits like these make the film a must-see. But the filmmaker shows real courage when she then includes the connection with genetically modified foods. It is with this additional component that a global conspiracy more fully comes into focus.
Idiot Cycle interviews world renowned scientists Arpad Pusztai, Eric-Gilles Seralini and Shiv Chopra, two of whom suffered job loss and all of whom endured campaigns to smear their professional reputations. In the GM debate, getting the message out about hazards to human health and the environment can cost you your career.
Silencing Negative Findings of Independent Scientists
1. Arpad Pusztai
Arpad Pusztai is no doubt the most famous scientist in the film. He first blew the whistle in 1998 on the hazards of GM crops, costing him his job at Rowett Research Institute in Scotland. Having studied biotechnology for 35 years, Pusztai had well earned the title as the world’s leading expert in this highly specialized field. In 1995, he won a three-year, $1.5 million contract from the UK government to establish a testing methodology for regulators when assessing the safety of GM crops.
This marked the world’s first independent study of GM food safety, according to Engdahl. He interviewed Pusztai in 2007 for his book, Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation. Engdahl notes that Pusztai “was fully certain the study would confirm the safety of GM foods.” His team used potatoes modified by Monsanto to produce an insecticide. Writes Engdahl:
“The rats fed for more than 110 days on a diet of GM potatoes had marked changes to their development. They were significantly smaller in size and body weight than ordinary potato-fed control rats in the same experiment. More alarming, however, was the fact that the GMO rats showed markedly smaller liver and heart sizes, and demonstrated weaker immune systems. The most alarming finding from Pusztai’s laboratory tests, however, was the markedly smaller brain size of GMO-fed rats compared with normal potato-fed rats.”
When he reported his findings on national television, excluding the smaller brain size info for fear it would induce mass panic, he also added that he wouldn’t eat GM foods. For two days, the Institute applauded and supported him, even issuing a press release clarifying that his concerns were based on “ a range of carefully controlled studies.”
But then the firestorm hit. President Bill Clinton contacted Prime Minister Tony Blair, who then contacted Pusztai’s boss at the Institute. Within two days, he was fired, along with his wife, another respected researcher at Rowett. Then began a mass media campaign to discredit him and his work, as revealed by UK journalist, Andrew Rowell. The Pusztais were gagged from defending Arpad under threat of losing their pensions.
In Idiot Cycle, Pusztai called it “criminal” that GM crops have been foisted on the world without full and complete safety studies, especially in light of preliminary studies showing serious potential harm.
2. Eric-Gilles Seralini
The next most famous scientist in the GM debate, arguably, is Eric-Gilles Seralini, whose groundbreaking studies we covered here. Seralini has also been vilified by the biotech community. In The Idiot Cycle, he describes the battle that he endured to publicize Monsanto’s blood test results of rats that had eaten GM corn for three months. Once the information was made public, independent scientists could then review Monsanto’s “safe” finding.
Normally, two years of testing is the “gold standard” in the scientific community. Seralini called it “absurd” that only three months of testing allowed the GM corn to be approved in over a dozen nations. Any reputable scientist would agree. Upon reviewing Monsanto’s raw data, he and his team found, among other problems, liver damage and physiological changes into a pre-diabetic condition among the rats which had eaten Monsanto’s GM corn. And that’s just from three months of eating such food.
The rate of diabetes in the U.S. has nearly doubled since GM foods were secretly foisted on us in 1996. Today, 26 million people have it and another 79 million are pre-diabetic, according to new estimates released in January. These figures include those actually diagnosed with the disease, plus an estimate of those who have diabetes but are undiagnosed. If we look at just the “diagnosed” numbers over the last three decades (which is less than the actual number who have diabetes), we see that diabetes has tripled since 1980:
Many believe that the prevalence of GM corn and GM sugarbeets used as sweeteners in processed foods (such as high fructose corn syrup) is a leading contributing factor to the spike in diabetes. Actos, made by Takeda Pharmaceutical, and Avandia, made by GlaxoSmithKline, reportedly treat Type II diabetes, and both increase the risk of heart failure – in one study by 72%.
3. Shiv Chopra
Canada Health whistleblower Shiv Chopra, who authored Corrupt to the Core: Memoirs of a Health Canada Whistleblower, explains the genesis of the misanthropic aims of these chemical companies and their government protectors. Beginning 50-60 years ago, he says in the film, chemicals began playing a major part in agriculture. “On the one hand, they’re contaminating people’s food, and they do damage. Then they come back with chemicals to treat them.”
Chopra was eventually fired from Health Canada, along with two others, for “insubordination” because they refused to authorize (among other food processes) the long-term use of antibiotics and GM hormones in food-producing animals, given their questionable safety. In particular, he adamantly refused to authorize rBST, a genetically modified bovine growth hormone created by Monsanto and Eli Lilly to stimulate milk production in dairy cows. Studies show that large percentages of cows develop lameness and mastitis from the GM hormone.
In Corrupt to the Core, we learn that one of the other “food processes” they objected to was feeding BSE-infested slaughterhouse waste to meat and milk animals. BSE, more popularly known as mad cow disease, gives humans the lethal Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD). Chopra makes a significant contribution to human health when he discusses his Five Pillars of Food Safety:
“The source of food-borne diseases during approximately the last 50 years is reported to originate from indiscriminate application of the following five substances in food production: hormones, antibiotics, slaughterhouse wastes, genetically modified organisms and pesticides.”
In the book and in Idiot Cycle, he charges that use of these substances violates the Food and Drug Act of both the U.S. and Canada. Because the first three are banned in the European Union, the US and Canada cannot ship beef to the EU. This issue, incidentally, continues to be debated at the World Trade Organization.
4. Andres Carrasco
Though not in the film, another globally recognized scientist in the biotech world is Andres Carrasco. He and his team from Argentina and Paraguay found that Monsanto’s Roundup causes birth defects in frogs and chickens. “The findings in the lab are compatible with malformations observed in humans exposed to glyphosate during pregnancy,” he told GMWatch. In 2009, he was threatened at his lab, and in 2010 physically attacked by local police and the hired hands of a wealthy GM rice grower.
Contaminating the Natural Food Supply
GM crops contaminate natural plants, converting ownership to the patent holder under twisted, but recognized, legal logic. Idiot Cycle stresses this as a deliberate move toward complete control of the world’s food supply. It’s no idle accusation. GeneWatch UK and Greenpeace have documented over 300 contaminations through July 2010. Genetic contamination of natural plants is vast and ongoing and, until recently, courts have repeatedly penalized the farmer victimized by such contamination.
Many have heard of Percy Schmeiser’s battle with Monsanto that resulted in a pyrrhic victory for the farmer. Unaware his crops had been contaminated with transgenes, he reused the seeds. Monsanto sued, but this time, after a long and expensive litigation process, the Canadian Supreme Court backed Schmeiser and ordered Monsanto to pay for the clean up of his fields. Though not in the final release of Idiot Cycle, he does appear in the bonus clips.
An 84-page report by the Center for Food Safety published in 2005 details cases like these and others. In 2008, Vanity Fair’s Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele also posted an in-depth investigation, providing more details of farmers being victimized by contamination and then being successfully sued by Monsanto. The CFS report also describes cases where farmers bought GM seeds third hand, signing no agreement about their use or reuse. This happened to Tennessee farmer, Kem Ralph, who is also featured in The Idiot Cycle.
In court, Monsanto presented an agreement which bore his forged signature. Judge Rodney Sippel, a former Monsanto attorney, awarded judgment for Monsanto in the amount of $2.9 million. CFS documents evidence of Monsanto presenting forged signatures in court. “Forging farmers’ signatures on Technology Agreements is called ‘common’ by seed dealers. Nearly one in 10 of Monsanto’s lawsuits involve such forgeries.”
In the film we learn that Judge Sippel in Kem Ralph’s case sat on ten other lawsuits involving Monsanto, corruptly refusing to recuse himself. In all of those cases, Monsanto won.
We also find such conflicts of interest on the U.S. Supreme Court with the ethically challenged Clarence Thomas, a former Monsanto attorney. In 2001, he wrote the high court decisionallowing biotech companies to patent GM seeds. Thomas also corruptly refused to recuse himself from Monsanto v Geertson Seed, which allowed the USDA to impose a partial deregulation of GM alfalfa last June. (This January, the USDA completely deregulated GM alfalfa, even removing the requirement for buffer zones.) Plus, Thomas’ new sidekick on the Supreme Court, Elena Kagan, defended Monsanto’s right to contaminate natural alfalfa crops when she served as Solicitor General arguing against Geertson.
But not all judges work for the biotech industry.After Bayer CropScience contaminated a third of the US rice supply in 2006, it found itself facing 6,000 lawsuits. In addition to cases it has already lost or settled, each under $2 million, Bayer now faces a whopping $380 million lawsuit from Riceland Foods in a trial currently underway in Arkansas. Stuttgart Daily Leader has been covering the trial, with articles postedFeb. 22, 2/24, 2/25, 2/28, March 4, Mar. 8 and Mar. 10.
Cases like these are what is surely behind a recent decision by the world’s largest seed company to modify its Technology Stewardship Agreement wherein Monsanto has shifted all liability arising from transgenic crops onto farmers who plant their seeds. How’s that for taking corporate immorality to new depths?
This falls in line nicely with a recent Supreme Court decision that protects vaccine makers from liability. In the film, one European regulator, Willy de Greef, informs us that GM crops only account for 5% of all biotechnology. Most drugs and vaccines contain GMOs. A host of deleterious effects from vaccines has been documented, including narcolepsy, sterility, mental retardation, paralysis, autism, and death. “First do no harm” has succumbed to “Make the most money.”
Given the USDA’s recent deregulation of GM alfalfa, and the certainty that natural alfalfa will become contaminated, Monsanto’s attempt to shirk responsibility with this no-liability clause “appears to be unconscionable” said environmental attorney Anthony Patchett in a video interview with Morph City. Patchett formerly worked as Assistant Head Deputy District Attorney of Environmental Crimes, OSHA Division.
That decision to deregulate a perennial plant with tiny seeds that can travel miles can be seen as nothing other than a deliberate intent to contaminate North American natural alfalfa. Biotech firms will gain ownership of contaminated fields. This will also destroy the organic meat and dairy industry in the United States, and likely Canada, as well. Biotech and chemical firms, along with all growers who chemically douse their crops, will profit enormously from the collapse of the untainted food industry. The question is, can we survive their victory?
Sick Food, Dangerous Vaccines & Eugenics
Controlling the world’s food supply is one thing. As evidence mounts that biotech crops sicken us, this assures increased profits for biotech companies that develop drugs to treat us. But, some wonder if GM crops will do more than sicken us. We have preliminary findings that GM crops cause sterility in test animals, and that Roundup is associated with spontaneous abortions in farm animals fed wheatlage under weed management using glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup. Coupling this with globalist concern with rising population, how can we avoid questioning if biotechnology is being used as a weapon?
In the film, author William Engdahl talks about his research for Seeds of Destruction. He briefly describes the relationship between depopulationists like the Rockefellers and IG Farben, the company that gassed millions to death in Nazi Germany and which also killed thousands more when testing drugs and vaccines on captured populations. For these crimes against humanity, after the war, IG Farben was broken into its original constituent companies. Bayer, BASF and Hoechst (now Aventis) eventually expanded into plant genetics. (In 2002, Bayer acquired Aventis.)
Engdahl writes: “The Rockefeller-I.G. Farben relationship went back to 1927, around the same time the Rockefeller Foundation began heavily funding German eugenics research.” Paraphrasing from his book, he explains:
“‘The Project’ I referred to is the project of the Rockefeller Foundation and powerful financial interests since the 1920’s to use eugenics, later renamed genetics, to justify creation of a genetically-engineered Master Race. Hitler and the Nazis called it the Ayran Master Race.
“The eugenics of Hitler were financed to a major extent by the same Rockefeller Foundation which today is building a doomsday seed vault to preserve samples of every seed on our planet. Now this is getting really intriguing. The same Rockefeller Foundation created the pseudo-science discipline of molecular biology in their relentless pursuit of reducing human life down to the ‘defining gene sequence’ which, they hoped, could then be modified in order to change human traits at will. Hitler’s eugenics scientists, many of whom were quietly brought to the United States after the War to continue their biological eugenics research, laid much of the groundwork of genetic engineering of various life forms, much of it supported openly until well into the Third Reich by Rockefeller Foundation generous grants.”
Seeds of Destruction provides a wealth of detailed evidence of “the hidden agenda of genetic manipulation.” It’s clear from having read the book why Garcia chose to interview him for her film. Seeds highlights bioweaponry, in the form of pandemics, and the drugs used to treat them. The recent Swine flu hype was a repeat of the Avian flu engineered just a few years before. Vaccines used in Nicaragua and the Phillipines actually sterilized people. Spermicidal corn was developed for Mexico.
Though Rockefeller, et al. may be looking to improve human genetics for traits they deem more desirable in their club, “you ain’t in it.” Neither am I; nor is 93% of humanity, if the Georgia Guidestones are any indication of what the ideal population level should be. What we get, instead, are toxic foods, grown or raised on toxic farms, and further treated and processed in toxic factories. Then we’re prescribed toxic drugs that cause side effects which hasten our death. Nice racket.
Bayer and BASF aren’t alone. Monsanto also has a history of “incidental” ecocide and genocide by the creation and deployment of Agent Orange (dioxin), PCBs, DDT, rBST, and the neurotoxin, Aspartame.
Biotech and pharmaceutical companies have also produced several hundred “pharma crops” – food that contains vaccines against a variety of diseases. Never mind that such a plan fails to consider appropriate dosage specific to a person’s age, weight and medical condition. The same failure applies to fluoride treated water, which lowers intelligence, causes skeletal and dental fluorosis, and induces depression and lethargy. (See the 2010 book, The Case Against Fluoride and this short 30-minute film, Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation.)
One final element briefly mentioned in the film plays heavily into this growing body of evidence supporting the idea of a global conspiracy to harm humanity for profit. The Idiot Cyclementions Iraq Order 81, which bans the saving of seeds. Iraqi farmers must buy GM seeds, every year. This outrageous law is a direct attack on the right to food freedom: the evolutionary imperative of humans to eat whatever natural foods their bodies crave.
Beyond that, a string of national and international laws, rules, and regulations criminalize natural plants. This will give the pharmaceutical industry complete control of healthcare, since the world’s best medicines come from plants. For example, prior to 2000, Monsanto began genetically modifying marijuana, and last November, the US Drug Enforcement Agency proposed a subtle rule change that will decriminalize synthetic THC for use as a medicine, reports Pencil Method, a medical marijuana news site:
“Paul Armentano of the National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws reads the proposal as a way of legalizing marijuana so just Big Pharma can make money from it.
“’DEA is taking a shortcut by saying, well, we can reschedule organic THC because it mimics an existing drug on the market,’ Armentano said. ‘Which is ironic given that they are saying the organic substance is derivative of the synthetic substance that is actually based on the organic substance.’”
Kitty Campion, a world renowned herbalist who has written several books, and who holds a PhD from the School of Natural Healing (Utah), warns that:
“[G]overnments all over the world are joining hands with Big Pharma and Big Food, (meaning the industrialised processed food giants) in an unprecedented pogrom against herbal medicine. I left Britain in December last year after 30 years in full time herbal practice and came into Australia on a Distinguished Talent Visa, precisely because so many of the herbs I needed in my extensive herbal pharmacy had been banned by the European Commission. The Gestapo tactics have long begun. In Germany and in the UK, the ‘drug police’ recently confiscated natural remedies as though they were contraband drugs. The EU’s main strategy has been to try and place every natural product, natural remedy or natural service firmly under the thumb of prescription drug law and, of course, if a substance is treated like a drug it has to be evaluated and studied like a drug. The millions that this costs, mainly for safety and efficacy evaluation, is out of reach of the vast majority of herbal manufacturers – in effect it is a de facto ban.”
Several similar laws around the globe further the scheme to criminalize nature. Here’s a brief sampling, with some victories for food freedom:
- On May 1, 2011, thousands of herbal medicinal products become illegal in the European Union. In an email, Shiv Chopra said, “As for the sale of herbal remedies, homeopathic, Ayurvedic and Chinese medicines, EU and NAFTA are on the same page. All of them, without counting Mexico, are determined to ban any substance that interferes in the sale of their big pharma products, including drugs and vaccines causing disease and death. I am not sure what China plans to do about it but India as we all know is selling out its stakes to join the rich man’s club, without any concern for the public interest.”
- Australia has proposed a ban on thousands of plants including its national flower, since they contain DMT – a naturally-occurring hallucinogen. Marketed as a war on drugs, the bill ignores that most of these common garden plants have never been used to extract DMT, since only trace amounts are found in them. Humans also produce DMT in their bodies, so we know this is something we need.
- Canada just passed a “consumer protection” law known as C36, though the final version exempted natural health products after a nationwide fight. However, the law violates human rights by authorizing home invasions to search for suspected products. Through Canada’s 2004 Food and Drug Act and other regulations, thousands of natural health products are no longer available, writes Karen Stephenson.
- Last December, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ordered one pharmacy to stop making injectable Vitamin C, a known cure for cancer. When taken intravenously in large doses, it has remarkable healing properties. IV Vitamin C even cured a New Zealand man on death’s door with the swine flu.
- The FDA is also waging a war on natural dairy, shutting down producers and distributors even though no one has become ill from their products. David Gumpert’s book, The Raw Milk Revolution, details the government’s war on food rights (which I reviewed here). As a complete food, raw milk provides innumerable benefits, including reducing childhood allergies. Many who are labeled “lactose-intolerant” safely drink raw milk.
- Also on the dairy front, Monsanto complained to the Federal Trade Commission about organic dairy farmers who labeled their product free of artificial hormones. Though the FDA allows such labeling, it maintains that rBST (also known as rBGH) is safe and that there is no difference between organic and GMO milk. Last September, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appealsdisagreed, overturning an Ohio law banning such labels. The court found a “compositional difference” between the two kinds of milk, and also ruled that prohibiting such labels violates the first amendment rights of organic producers.
- The US Food Safety Modernization Act, signed into law in January, “extends control over all food in the US, violating the fundamental human right to food,” explains Steve Green. Providing a comment for that article, Shiv Chopra said that the bill precludes “the public’s right to grow, own, trade, transport, share, feed and eat each and every food that nature makes. It will become the most offensive authority against the cultivation, trade and consumption of food and agricultural products of one’s choice.”
- Operating under the UN and the World Health Organization, Codex Alimentarius harmonizes international food standards, ostensibly to facilitate trade. Summarizing the work of Scott Tips and the Alliance for Natural Health, Brandon Turberville writes, “At best, the guidelines will reduce dose levels [of vitamins and other supplements] to minuscule amounts too small to be beneficial, as well as causing the prices to skyrocket for both consumers and producers.”
Taken together, we are witnessing corporate-government seizure of the means by which humans survive and thrive. Major corporations, backed by government, are causing cancer and other diseases with their toxic products. Yet, natural foods and remedies are being criminalized, forcing us to rely on Western drugs with often lethal side effects. On top of this, our water supply is deliberately treated with a substance that, among other problems, lowers intelligence.
The Idiot Cycle provides an excellent summary of the major forces working against humanity, which are well documented in several books, including those listed below.
Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation
F. William Engdahl
Global Research: 2007 (341 pp.)
Corrupt to the Core: Memoirs of a Health Canada Whistleblower
KOS Publishing: 2009 (340 pp.)
The Raw Milk Revolution: Behind America’s Emerging Battle over Food Rights
David E. Gumpert
Chelsea Green Publishing: 2009 (254 pp.)
The Case Against Fluoride: How Hazardous Waste Ended Up in Our Drinking Water and the Bad Science and Powerful Politics That Keep It There
Paul Connett, James Beck, Spedding Micklem
Chelsea Green Publishing: 2010 (384 pp.)
Urges USDA to rescind approval of genetically engineered alfalfa: “In layman’s terms, it should be treated as an emergency.”
Late term spontaneous abortion
A plant pathologist experienced in protecting against biological warfare recently warned the USDA of a new, self-replicating, micro-fungal virus-sized organism which may be causing spontaneous abortions in livestock, sudden death syndrome in Monsanto’s Roundup Ready soy, and wilt in Monsanto’s RR corn.
Dr. Don M. Huber, who coordinates the Emergent Diseases and Pathogens committee of the American Phytopathological Society, as part of the USDA National Plant Disease Recovery System, warned Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack that this pathogen threatens the US food and feed supply and can lead to the collapse of the US corn and soy export markets. Likewise, deregulation of GE alfalfa “could be a calamity,” he noted in his letter (reproduced in full below).
On January 27, Vilsack gave blanket approval to all genetically modified alfalfa. Following orders from President Obama, he also removed buffer zone requirements. This is seen as a deliberate move to contaminate natural crops and destroy the organic meat and dairy industry which relies on GM-free alfalfa. Such genetic contamination will give the biotech industry complete control over the nation’s fourth largest crop. It will also ease the transition to using GE-alfalfa as a biofuel.
“My letter to Secretary Vilsack was a request to allocate necessary resources to understand potential nutrient-disease interactions before making (in my opinion) an essentially irreversible decision on deregulation of RR alfalfa,” Huber told Food Freedom in an email.
But, he cautions:
“Although the organism has been associated with infertility and spontaneous abortions in animals, associations are not always evidence of cause in all cases and do not indicate what the predisposing conditions might be. These need to be established through thorough investigation which requires a commitment of resources.
“I hope that the Secretary will make such a commitment because many growers/producers are experiencing severe increases in disease of both crops and animals that are threatening their economic viability.”
On Feb. 16, Paul Tukey of SafeLawn telephoned Dr. Huber who told him, “I believe we’ve reached the tipping point toward a potential disaster with the safety of our food supply. The abuse, or call it over use if you will, of Roundup, is having profoundly bad consequences in the soil. We’ve seen that for years. The appearance of this new pathogen may be a signal that we’ve gone too far.”
Tukey also conveyed that while Huber admits that much further study is needed to definitively confirm the link between Round-Up and the pathogen, “In the meantime, he said, it’s grossly irresponsible of the government to allow Roundup Ready alfalfa, which would bring the widespread spraying of Roundup to millions of more acres and introduce far more Roundup into the food supply.”
Huber, who has been studying plant pathogens for over 50 years and glyphosate for over 20 years, has noticed an increase in pathogens associated with the herbicide. In an interview with the Organic and Non-GMO Report last May, he discussed his team’s conclusions that glyphosate can, “significantly increase the severity of various plant diseases, impair plant defense to pathogens and diseases, and immobilize soil and plant nutrients rendering them unavailable for plant use.”
Sudden Death Syndrome in soy where the right field was sprayed the previous year with glyphosate (Iowa, 2010. Photo by Don Huber)
This is because “glyphosate stimulates the growth of fungi and enhances the virulence of pathogens.” [Image] In the last 15-18 years, the number of plant pathogens has increased, he told the Non-GMO Report. “There are more than 40 diseases reported with use of glyphosate, and that number keeps growing as people recognize the association (between glyphosate and disease).”
In his undated letter to the USDA, Huber highlighted “the escalating frequency of infertility and spontaneous abortions over the past few years in US cattle, dairy, swine, and horse operations.” He reported that spontaneous abortions occurred in nearly half the cattle where high concentrations of the pathogen were found in their feed. Huber notes that the wheat “likely had been under weed management using glyphosate.”
Other Research Supports Huber’s Warning
Last year, Argentine scientists found that Roundup causes birth defects in frogs and chickens. Publishing their paper, “Glyphosate-Based Herbicides Produce Teratogenic Effects on Vertebrates by Impairing Retinoic Acid Signaling,” in Chemical Research in Toxicology, Alejandra Paganelli, et al. also produced a large set of reports for the public at GMWatch:
“In Argentina and Paraguay, doctors and residents living in GM soy producing areas have reported serious health effects from glyphosate spraying, including high rates of birth defects as well as infertility, stillbirths, miscarriages, and cancers. Scientific studies collected in the new report confirm links between exposure to glyphosate and premature births, miscarriages, cancer, and damage to DNA and reproductive organ cells.”
One of the researchers, Andrés Carrasco, told GM Watch, “The findings in the lab are compatible with malformations observed in humans exposed to glyphosate during pregnancy.”
When trying to present these findings to the public in August of last year, Dr. Carrasco and the audience were attacked by 100 thugs who beat them and their cars with clubs, leaving one person paralyzed, Amnesty International reported. Local police and a wealthy GM rice grower were implicated in that attack.
In a 2009 study, researchers linked organ damage with consumption of Monsanto’s GM maize, based on Monsanto’s trial data. As we reported last year, Gilles-Eric Séralini, et al., concluded that the raw data from all three GMO studies reveal that novel pesticide residues will be present in food and feed and may pose grave health risks to those consuming them.
In a 2005 paper published in Environmental Health Perspectives, Sophie Richard, et al. compared the toxicity of Roundup with that of just glyphosate, its active ingredient. They found Roundup to be more toxic, owing to its adjuvants. They also found that endocrine disruption increased over time so that one-tenth the amount prescribed for agriculture caused cell deformation. Citing other research, they also reported that Roundup adjuvants bond with DNA.
Such negative findings probably explain why Monsanto and other biotech firms so vociferously block independent research.
Tom Laskawy at Grist estimated that in 2008, nearly 200 million pounds of glyphosate were poured onto US soils. But, he notes that “exact figures are a closely guarded secret thanks to the USDA’s refusal to update its pesticide use database after 2007.” This figure more than doubles what the EPA estimates was used in 2000.
Below is Dr. Huber’s full letter, graciously provided to me by Paul Tukey:
Dear Secretary Vilsack:
A team of senior plant and animal scientists have recently brought to my attention the discovery of an electron microscopic pathogen that appears to significantly impact the health of plants, animals, and probably human beings. Based on a review of the data, it is widespread, very serious, and is in much higher concentrations in Roundup Ready (RR) soybeans and corn—suggesting a link with the RR gene or more likely the presence of Roundup. This organism appears NEW to science!
This is highly sensitive information that could result in a collapse of US soy and corn export markets and significant disruption of domestic food and feed supplies. On the other hand, this new organism may already be responsible for significant harm (see below). My colleagues and I are therefore moving our investigation forward with speed and discretion, and seek assistance from the USDA and other entities to identify the pathogen’s source, prevalence, implications, and remedies.
We are informing the USDA of our findings at this early stage, specifically due to your pending decision regarding approval of RR alfalfa. Naturally, if either the RR gene or Roundup itself is a promoter or co-factor of this pathogen, then such approval could be a calamity. Based on the current evidence, the only reasonable action at this time would be to delay deregulation at least until sufficient data has exonerated the RR system, if it does.
For the past 40 years, I have been a scientist in the professional and military agencies that evaluate and prepare for natural and manmade biological threats, including germ warfare and disease outbreaks. Based on this experience, I believe the threat we are facing from this pathogen is unique and of a high risk status. In layman’s terms, it should be treated as an emergency.
A diverse set of researchers working on this problem have contributed various pieces of the puzzle, which together presents the following disturbing scenario:
Unique Physical Properties
This previously unknown organism is only visible under an electron microscope (36,000X), with an approximate size range equal to a medium size virus. It is able to reproduce and appears to be a micro-fungal-like organism. If so, it would be the first such micro-fungus ever identified. There is strong evidence that this infectious agent promotes diseases of both plants and mammals, which is very rare.
Pathogen Location and Concentration
It is found in high concentrations in Roundup Ready soybean meal and corn, distillers meal, fermentation feed products, pig stomach contents, and pig and cattle placentas.
Linked with Outbreaks of Plant Disease
The organism is prolific in plants infected with two pervasive diseases that are driving down yields and farmer income—sudden death syndrome (SDS) in soy, and Goss’ wilt in corn. The pathogen is also found in the fungal causative agent of SDS (Fusarium solani fsp glycines).
Implicated in Animal Reproductive Failure
Laboratory tests have confirmed the presence of this organism in a wide variety of livestock that have experienced spontaneous abortions and infertility. Preliminary results from ongoing research have also been able to reproduce abortions in a clinical setting.
The pathogen may explain the escalating frequency of infertility and spontaneous abortions over the past few years in US cattle, dairy, swine, and horse operations. These include recent reports of infertility rates in dairy heifers of over 20%, and spontaneous abortions in cattle as high as 45%.
For example, 450 of 1,000 pregnant heifers fed wheatlage experienced spontaneous abortions. Over the same period, another 1,000 heifers from the same herd that were raised on hay had no abortions. High concentrations of the pathogen were confirmed on the wheatlage, which likely had been under weed management using glyphosate.
In summary, because of the high titer of this new animal pathogen in Round Ready crops,[sic] and its association with plant and animal diseases that are reaching epidemic proportions, we request USDA’s participation in a multi-agency investigation, and an immediate moratorium on the deregulation of RR crops until the causal/predisposing relationship with glyphosate and/or RR plants can be ruled out as a threat to crop and animal production and human health.
It is urgent to examine whether the side-effects of glyphosate use may have facilitated the growth of this pathogen, or allowed it to cause greater harm to weakened plant and animal hosts. It is well-documented that glyphosate promotes soil pathogens and is already implicated with the increase of more than 40 plant diseases; it dismantles plant defenses by chelating vital nutrients; and it reduces the bioavailability of nutrients in feed, which in turn can cause animal disorders. To properly evaluate these factors, we request access to the relevant USDA data.
I have studied plant pathogens for more than 50 years. We are now seeing an unprecedented trend of increasing plant and animal diseases and disorders. This pathogen may be instrumental to understanding and solving this problem. It deserves immediate attention with significant resources to avoid a general collapse of our critical agricultural infrastructure.
COL (Ret.) Don M. Huber
Emeritus Professor, Purdue University
APS Coordinator, USDA National Plant Disease Recovery System (NPDRS)
Human beings perform 46 million abortions annually around the planet. Year in and year out! That’s 46 million women requesting and accepting an abortion of their fetus. According to the World Health Organization, 96 percent of those abortions represent a secondary form of birth control. That means they did not have access to birth control on the front end. It means they either couldn’t feed a child, shelter it or provide for it—or they already had birthed too many children they couldn’t feed or care for.
At the same time, eight million adults and 10 million children under the age of 12 die of starvation and related diseases annually around this planet—18 million human beings. Year in and year out! In my world bicycle travels, I witnessed such massive human die-offs personally. I also witnessed living conditions that would turn the stomach of an average Canadian, European, American. (Sources: Time Magazine, World Health Organization)
Two billion human beings live on less than $2.00 per day and over 1.5 billion human beings cannot procure a clean glass of drinking water. Over 2.1 billion humans do not have access to or use of flush toilets with water sewage treatment plants. In India, 1,000 children under the age of 12 die of dysentery, diarrhea and other water borne diseases every day of the year. (Source: www.populationmedia.org) Yet, without birth control, India grows by an added 12 million annually, net gain, on their way from 1.2 billion to 1.6 billion in 39 years. The Ganges River, which I witnessed, flows into the ocean loaded with raw sewage, chemicals and cremated human bodies. It forms a 10,000 mile dead zone at its mouth—where few marine creatures can survive the polluted waters. Today!
Another impoverished nation, Haiti, long before the earthquake, suffered under 9.1 million people on a tiny island desecrated by human overload. They cut 98 percent of their trees. Remember Easter Island’s human population fiasco? Result: extinction of their civilization! Haitians run billions of gallons of raw sewage into the ocean. They live in utter poverty, and yet, because the Catholic Church curtails any birth control, Haiti, already living in appalling human misery—expects to add another 3.1 million onto that island within another decade or so. Because of the lack of birth control, Haitian women birth thousands of children they cannot feed, care for or house. Illiteracy: almost 100 percent. Definition and cause of their poverty: illiteracy, religious mandates and babies.
The third world adds 80 million children annually, net gain. Fact: 57 million humans die off around the planet every year. Humans birth 57 million to replace them while birthing another 80 million to create a net gain—on our way to adding 2 to 3 billion more humans within 40 years.
In other words, the human race seems to love its suffering, its deaths by starvation via all religions that stand against birth control and family planning.
Here in the USA, according to Dottie Lamm, Denver Post last Sunday, “A full 69 percent of African-American children are raised by a single parent, usually the mother.”
They birthed those children because they either didn’t have money or access to birth control. Cost to U.S. taxpayers in Aid to Dependent Children: billions since 1965 when government programs paid for those women to be non-responsible for their actions. White, Black, Hispanic—no difference! Current food stamp usage: 43 million Americans too uneducated, too poor, or incapable of holding down a job to buy food! (Source: Reuters News)
Current high school dropout rates across the nation: 76 percent in Detroit, Michigan; 50 percent in Denver, Colorado; 55 percent in Los Angeles; and most other major cities. Result: 7,000 teenagers per day drop out of high school, 1 every 26 seconds—total of 1.2 million annually—illiterate teens hitting our streets. (Source: Brian Williams, NBC News, CNN)
We may prefer to ignore these sobering statistics, but they will not ignore us or our civilization—given enough time—complete breakdown of our welfare, educational, medical and prison systems.
THE GREAT ABORTION DEBATE
Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives voted down funds for International Family Planning as well as in the United States, i.e., birth control, family counseling regarding “wanted births” as well as termination of pregnancy. They removed the very funds that could alleviate human suffering by providing birth control and family counseling for millions of America’s and third world poor.
Let me be clear: I am not in favor of abortion. Used as birth control, it remains insensible!
Common sense: I am in favor of birth control so that abortion would become largely obviated.
If the House carries through with its ‘charge’ to stop family planning, sex education and family size counseling—its collective choice will generate added millions to that 46 million annual abortions. At the same time, it will cause millions more starvations of adults and children that do become born. It will add to environmental devastation now taking place around the planet as we add 80 million humans annually.
CONSIDER THESE FINANCIAL OUTLAYS ON TOP OF HUMAN DEGRADATION
Cost of International Family Planning: $130 million annually. Planned Parenthood in the USA: Less than $50 million.
Cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars: $12 billion every 30 days. That’s correct; we pay out $12 billion every month to kill people. We killed millions in Korea. We killed over 2.1 million in the Vietnam War. We masterfully snuff out lives in other countries. We have killed hundreds of thousands in Iraq and Afghanistan while displacing 2.5 million as refugees.
I must ask: how many rational people reading this column think it’s okay to kill, maim and displace THAT many people in other countries—spend THAT much money on human death—and stand by to witness THAT much misery around the planet, as well as accelerating environmental carnage, while the majority of scientists assure us accelerating backlash by Mother Earth?
You find those actions unconscionable don’t you. Yet by refusing to speak out, you remain complicit in denying to support birth control for women that desperately need it in the USA and abroad.
Tell me—and your friends—why you support the Pope’s advocacy against birth control when you see the poignant results in Haiti, Mexico and every other Catholic-dominated country. The same goes for Islam, Buddhism, Hindus and other religions. What malady within humanity propels human wretchedness over common sense?
When will we Americans face up to the fact that it’s better to proactively prevent conception rather than abort a fetus at the back end of that conception? When will we come to our senses and support birth control rather than do everything in our power to stop it—yet stand gasping in anger at the abortion rates?
You’re invited to get off your ‘righteous indignation’ and get down to reality. Get down to reasoned thinking! Get down to the nitty-gritty of how fast our civilization fails to deal with reality.
As these children grow into illiteracy, poverty, misery, drugs, ghettoes and welfare—you pay the bills. We’re losing the ‘quality’ of our citizens. Every human being wants and deserves to be successful. We need their positive impact on our country, not the other way around. Wouldn’t it be better for the House of Representatives to vote in $140 million for birth control for the whole year rather that $12 billion for killing people every 30 days in Iraq and Afghanistan? Discrepancy: $144 billion for war versus $140 million for birth control. What’s your choice? When will you speak up?
Part 2: humanity’s future, morals, ethics, choice, environment
Excerpts from a speech to the H.L. Mencken Club, Baltimore, October 23, 2010
Two weeks ago the first “gay pride parade” was staged in Belgrade. Serbia’s “pro-European” government had been promoting the event as yet another proof that Serbia is fit to join the European Union, that is has overcome the legacy of its dark, intolerant past. Thousands of policemen in full riot gear had to divide their time between protecting a few hundred “LBGT” activists (about half of them imported from Western Europe for the occasion) and battling ten times as many young protesters in the side streets.
The parade, it should be noted, was prominently attended by the U.S. Ambassador in Belgrade Mary Warlick, by the head of the European Commission Office, Vincent Degert of France, and by the head of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Mission in Serbia, Dimitris Kipreos. Needless to say, none of them had attended the enthronment of the new Serbian Patriarch a week earlier. Two days later, Hillary Clinton came to Belgrade and praised the Tadic regime for staging the parade.
Mrs. Clinton et al are enjoying the fruits of one man’s two decades of hard work in Eastern Europe. George Soros can claim, more than any other individual, that his endeavors have helped turn the lands of “Real Socialism” in central and eastern Europe away from their ancestors, their cultural and spiritual roots. The process is far from over, but his Open Society Institute and its extensive network of subsidiaries east of the Trieste-Stettin line have successfully legitimized the notions that only two decades ago would have seemed bizarre, laughable or demonic to the denizens of the eastern half of Europe.
The package was first tested here in America. Through his Open Society Institute and its vast network of affiliates Soros has provided extensive financial and lobbying support here for
- Legalization of hard drugs: We should accept that “substance abuse is endemic in most societies,” he says. Thanks to his intervention the terms “medicalization” and “non-violent drug offender” have entered public discourse, and pro-drug legalization laws were passed in California and Arizona in the 90s.
- Euthanasia: In 1994 Soros—a self-professed atheist—launched his Project Death in America (PDIA) and provided $15 million in its initial funding. (It is noteworthy that his mother, a member of the pro-suicide Hemlock Society, killed herself, and that Soros mentions unsympathetically his dying father’s clinging on to life for too long.) PDIA supports physician-assisted suicide and works “to begin forming a network of doctors that will eventually reach into one-fourth of America’s hospitals” and, in a turn of phrase chillingly worthy of Orwell, lead to “the creation of innovative models of care and the development of new curricula on dying.”
- Population replacement: Soros is an enthusiastic promoter of open immigration and amnesty & special rights for immigrants. He has supported the National Council of La Raza, National Immigration Law Center, National Immigration Forum, and dozens of others. He also promotes expansion of public welfare, and in late 1996 he created the Emma Lazarus Fund that has given millions in grants to nonprofit legal services groups that undermine provisions of the welfare legislation ending immigrant entitlements.
Soros supports programs and organizations that further abortion rights and increased access to birth control devices; advocate ever more stringent gun control; and demand abolition of the death penalty. He supports radical feminists and “gay” activists, same-sex “marriage” naturally included. OSI states innocently enough that its objectives include “the strengthening of civil society; economic reform; education at all levels; human rights; legal reform and public administration; public health; and arts and culture,” but the way it goes about these tasks is not “philanthropy” but political activism in pursuit of all the familiar causes of the radical left—and some additional, distinctly creepy ones such as “Death in America.”
Soros’s “philanthropic” activities in America have been applied on a far grander scale abroad. His many foundations say that they are “dedicated to building and maintaining the infrastructure and institutions of an open society.” What this means in practice? Regarding “Women’s Health” programs in Central and South-Eastern Europe, one will look in vain for breast cancer detection programs, or for prenatal or post-natal care. No, Soros’s main goal is “to improve the quality of abortion services.” Accordingly his Public Health Program has focused on the introduction of easily available abortion all over the region, and the introduction of manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) abortion in Macedonia, Moldova, and Russia. Why is Soros so keen to promote more abortions? Overpopulation cannot be the reason: the region is experiencing a huge demographic collapse and has some of the lowest fertility rates in the world. Unavailability of abortions cannot be the answer either: only five European countries had more abortions than live births in 2000: the Russian Federation, Bulgaria, Belarus, Romania and Ukraine. The only answer is that Soros wants as few little European Orthodox Christians born into this world as possible.
Soros’s Public Health Programs additionally “support initiatives focusing on the specific health needs of several marginalized communities,” such as “gays” and AIDS sufferers, and promote “harm reduction” focusing on needle/syringe exchange and supply of methadone to adicts. His outfits lobby governments to scrap “repressive drug policies.” Over the past decade and a half the Soros network has given a kick-start to previously non-existent “gay” activism in almost all of its areas of operation. The campaign for “LGBT Rights” is directed from Budapest, publishing lesbian and gay books in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia and Slovakia, opening Gay and Lesbian Centers in Ukraine and Rumania. Its activists routinely attack the Orthodox Church as a key culprit for alleged discrimination of “LGBTs.”
Education is a key pillar of Soros’s activities. His Leitmotif is the dictum that “no-one has a monopoly on the truth” and that “civic education” should replace the old “authoritarian” model. Even under communism Eastern Europe has preserved very high educational standards, but the Soros Foundation seeks to replace the old system with the concept of schools as “exercise grounds” for the “unhindered expression of students’ personalities in the process of equal-footed interaction with the teaching staff, thus overcoming the obsolete concept of authority and discipline rooted in the oppressive legacy of patriarchal past.” The purpose of education is not “acquisition of knowledge”: the teacher is to become the class “designer” and his relationship with students based on “partnership.” Soros’s reformers also insist on an active role of schools in countering the allegedly unhealthy influence of the family on students, which “still carries an imprint of nationalist, sexist, racist, and homophobic prejudices rampant in the society at large.”
“Racism” is Soros’s regular obsession, but he had a problem finding it in racially non-diverse East European countries. This has been resolved by identifying a designated victim group—gypsies (“Roma”). His protégés now come up with policy demands to “protect” this group that could have been written by Rev. Jesse Jackson:
- anti-bias training of teachers and administrators;
- integration of Romani history and culture in the textbooks at all levels;
- legally mandated arffirmative action programs for Roma;
- tax incentives for employers who employ them;
- access to low-interest credit for Roma small family businesses;
- setting aside a percentage of public tenders for Roma firms;
- legislation to fight “racism and discrimination” in housing;
- adoption of “comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation”;
- creation of mechanisms “to monitor implementation of anti-discrimination legislation and assist victims of racial discrimination in seeking remedies”;
- recognition by governments of “the Roma slavery and the Holocaust through public apology along with urgent adoption of a package of reparatory measures.”
A budding race relations industry is already in place, with the self-serving agenda of finding “discrimination” in order to keep itself in place for ever.
To make his agenda appear “normal” to the targeted population, millions of East Europeans are force-fed the daily fare of OSI agitprop by “the Soros media”—the term is by now well established in over a dozen languages—such as the B-92 media conglomerate in Serbia.
The social dynamics Soros uses to penetrate the target countries is interesting. To thousands of young East Europeans to become a “Soroshite” represents today what joining the Party represented to their parents: an alluring opportunity to have a reasonably paid job, to belong to a privileged elite, for many to travel abroad. The few chosen for the future new Nomenklatura go to Soros’s own Central European University in Budapest. In all post-communist countries Soros relies overwhelmingly on the sons and daughters of the old Communist establishment who are less likely to be tainted by any atavistic vestiges of their native soil, culture and tradition. The comparison with the janissary corps of the Ottoman Army is more apt than that with the Communist Party. The new janissaries, just like the old, have to prove their credentials by being more zealous than the Master himself.
The key ideological foundation for Soros’s beliefs is the same: that all countries are basically social arrangements, artificial, temporary and potentially dangerous. A plethora of quotes from his writings will make it clear that he thinks that owing allegiance to any of them is inherently irrational, and attaching one’s personal loyalty to it is absurd. Like Marx’s proletarian, Soros knows of no loyalty to a concrete country. He could serve any—or indeed all—of them, if they can be turned into the tools of his Wille zur Macht. In 1792, it could have been France, in 1917 Russia. Today, the United States is his host organism of choice because it is so powerful, and its media scene is open to penetration by his rabidly anti-traditionalist and deeply anti-American worldview and political agenda.
Textbooks and educational curricular reforms pushed by Soros in Eastern Europe indicate that he is trying to perform crude dumbing down of the young. Within months of coming to power in October 2000 the “reformists” within Serbia and their foreign sponsors insisted that schools—all schools, from kindergarden to universities—must be reformed and turned from “authoritarian” institutions into poligons for the “unhindered expression of students’ personalities in the process of equal-footed interaction with the teaching staff, thus overcoming the obsolete concept of authority and discipline rooted in the opressive legacy of patriarchal past.” They started with primary schools, with a pilot program of “educational workshops” for 7-12 year olds. The accompanying manual, sponsored by UNICEF and financed by the Open Society, denigrades the view that the purpose of education is acquisition of knowledge and insists that the teacher has to become the class “designer” and his relationship with students based on “partnership.”
The reformers devote particular attention to the more active role of schools in countering the allegedly unhealthy influence of the family on students, which “still carries an imprint of nationalist, sexist, [anti-Roma] racist, and homophobic prejudices rampant in the society at large.” The time-honored Balkan tradition of slapping childrens’ bottoms when they exceed limits is now presented in the elementary classroom as a form of criminal abuse that should be reported and acted upon. Traditional gender roles are relativized by “special projects” that entail cross-dressing and temporary adoption of opposite gender names.
Soros’s vision is hostile even to the most benign understanding of national or ethnic coherence. His core belief—that traditional morality, faith, and community based on shared memories are all verboten—is at odds even with the classical “open society” liberalism of Popper and Hayek, by whom he swears. His hatred of religion is the key. He promotes an education system that will neutralize any lingering spiritual yearnings of the young, and promote the loss of a sense of place and history already experienced by millions of Westerners, whether they are aware of that loss or not. Estranged from their parents, ignorant of their culture, ashamed of their history, millions of Westerners are already on the path of alienation that demands every imaginable form of self-indulgence, or else leads to drugs, or suicide, or conversion to Islam or some other cult.
To understand Soros it is necessary to understand globalization as a revolutionary, radical project. In the triumph of liberal capitalism, the enemies of civilization such as Soros have found the seeds of future victory for their paradigm that seeks to eradicate all traditional structures capable of resistance. The revolutionary character of the Open Society project is revealed in its relentless adherence to the mantra of Race, Gender and Sexuality. His goal is a new global imperium based that will be truly totalitarian. But he is making a colossal miscalculation. He does not realize that the unassimilated and unassimilable multitudes do not want to be the tools of his will to power. Illegal aliens in America, Algerians in France, Turks in Germany and Pakistanis in Britain have their own, instinctive scenario, and it does not entail leaving Soros and his ilk in positions of power, or alive.
In a piece I recently wrote about the dangers inherent in libertarianism, I pointed out that libertarians, by applying their live-and-let-live philosophy to the moral sphere as well as the governmental, do nothing to maintain the societal moral framework that enables people to govern themselves from within and that ensures Big Brother won’t have to do so from without (I recommend you read the piece). Not surprisingly, this provoked some angry responses and fallacious counter-arguments. This article is my response to them.
I will start with the one thing that characterizes libertarians as much as anything else: a misunderstanding about the nature of law. To illustrate the point, consider the commentary of “End the Fed,” a “devout libertarian” who posted under my first piece. He wrote:
- I don’t spend a lot of time dwelling on whether people should smoke crack or have abortions. My choice is drug free. My choice is not to have abortions. And if you want to do those things, I won’t criticize or judge you.
I simply accept the fact that those things exist whether I want them to or not.
OK, now what if I said:
- I don’t spend a lot of time dwelling on whether people should commit murder or rape. My choice is to respect life. My choice is not to commit rape. And if you want to do those things, I won’t criticize or judge you. I simply accept the fact that those things exist whether I want them to or not. I’m a good Libertarian.
Understand that all I did was take End the Fed’s reasoning to its logical conclusion. After all, what do murder, rape and abortion have in common? They are all moral matters — as is the stuff of all legitimate laws. As I explained here:
- A law is by definition the imposition of a value (and a valid law is the imposition of a moral principle). This is because a law states that there is something you must or must not do, ostensibly because the action is a moral imperative, is morally wrong, or is a corollary thereof. If this is not the case, with what credibility do you legislate in the given area? After all, why prohibit something if it doesn’t prevent some wrong? Why force citizens to do something if it doesn’t effect some good? You’ll never see a powerful movement lobbying to criminalize chocolate ice cream or broccoli.
- To provide a concrete example, what is the possible justification for speed laws? It isn’t simply “me no like speedy.” Rather, there is the idea that it is wrong to endanger others or yourself, and, in the latter case, it could be based on the idea that it’s wrong to engage in reckless actions that could cause you to become a burden on society. Of course, some or all of these arguments may be valid or not, but the point is this: If a law is not underpinned by a valid moral principle, it is not a just law. Without morality, laws can be based on nothing but air.
So here is how you fall into the philosophical trap that has ensnared virtually all libertarians (and many others):
Step 1 — Believe in a mythical separation of morality and state.
Step 2 — Accept the laws you agree with and believe necessary, not realizing they’re an imposition of morality.
Step 3 — Turn around and oppose laws you disagree with, not on the basis that the values they reflect are wrong or are not the government’s domain, but simply because they’re an “imposition of morality.”
In truth, something doesn’t have to be proclaimed by a thunderous voice from the heavens, a bishop or Charlton Heston in a Cecil B. DeMille film to be christened “morality,” nor does something cease being so (or at least a conception thereof) because it has become the stuff of academia or wins a popular vote. A moral does not cease to be a moral because it becomes a meme.
This is precisely, however, why we reflexively accept the impositions of morality known as laws against murder, rape and theft: These moral principles are seamlessly woven into civilization. But this wasn’t always the case. At one time, pillaging other peoples, à la the Vikings, was status quo, and the murder, rape and theft involved therein were simply part of doing business. I mean, sure, perhaps you didn’t thus abuse a fellow tribesman, but foreigners were fair game.
The lesson here is that most of the morality we take for granted is part of the Judeo-Christian ethic and for most of history would have been received like an injunction against masturbation is today. Yet this fact eludes most because man’s default is to be a child of his age. In fact, were today’s average good libertarian raised in a cultural milieu in which abortion was outlawed and universally equated with murder, he’d no doubt accept its criminalization as he accepts the illegality of murdering those occupying a place safer than the womb. And were he living in ancient Rome, he might very well say, “I don’t spend a lot of time dwelling on whether people should have men fight to the death in the arena. My choice is not to attend the games. And if you want to, I won’t criticize or judge you.” And when the Christians tried to end the games — which they were ultimately successful in doing — who knows, he might complain about how they were imposing their values on others.
Now, another argument I occasionally hear is, “Laws are not based on morality! They’re based on property rights. You mustn’t kill or steal from me because I own myself and my belongings.” OK, but what if I said I didn’t think it wrong to not respect your property rights? I’m sure you’d passionately retort, and if you were philosophically sound you might even mention Truth, or Natural Law. Really, though, I don’t care what your arguments would be, only that you’d reflexively tried to prove a certain thing: that such a trespass is wrong. Without a second thought, you would put forth a moral argument for laws prohibiting violation of property rights.
You see, the property-rights argument is, like so many other things, a dodge we use to avoid frank discussion about the real issue: What is good? G. K. Chesterton addressed this in his 1905 book Heretics, writing, “Every one of the popular modern phrases and ideals is a dodge in order to shirk the problem of what is good.” He then offers as examples the buzzwords “progress,” “education” and also, well, read it in his own words:
- We are fond of talking about “liberty”; that, as we talk of it, is a dodge to avoid discussing what is good . . . . The modern man says, “Let us leave all these arbitrary standards and embrace liberty.” This is, logically rendered, “Let us not decide what is good, but let it be considered good not to decide it.
I might add that the property-rights argument can be summed up as: Let us not decide what is good, but, please, whatever you do, don’t touch my goods!
The point is that libertarians tend to live in an unreal world, one without the understanding that political battles are merely the front lines in a values death match that, ultimately, has definite winners and losers; it’s a world in which there is a disconnect between religious belief and morality and morality and law. As an example, End the Fed also wrote:
- Articles like yours continue the ‘insane idea’ that at some point the two warring factions, the left or the right, will somehow- someday impose their will and cause the other side to capitulate. That has not and will not ever be the case. So go on ahead and believe what you want to believe- I’m ok with that. After all, I am a Libertarian.
Actually, as the communists proved in 1917, the Nazis proved in 1933, Europeans prove with hate-speech laws and Islamists prove the world over — and as history has consistently taught — ideological conquest is, has been and always will be the case. The story of man is one of spiritual, cultural, political and physical warfare, and each chapter has victory and vanquishment. Zoroastrianism was extinguished by Islam, the Ainus have largely been subsumed by the Japanese, and the Maldives’ native Giraavaru culture is now only a memory. Just like animals, countless languages, cultures, beliefs and peoples have become extinct, often the victims of invasive entities that, through superior morality or might, won that inevitable battle.
And that is the battle for civilization. It may sound very noble to say, “. . . believe what you want to believe — I’m ok with that. After all, I am a Libertarian,” but when enough people believe the wrong things, you will not be OK with it. You will be living under a regime that enshrines those things in law — you’ll be living in tyranny.
Like it or not, imposing values is what arranging civilization is all about. And like it or not, you’re part of this process. The only difference among any of us is in what and how much we impose — and in that some of us actually understand this is precisely what we’re doing.
So we can avoid talk about morality if we want, but it will do nothing to ensure that morality won’t be imposed on us. It only guarantees a descent into error that, ultimately, ensures that immorality will be.
The radical Left’s effort to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT), a law that bans homosexuals from serving openly in the military, has failed. On September 21 the Senate Democrats were unable to achieve the 60 vote threshold to get cloture which was needed to advance a Defense Authorization bill. Democrats included the repeal provision in the bill. The bill authorizes $726 billion in military spending for next year and includes $159 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and a pay raise for the troops.
Stealthy Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) included this and other partisan amendments to the bill that would have eventually become law. One amendment allowed for abortions to be performed on military bases, another, the DREAM Act, would allow the children of immigrants who entered the country illegally to become U.S. citizens. DREAM Act sponsor Sen. Dick Durbin (D) has sent a new version to the Senate floor so that the bill can be ready for a stand-alone vote or as an amendment to a future bill.
Sen. John McCain chided the Majority Leader for the “unfortunate and growing politicization of the National Defense Authorization Act.” He also told Harry, “I regret to see that the long-respected and revered Senate Armed Services Committee has evolved into a forum for a social agenda of the liberal left of the Senate.”
Although this is a major victory for the military, the victory may be short-lived. Sen. Joe Lieberman, who supports repeal despite the fact that there is ample evidence that allowing homosexuals to serve openly would heighten tension, erode morale, and have a negative impact or recruitment and retention, warned, “This ain’t over.”
Sen. Reid will push for reconsideration of the legislation later this year.
Robert Knight, senior writer for Coral Ridge Ministries, raised the possibility that Reid did not intended to win the vote. Knight thinks tacking on controversial provisions “is like asking for it to be rejected.” He intimated that the real reason Sen. Reid brought the bill to a vote was to appeal to Democrat abortion backers, homosexual groups and Latino voters before they vote in the November elections.
Penny Nance, CEO of Concerned Women for America doesn’t believe it’s over yet. She said, “I believe this issue will come up again. We are going to be cautious, but optimistic, and we will continue to be on guard.”
Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council agrees. He commented:
“When the issue does resurface the Marines will have a new face in the fray. With General James Conway’s term almost up, Defense Secretary Robert Gates has tapped General James Amos to take over as Marine Commandant. Yesterday, Conway’s successor-to-be was grilled by members of the Senate Armed Services Committee in a hearing where, for an entire hour, not a single issue was discussed except gays in the military. Proving just how misplaced the Left’s priorities are, important questions on things like Marine warfare, Iraq strategy, and our role in Afghanistan all took a backseat to the General’s opinion on homosexuals in the military. Instead of pressing the nominee on his experience or vision for the Corps, liberals seemed obsessed with his position on homosexuality.”
General Amos told the Committee:
“In my personal view, the current law and associated policy have supported the unique requirements of the Marine Corps, and thus I do not recommend its repeal.” He also said that changing the policy at this juncture would “serve as a distraction to Marines who are tightly focused at this point on combat operations in Afghanistan.”
Not surprisingly, General Amos’ expert opinion fell on deaf ears as 54 Senate liberals chose to ignore his advice and voted for cloture on the Defense Authorization bill.
In July Secretary of Defense Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen urged service members to complete a survey on DADT. The survey went out to 400,000 active and reserve troops and asks them to give their views on the policy and how they would feel if homosexuals are allowed to serve openly. Gates said, “I think it is very important for us to understand from our men and women in uniform the challenges that they see.”
In 1992 President Bill Clinton sought to repeal the prohibition of homosexuals serving openly in the military but his plan did not have the support of the American people much less the military. The DADT policy was a compromise that has served relatively well over the last two decades.
In 2004 the Log Cabin Republicans, a group of homosexual RINOs (Republicans In Name Only), filed a lawsuit seeking an injunction to stop the U.S. military’s ban. Recently a Federal judge in California declared from the bench that DADT is unconstitutional and that she will issue an order to stop the government from enforcing it. What the Left fails to win in Congress they try to control from the courts.
Radical “gay” activists, who are the ones pushing for the normalization of sodomy, view the military as a means to an end. These people are fully aware that this sort of social experiment is likely to have unintended and unforeseen consequences, none of which are in the best interest of the military.
For those of us that are paying attention and care about this issue, now is a time to celebrate. “Faced with a liberal supermajority, a White House doggedly determined to reinvent the military, and entertainers who used their platform to step on the troops, this is a huge victory for our military and all that they stand for. That doesn’t mean the fight is over. It just means that the question will fade into the background until after the election, when Democrats, fueled by what may be monumental losses, will decide whether to use the lame-duck session to exact revenge or not.”
Meanwhile homosexuals are on the warpath against the Catholic Church. Bill Donohue of the Catholic League released this statement:
“On June 1, Archbishop Broglio released an excellent statement recounting the Catholic Church’s opposition to homosexuality. He called on Catholic chaplains in the armed forces to show respect for the dignity of homosexuals, but he also implored them to ‘never condone—even silently—homosexual behavior.’
“On September 17, a new dissident group, Catholics for Equality, wrote a letter to the archbishop that was not only critical of his Catholic position, it reeked with smugness and arrogance: ‘We are ready to help you and Catholic chaplains in the transition to full acceptance of gays and lesbians in the military and respectfully request a meeting with you….’ So thoughtful of these malcontents to offer their help in transitioning the bishop to oppose the Catholic Church’s teachings on sexuality.”
Donohue went on to say:
“While any group can slap the label Catholic on itself, bona fide Catholics are under no obligation to acknowledge it. And by bona fide, I simply mean Catholics not in open rebellion against the teachings of the Magisterium.”
Here’s a September 24 OneNewsNow.com headline:
CDC report accurate, but ignores truth
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has released some startling statistics on homosexuality and HIV.
The study, announced Thursday in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, found one in five active homosexual and bisexual men is infected with HIV — and nearly half of those infected do not know it. The study is considered the largest to look at urban homosexual and bisexual men at high risk for HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.
Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, comments on how the government agency’s study reflects accuracy — but ignores the truth.
“This is just the latest study showing the incredible health risks of men who have sex with men. Homosexuality is a very dangerous lifestyle, especially for men,” he points out. “And yet the CDC will not do the one basic thing that it can do to really limit it — which is to do everything it can to teach men not to have sex with other men.”
Three days later CNSNews.com reports:
Health Care Law Includes Millions of Dollars for HIV/AIDS Prevention
The physician who oversees prevention of sexually transmitted diseases for the federal Centers for Disease Control said the funding announced on Friday will support “innovative, evidence-based, and high-impact prevention efforts.”
The CNS News story informs us how our hard earned tax dollars will be spent:
“This funding will give a critical boost to our HIV/AIDS prevention efforts across the country,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “By focusing on communities and geographic areas that have been hardest hit by this disease, these critical investments will make a real impact on prevention efforts — a key part of the National HIV/AIDS Strategy.”
Kevin Fenton, the physician who oversees prevention of sexually transmitted diseases for the federal Centers for Disease Control, said the funding announced on Friday will support “innovative, evidence-based, and high-impact prevention efforts.”
The Food and Drug Administration – in a brochure on condoms and sexually transmitted diseases – was able to sum up prevention strategies in three sentences: It says the surest way to avoid sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS, is either to abstain from sex altogether; limit sex to one monogamous partner; and/or use condoms correctly.
According to the FDA, about two-thirds of the people with AIDS in the United States got the disease during sexual intercourse with an infected partner. “Experts believe that many of these people could have avoided the disease by using condoms,” the brochure says.
They didn’t use a condom because “barebacking” is once again in vogue. Why? Because the gay community has the mistaken idea that HIV/AIDS is curable and if they get it it’s manageable. According to “southern gay writer” Chris Rudisill:
“A quick search of some adult blogs and you will quickly find many from self-identified “bug-catchers” who glorify how many times they’ve had unprotected sex. While the sites may provide fantasy for some, they can also provide fuel, especially to the raging young man who is seeking that risk factor and excitement in his sex life. … From 2001 to 2006, the number of new HIV diagnoses in men younger than 30 who had sex with other men increased by 33 percent, according to city health officials in New York City, which has the highest rate of HIV infection in the country. The most shocking news was that the group with the fastest-growing rates of HIV infection was made up of men between the ages of 13 and 19, for “whom HIV diagnoses doubled between 2001 and 2006,” according to preliminary data from the city’s Department of Heath and Mental Hygiene.”
The average age for enlistment in the military is 19.5.
Now more from the article that appeared in One News Now:
But according to LaBarbera, there are those at the CDC and in Congress who will use the study for another purpose — which he points out has failed. “…They will use this to say we need greater awareness programs for men who have sex with men,” he predicts.”
LaBarbera’s prediction was right on the money. And speaking of money, the American taxpayers will have to spend billions on a preventable disease. As LaBarbera reminds us:
“They’re telling men to get tested every 3 to 6 months — [but] when you’re living a lifestyle which requires you to get tested for a very serious, even life-threatening disease, every 3 to 6 months, the real message that our government should be giving these men is ‘don’t practice this lifestyle.'”
All the PC do-gooders who insist that the military accept homosexuals, despite the health risks, should at the very least consider the financial cost to taxpayers. The CDCs study makes it clear that “gay” sex is unsafe.
One last comment. In our PC society gone mad, we worry far more about the rights of homosexuals and bisexuals than about the rights of heterosexual military personnel.
Unlike for most Americans, the Delaware senatorial primary was not my first introduction to Christine O’Donnell. I remembered her from as far back as approximately two decades ago, making appearances on shows such as “Politically Incorrect.” So when I heard about her supposed “extremist views,” I had to wonder if I was overlooking something. It’s hard to forget such a pretty face, but did I fail to recollect some strange aspect of her ideology?
So I did a Google search and quickly found criticism of her at the Huffington Compost. “What better source for getting the dirt, real and imagined, on a Tea Party candidate?” I thought. Yet I figured I knew what I’d find, and I was right. Had she ever proclaimed herself a Marxist? No, that was her opponent, Chris Coons. Had she ever belonged to a socialist party? No, that was Barack Obama in the 1990s. Did she once advocate forced abortions and sterilization? No, that was the president’s “science czar,” John Holdren. Had she headed up an organization that promoted “fisting” for 14-year-olds and books featuring sex acts between pre-schoolers? No, while Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” Kevin Jennings did do that, O’Donnell’s sin is far different:
She believes in sexual purity.
To be precise, she is a Catholic who embraces the totality of the Church’s teachings on sexuality. I could elaborate on that, as I’m a devout Catholic myself, but this misses the point. To wit: The most the left can do when trying to cast O’Donnell as a danger in government is cite something that she believes has nothing to do with government. She won’t propose the “Self-gratification Control Act” of 2011 anymore than she will mandate that you must attend Mass on Sundays, fast during Lent or believe in the true presence of Christ in the Eucharist. (Note that former senator Rick Santorum never did, and, as a devout Catholic who often attends Mass even on weekdays, he presumably believes all O’Donnell does.) What the left is mischaracterizing as her ideology is actually her theology of the body.
Then, I must say that I tire of how the word “extremism” is bandied about so thoughtlessly. This isn’t primarily because the label is often misapplied. It is because it is always misunderstood.
The late Barry Goldwater once said, “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.” But to be more precise, extremism that happens to reflect Truth is a virtue. After all, if you live in a land where everyone believes 2+2=5 and you insist it is 4, you’ll be considered an extremist. All being an “extremist” means is that your views deviate greatly from those of the mainstream. It doesn’t mean you’re wrong.
But we don’t talk about wrong, or right, as much as we should in this relativistic culture. Instead, believing “Man is the measure of all things,” we naturally take the norms of current civilization as the default and any deviation from them as defect (in fairness, all cultures tend to be guilty of this). But the reality is that while Truth sometimes lies at the center of a culture, other times it occupies the fringes. Sometimes, like an abolitionist in 1800, an extremist is just someone who is right 50 years too soon. Or you might say that an extremist is someone who upholds the wisdom of the ageless despite the folly of the age.
So saying someone is an extremist relates nothing about his rightness. The problem with Islamic extremists, for instance, isn’t that they’re extreme — any truly religious person is thus viewed in a secular time. It’s that they’re extremely wrong. This brings us to O’Donnell’s opponent, Chris Coons.
Since we’re digging up old O’Donnell quotations, it’s only fair to delve into Coons’ past. And when we do, we find this interesting bit of extremism: An article he wrote titled “Chris Coons: The Making of a Bearded Marxist.” It details how a trip to Kenya that Coons took as a junior in college served as a “catalyst,” completing his transformation from “conservative” to communist. Yet, while one could elaborate further here as well, as with O’Donnell, this misses the point. To wit: Marxism has everything to do with government, as it is about transforming it through socialist revolution into something tried and untrue, something that slays the light and visits a dark age of a thousand sorrows upon its victims. It’s something that killed 100,000,000 people during the 20th century and every economy it ever touched. That is a negative extremism if ever there were one, and it should scare the heck out of every one of us.
And what is this supposedly balanced with on O’Donnell’s side?
Oh, yeah, the sexual purity thing.
Of course, Coons’ piece was written 25 years ago when he was 21 and will be excused by some as youthful indiscretion. But I’ll make two points. First, the ability to profile properly is always necessary when choosing candidates, as the information you have at your disposal when judging them is limited and managed. A politician certainly wouldn’t admit to harboring Marxist passions; thus, in keeping with the maxim “The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior,” the best yardstick we have for measuring Coons is actions and pronouncements taken/made before he had a vested interest in lying about his aims. (And wouldn’t we instinctively apply this when judging someone with a neo-Nazi or KKK history? Would we give David Duke the benefit of the doubt many would give Coons?) Then, when profiling, know this: People who embrace communism but then truly renounce it generally become passionate rightists. Those who remain leftists usually haven’t renounced anything but honesty about their intentions.
The reason why we should fear Coons is the exact reason why leftists fear O’Donnell: In their universe, moral statements are synonymous with policy positions. If they don’t like salt, fat, tobacco (paging Mayor Bloomberg) or free markets, they play Big Brother and give us a very un-free society. But traditionalist Americans are different: We don’t think that every supposedly good idea should be legislated. We understand that government and its coercion aren’t the only forces for controlling man’s behavior; there is also something called society, with its traditions, social codes and persuasion; and something else called individual striving. We can preach sexual purity while also adhering to constitutional purity. As to this, note that while some snarky leftists have criticized O’Donnell for living in the 1800s, the men who gave us our Constitution lived in the 1700s. And the norm back then was to have traditional sexual mores. But guess what they didn’t have. Marxism.
Speaking of which, that great adherent of Marx, V.I. Lenin, once said, “The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.” Given that we have a government poised to do just this — with steep tax increases and rapid money-printing that will cause inflation — should we really be concerned about a candidate’s views on sexual propriety? Or should we be more concerned about a candidate who may be harboring Marxist passions?
So all the libertines amongst us should know that Christine O’Donnell will not take their sex toys away. But Chris Coons may want to take all their toys away. To vote for him is to play with fire.
Our U.S. Congress causes most Americans of both parties intellectual trauma, emotional fits and mental anguish. Every week, 545 individuals misdirect, obfuscate, cloud, suppress, deny or avoid dealing with serious issues facing our civilization. Fact: they don’t solve much, but they do perpetuate most of our problems.
You might read a compelling piece, “545 PEOPLE” by Charlie Reese that explains their profound disconnect with America, with her values, with her people and with the principles of the U.S. Constitution.
Reese said, “Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them. Have you ever wondered if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, why do we have deficits? Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, why do we have inflation and high taxes?”
Since 80 percent of the American people stand against both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, why have those wars continued for nine years at a cost of $1 trillion and incredible loss of life and misery? It’s beyond the scope of rational thinking or logical reasoning. Are those 545 crazy or are we crazy to keep electing them?
Everything going wrong in America today stems from their decisions in Washington DC. Yet, like lemmings, we continue voting them back into office.
Problems they have perpetuated:
- 20 million Americans cannot secure a job. (Source: Brian Williams, NBC)
- 35 million Americans subsist on food stamps. (Source: “One in eight Americans living on food stamps: 35 million”, Huffington Post, 11/29/09)
- 13.4 million American children live in poverty. (Source: Katie Couric, NBC)
- 20 million illegal aliens work and live in America in violation of U.S. laws. (Source: www.cis.org; www.numbersusa.com)
- $12 trillion national debt.
- Influx of 2.4 million legal and illegal immigrants annually. (Source: www.fairus.org ; www.thesocialcontract.com)
- Annual cost of immigrants to U.S. taxpayers: $346 billion. (Source: Edwin Rubenstein Report, www.thesocialcontract.com)
- Millions suffering home foreclosures. (Source: CNN)
- $700 billion annual trade deficit. (Source: Department of Commerce)
- Educational breakdown across the country with as high as 76 percent dropout rates in major cities like Detroit, Michigan. (Source: Time Magazine, “Tragedy of Detroit”)
The list grows; it doesn’t diminish. It expands; it gets worse. The problems mount; but the Congress fiddles.
LET US UNDERSTAND AN EXAMPLE OF AN INDIVIDUAL CONGRESSMAN
You may think that writing or calling your Congress critter would bring solutions, rational decision making, and use of common sense for the common good. You would be wrong. You will receive a form letter.
I wrote my Congressman Mike Coffman and two senators Mike Bennet and Mark Udall in Colorado.
I mentioned that we needed to change the annual 1.2 million legal immigrants down to 100,000 a year, which worked from 1924 to 1964, in order to allow our civilization to become stable and sustainable. We do not need to add another 100 million people to this country within 25 years, most of it via immigration. Straight forward common sense!
Coffman wrote back, “I do not believe it is in the best interests to limit legal immigration to 100,000 individuals annually.”
“According to a study from the nation’s largest food bank operator, the number of Americans in need of food aid has jumped 46 percent in three years, including a 50 percent jump in the number of children needing food assistance, and a 64 percent increase in hunger in senior citizens’ homes,” said Daniel Tencer, journalist at www.rawstory.com “The study, Hunger in America 2010, found that 37 million people, or roughly one in eight US residents, received food aid in 2009. That’s a 46 percent jump from a similar survey carried out in 2006.”
Coffman expressed the same thinking as the Pope when he condemned Galileo for observing that the earth revolved around the sun instead of vice versa. Coffman showed (s) a complete lack of understanding that we’re already drowning in too many immigrants with 20 million illegals while adding 1.2 million legal immigrants annually—yet 20 million American citizens cannot obtain a job and another 35 million live on food stamps.
Then, we face horrendous environmental problems with carbon footprint, ecological footprint, water shortages, energy crisis and more. That shows a HUGE disconnect from what our citizens face.
Next, I said that we need to stop giving away H-1B and H—2B visas because over 1.1 million IT workers in the USA suffer unemployment from the insourcing, offshoring and outsourcing of American jobs.
He wrote back, “While this may lessen the amount of people in our country, it will also place America at a competitive disadvantage moving forward. For that reason, I do not support eliminating the H-1B and H 2-B Visas.”
Is he nuts or what? We suffer 1.1 million unemployed Americans IT workers BECAUSE of those H-1B and H-2B visas!
He gave a bunch of other inane excuses to move on several other points, as did Udall and Bennet. I asked all of them to support International Family Planning which provides birth control for women of the world so they might bring down birthrates to two kids instead of having 10 kids that suffer starvation as do over 10 million children that die of starvation annually around the globe. Obviously, that’s one of the reasons they flee to the USA for a “better life.” (Source: World Health Organization)
He wrote back, “I oppose funding organizations which use taxpayer dollars to perform or fund abortions.” Understand this Mr. Coffman: over 46 million desperate women choose abortions annually, as a secondary form of birth control, because they weren’t given birth control through family planning organizations in the first place. And, for those who didn’t use birth control, a whopping 18 million humans die annually from starvation in overloaded countries. No thanks to the Catholic and Islamic churches!
If Coffman, Udall and Bennet along with the other 532 people walking around Washington DC would get off their fat elitist/narcissistic butts, and take action for the good of our citizens—we would see results instead of worsening drama across our country and the world.
We really need to vote out most of the incumbent members of Congress and inject new blood, new thinking and workable solutions. The current crop proves a rat’s nest of incompetence, corruption and neglect of our citizens.
While the world sends food, water, tents, toilets and doctors to Haiti, most American citizens don’t realize that island’s plight dives deeper than a few earthquakes.
Haiti symbolizes dozens of the world’s countries that live on the edge of catastrophe. It won’t take an earthquake to trigger their equation into chaos. They live on the edge daily. For example, nearly one million people in India, out of 1.16 billion, squat out in the open for their morning constitutionals. They create such contamination of their water supplies that 1,000 Indian children die of diarrhea, dysentery and other water born diseases DAILY. Nonetheless, India adds 12 million people annually, net gain, on their way to 1.55 billion in 40 years. (Source: www.populationmedia.org)
Over 18 million people starve to death annually around the globe, while, at the same time, humans add another 77 million annually—as if no one notices. Think again! Mother Nature notices and she’s taking action with greater harshness.
In Haiti, a spit of land on the ocean, the Haitians, led by the Pope and the Catholic Church, managed to grow their numbers to nine million. They expect to hit 12 million within two decades. They use little birth control. They cut 98 percent of their forests. They drain raw sewage into the oceans. They suffer 80 to 90 percent illiteracy. Yet, the Catholic Church mandates as many children as possible.
Lawrence E. Harrison wrote a profound book, Underdevelopment is a State of Mind, exposing the Catholic Church’s activities around the world. Wherever the church dominates, unending babies, poverty and illiteracy follow. Haiti illustrates that paradigm. Islam also follows the same mandate.
I interviewed world traveler and Washington DC writer Don Collins and got his take on Haiti’s disaster. “What do you think is happening in Haiti and around the world?” I asked.
Collins said, “When asked about the level of violent disruption now going on in Haiti, one military man on NBC’s Tuesday, January 19, 2010 Today Show said, “Well, it’s now at a lower level than before the quake.” Today’s Matt Lauer then reported that the estimated death toll could reach 200,000. Then another 6.1 quake early Wednesday, January 20th. A hard way to reduce violence, eh?”
“Haiti, long a nearly-failed state, will likely fall even lower toward that unenviable condition. Lots of other countries around the world are in the same pickle. Is Yemen one? Is Afghanistan one? Is North Korea one? Will Pakistan become one? Take your pick!
“Sans earthquakes, many countries around the world are moving toward disasters based on the huge growth of their populations and the mindlessness of their leaders. They either ignore the urgent need for more family planning, or are even pro-natalist leaders, like some my wife and I met on our trip to Africa this past year, wanting more people so their “sort” can be equal in numbers to other “sorts”!
“Traveling around the world for over 40 years, I have personally seen this rumbling tsunami tidal wave of humans rising against resource limitations. It gets worse daily.
“This grisly Haitian situation epitomizes the kind of future that many, including me, have been predicting for years—unless we empower women and give them the means to regulate their fertility. (www.quinacrine.com)
“Fifty-three Haitian youngsters are being given new families in Pittsburgh, PA. Bet you that they will never again see Haiti!
“A friend emailed me on January 19th: “I just saw that the Red Cross has air lifted 2,000 Haitians into Orlando and is planning to bring 45,000 more to Florida with Obama’s support.”
HAITI DOOMED ITSELF LONG BEFORE HURRICANES AND EARTHQUAKES
“And as Steve Sailer so eloquently suggested in his superb January 17 VDARE.com piece, Why Haiti Is So Hopeless; And A Very Modest Proposal. He ends his perceptive piece by saying,
“But today, it’s hard to find much on Google about Haiti and contraceptives. According to a 2001 World Health Organization report: “Among sexually active women, 13% used a modern method of contraception and 4% relied on traditional methods”.
“And the other 83 percent?”
“It appears that Haitian women now wisely want to reduce the number of children they have—Haiti’s total fertility rate is said to be down to 3.8 babies per lifetime, the same as Saudi Arabia’s. But Haitians need to bring their fertility down to European below-replacement rates for a couple of generations to allow the land to recover—and the people, hopefully, improve their “human capital.”
“Let’s make long lasting Depo Provera contraceptive injections free to Haitian women. “Anyone got any better ideas?”
Mr. Sailer, you are really on the right track!
“Talk about Nero fiddling while Rome burned!” said Collins. “Our own leaders have been building up our killing machines for the profit of today’s Andrew Undershafts (Major Barbara’s father in GBS’s 1905 immortal play, who made a huge fortune from selling munitions), while missing the true Trojan Horse of massive immigration into the West.
“The unmet birth control needs of most of the world’s women in poor, underdeveloped countries has directly led to the massive migration of persons whose countries can no longer support them. Ah, Mexico, you are but one of many!
“As for Depo Provera, which is being distributed by Population Services International (PSI) in Haiti, it is an effective method of birth control. But it only lasts for three months and must be renewed by injection at that point. In a place where medical services are scarce, more permanent long-term methods are required.
“My colleagues and I have been working to gain approval for one such long-term method for many years. It is called QS: An Inexpensive, Easily Administered Contraceptive Option for Women. It has yet to be approved by FDA, but certainly would be useful.
“QS (the quinacrine method of non-surgical permanent contraception for women) is one family planning option currently under study that shows great potential. It offers the advantages of being discreet, easily administered and inexpensive, and can it be used in many settings by healthcare providers capable of performing IUD insertions.
“The amount of money now spent worldwide on reproductive services and maternal and child health is a joke—under $1 billion, compared to what we is spent on armaments. Our Congress just passed a $626 billion annual defense budget.
“Another great need is for emergency contraceptives (EC) which FDA has already determined are safe, effective and yet which were, when I last looked, prohibited at Wal-Mart Pharmacies. EC, like other contraceptives, prevents pregnancy.
“Unlike other contraceptives, EC only works within 72-hours AFTER sexual intercourse—after a condom breaks, or a birth control pill is forgotten. About half of all unintended pregnancies occur because of some type of contraceptive failure. It could happen to anyone who is sexually active. In 2000, there were an estimated three million unintended pregnancies and 800,000 abortions in the United States. And we are a developed country, not (yet) a failed state.
“Sort of makes the UN Population Fund’s hope seem dim: “All couples and individuals have the right to decide freely and responsibly the number and spacing of their children and to have access to the information and means to do so.”
“Our immigration invasion, alarmingly ignored by our own leaders as they grapple ineffectively with our comparatively minor problems, stands only to worsen.”
There is a Jewish tale, in which a man is promised that he will be granted any wish he chooses, so long as his neighbour will get twice as much. After some thought he states his wish: please put me out one of my eyes! This is a very American attitude. An American refuses to get free medical care, if the condition is that others will get it, too. This we learned from the rallies against Obama’s health reform. The slogans and ideas of the demonstrators were just too weird!
A little girl asks how she will pay the bill for the reformed health services. This little girl — or rather, her parents – did not go out and ask how she was going to pay off the bills for the Iraqi and Afghani wars, how she was going to pay for the US involvement in Palestine, how she would repay the trillions given away to the bankers. Up until now, Big Government was good. It provided billions for AIG – ok. Billions for a new fighter jets – great. Billions to Blackwater to kill more Afghanis and Pakistanis – fine. Billions to Israel – perfect. But funding for health? What a communist notion!
The US health insurance problem is something we foreigners can’t understand. All of us, whether in England or Russia or Israel or France, have a national health service; we regret only that it is not as good as it used to be. But how can normal people prefer turning their health into a commodity and making it dependent on their bank accounts? This strange attitude is rooted in America’s older ills.
The US is an experimental ‘project’ – to see what would happen when a rather empty space is colonized by people of diverse backgrounds, ethnicities and affiliations, all moved by the desire to get rich and knowing no moral inhibitions but the Smith and Wesson. At first, they destroy the natives and the neighbours, afterwards they turn to cannibalism. If the Americans do not eat each other, it is only because they have found somebody else to eat together.
America was informed by love of profit and by hatred of communism. Her anticommunism is visceral, brutal, basic, inherent. The United States was created as the supreme sheriff, as the bastion of staunch individualism, of ‘homo homini lupus est’, of rejection of the notions of solidarity and mutual help. This was the plan of project designers.
Human nature being what it is, this satanic plan was partly upset by the inherent goodness of men and women. There are many wonderful Americans, rebels against crass materialism and unbridled greed, but they are isolated in their milieu; the best American characters are living and fighting alone. Such is Thoreau in his Walden. Such is Ishmael aboard the Pequod. Such is the Old Man at the Sea. Solidarity – togetherness – is conspicuous by its absence from American literature.
Every European state, from England to Russia, has its National Health, for every nation considers self a living body, and every member of the nation is as valued as a body part. All these nations are or were Christian and solidarist. Their citizens were embraced by one church. The US is different because of the anti-solidarist and anti-Christian spirit of her founders. Her Manifest Destiny did not connect to the faith. The US founders openly denied she was a Christian nation when concluding the Tripoli treaty, and their denial was sincere, because solidarity is a basic tenet of the Christian faith.
Every part of American society – Left, Right, churches, parties – are touched by this lack of compassion magnified by envy. The US Right is obsessed with anticommunism. This goes without saying for the imperialist Right of Ronald Reagan and George Bushes Junior and Senior. What is upsetting is that even the traditional anti-imperialist, nationalist American Right (the “paleocons”) are equally anti-communist and anti-Christian. I, for one, hoped they would understand their mistakes of yesteryear and become allies of other anti-imperialist forces including China, Russia and Iran. Alas, while they do not like neocons, and this is all to the good, they are no better themselves: Instead of fighting Arabs, they would rather kill Russians.
In a recent essay, Patrick Buchanan glorifies Adolf Hitler’s Germany and vilifies Communist Russia. He is sorry that the US allied with the Russians against the Germans, and not vice versa. Though Russia is no longer Communist, he would like to fight it anyway.
Mind you, I do not need smelling salts every time Hitler’s name is mentioned. I do not think everyone has to hate Hitler. I am at peace with people who admire Hitler for sentimental reasons: they like his solidarism, or German greatness or his vegetarianism, or his treatment of banks and bankers or unification of German lands. But there is a red line: people who admire Hitler because he attacked Russia and/or massacred civilians are my enemies too. In the battle of Stalingrad, I know which side I am on. And Buchanan is on the other side.
Similar anti-communist and anti-Russian notes prevail in other far-right white-nationalist writings. Be on the look out for the telling word “hordes”. For neocons, there are Muslim hordes, for the white-nationalists, these are Russian hordes, as in Patrick Buchanan: “By May 1945, Red Army hordes occupied all the great capitals of Central Europe: Vienna, Prague, Budapest, Berlin”. He forgot to explain that this happened because the people of these great capitals had decided to try their luck in Moscow under Hitler’s banners, and it may well happen again if this lesson is forgotten.
Our erstwhile friend Tom Sunic came from his search for a New Right to the Old Hitlerism: “The last shot in the European capital of Berlin was fired by a drunken Soviet soldier, killing the young French Waffen SS volunteer.” Well, God bless the Soviet soldier, drunken or sober, for his steady mark, and to hell with the SS-man, young or middle-aged, especially if he volunteered to do that butcher job.
Buchanan writes of “the most barbarous tyranny in history: the Bolshevik regime of the greatest terrorist of them all, Joseph Stalin”. Hatred of Stalin, the man who stopped Hitler, created modern Russia and resurrected the Russian Church after the Trotskyite excesses, is the common ground of these anticommunists. If they care at all about the Russian people as they pretend they do, they can ask them and find out that despite decades of anticommunist propaganda, Stalin is much loved by Russians. In the huge recent poll run by the Russian TV, Stalin was chosen ‘the most important personality in the whole history of Russia’ next to St Alexander Nevsky. The Russians remember that Stalin became the leader of an illiterate country devastated by civil war – a country of no industry, of dying agriculture, of no money and of plenty of debts, surrounded by enemies. He created industry, built housing and roads, created full free health care and comprehensive free education for all; he made Russia the best educated country in the world.
Unprejudiced Americans may find Stalin’s simple attitude to life and business rather to their liking. He’d have solved the current financial crisis by dispatching the bankers to chop wood somewhere deep in Oregon and by canceling all debts. The automobile plants of Detroit would be saved. When Stalin discovered a Zionist Lobby in his country, he smashed it on the spot instead of surrendering to them, while ordinary Jews who were loyal to Russia retained their positions. That is why his name is besmirched by anticommunists.
This is neither the time nor the place to deal with impossible exaggerations of alleged Soviet crimes. It is enough to state that they are fantastic. Nobody, even Stalin, could have killed one hundred million people out of one hundred sixty million, won a war and yet found himself with two hundred fifty million at the end of it.
This sick hatred of communism pours out of a column by another anti-imperialist right-winger, Chuck Baldwin. This “alternative candidate” fumed against the Chinese national flag, which is red, being hoisted at the White House’s South Lawn for an anniversary of the Chinese national holiday. He speaks of “the extreme offensiveness of flying the Communist Chinese flag”. This is “unbelievable, unreal, horrific, obscene, even traitorous… for the communist leaders of Mao’s China are the Butchers of Beijing, and this proves … the communist leanings of President Barack Obama”.
Further, Baldwin spreads the heart-rending story of the Chinese people’s suffering under the cruel leadership of Mao. If Communist leadership is so bad, how come the US is indebted to China to the tune of a few trillions? Before Mao, China was an impoverished semi-colony of the West, ‘the Chinese and dogs were not allowed’ into some parts of Shanghai, famines were annual, and Anglo-American navies studiously supplied the people with opium when they weren’t busy burning Beijing Palace. Now, after so many years of Communist tyranny, the Chinese are a shining example for the rest of the world.
In any case, flying the Chinese national flag at such events is not a proclamation of Communism as state doctrine, it is just a normal sign of courtesy. Likewise, flying the Israeli flag over the same lawn was not considered by the sane as a sign of submission to the Elders of Zion, nor flying the British flag as cancellation of Declaration of Independence. It is pity that the Obama administration allegedly got cold feet and decided to cancel the event. This suppleness of Obama’s back is not a good sign, as we have already learned in the Middle East.
The US Left is afraid of communism as well. In many, many articles and responses to the anti-Obama rallies, left-wing authors invariably stress the racism of the demonstrators. William Rivers Pitt called the “white, middle-aged, overweight, pissed-off right-wingers… a Klan rally minus the bedsheets and torches.” Susie Day pretends that the rallies were formed by those whites upset by Obama’s mouthing off to a white cop.
I am not a great believer in racism. Reputation of this sin is largely overblown, to the best of my knowledge. The Russians, who are supposed to be racists, loved Stalin, a Georgian. The French and the Germans, presumably also racist, had a Jewish prime minister and a foreign minister respectively in the last century. The Americans had no problem electing the black Obama. So much for racism. The American leftists who explain everything by racism are barking up the wrong tree, and they know it – but they dare not speak about the real problems.
This sick fear of human solidarity is American society’s knee-jerk reaction. It was activated by the Lobby in order to undermine President Obama. Because he spoke against Israeli expansion, because he mentioned Palestinian rights and sorrows, they fight against him on every possible occasion – even on the issue of national health. If Obama would just do everything they want in the Middle East, his domestic initiatives would pass as easily as a steamer through the Golden Gate.
Obama is attacked at every step. Look at the Middle East: Israel wants to bomb Iran. The President refused Netanyahu’s pleas to attack Tehran, but the Lobby doesn’t take no for an answer. In the Voice of the Lobby, a.k.a. The Wall Street Journal, Bret Stephens impossibly claims: Obama Is Pushing Israel Toward War. How? Obama’s refusal to attack Iran is “pushing Israel toward a pre-emptive military strike on Iran”. The Voice of the Lobby does not hide the fact that such a strike could well usher in a “price of oil at $300 a barrel, a Middle East war, and American servicemen caught in between.” For a normal reader, the conclusion is clear: that’s why Obama forbade the Israelis to attack Iran. But the Lobby’s sophist offers another solution: let Obama’s America attack Iran instead of Israel. Obama’s refusal to interfere with Iran is presented as “Obama’s pushing Israel toward war”. Begorrah!
While the enemy is active, no friends are forthcoming to help the embattled American President. Many of us received and forwarded an email claiming that Obama supported the coup d’etat in Honduras. But much less attention was paid when Obama actually cut off US aid to Honduras in response to the coup.
Sensing this loneliness of the President, Netanyahu ridicules his mild and limited demands. There is no other word for Israel’s response – that they will freeze some settlements’ construction work for a few months. Such a response is only marginally better than “shove it”. This was followed by an announcement that some five hundred new Jewish homes will be built in the teeth of Obama’s demand. Obama does not dare to push intransigent Israel any more, for Congress and the Senate are in the Jewish pocket, and these powerful Jews prefer Zionism to Communism.
What a pity! Once upon a time, the Jews were all for Communism and none for Zionism, and the human lot markedly improved. In a remarkable article, Winston Churchill wrote in 1920s: the Jews are choosing between Communism and Zionism, let us direct them towards Zionism so they will isolate themselves and stop bothering us. His plan was realised: Jews were seduced by the Zionist idea, parted with communism and became its enemies. The result was quite sad: the positive contribution of Israeli Jews to mankind’s welfare is next to zero, unless you count the development of new torture and surveillance techniques. Jews elsewhere waste their abilities and time on the same rotten Zionist project, instead of helping their fellow countrymen to improve their lives. Winston Churchill lit a candle, and its light attracts the butterflies who die in its flames. The daring report of Judge Richard Goldstone is a first harbinger of a weather change: despite his pro-Israel sympathies he condemned the recent Zionist atrocities in Gaza.
Now it is time for Obama to move forward fearlessly. He should listen to his fellow- Americans. If they are so upset and worried by immigration, stop immigration completely. Send away illegal aliens, or legalise those who have lived long enough in America. Show people that you care about them.
Proceed with the health care. This field is ripe for revolution. Only in a time of crisis can a great leader enact radical reforms:
- Borrow the script from Illich’s Medical Nemesis, and minimise the cost of medical care. Do it the Cuban way.
- Treat health care like fire brigades – human bodies are no less important than buildings. Nobody is amazed that the fire brigades are not private. Turn health care into a public service, and make all doctors public employees.
- Ban private medical care.
- Provide medical help for everyone, at the state’s expense.
- Stop expensive life-saving, life-supporting devices. No transplantations, no complicated infertility treatments, no reproductive technology, no heart-and-brain operations, no abortions.
- Cut down research. Let incurable diseases remain incurable.
- Allow people to get born and to die; this is normal, as opposed to this morbid fear of death.
- While he’s at it, nationalise pharmaceutical companies. Let them sell medicine to the national health service at the cost of production.
Thus the national health system will become good, simple, comprehensive and inexpensive. Communism? Yes! Good for you? Yes, unless you are a wealthy gynecologist. And Comrade Stalin would approve of it! J