Rick Warren introduces “The Devil Plan”

January 29, 2011 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

Pastor Rick Warren continues to work at “fulfilling people’s needs.” His latest endeavor is “The Daniel Plan,” a 52-week health and fitness program. Pastor Rick has decided it’s high time to lose 90 pounds. But there’s more to his health plan than meets the eye.

“The church says all of its more than 5,000 small groups will go through “The Daniel Plan,” which is part of Saddleback’s “Decade of Destiny,” a 10-year plan launching this month “to help individuals succeed and be who God designed them to be in every aspect in life.””

On January 15, over 6,000 people flocked to Saddleback’s main campus while thousands more watched online at the other Saddleback campuses.

It would appear that Pastor Warren has good intentions and that he genuinely wants his congregants to be the picture of health. He says that Christians should honor God with our bodies and he draws from Scripture to prove his point, 1 Cor. 6:19 and Rom. 12:1, for example. Who can possibly dispute that Warren’s plan to get the sheep shipshape is anything but admirable?

RECIPE FOR AWITCH’S BREW

Into a cauldron of green tea add in 1 eye of a knut, 4 lizard’s tails, 3 dragon incisors, 4 forked tongues, 7 pages from the Message Bible, 1 page from the KJV Bible, then stir the pot while chanting “I am God…I am God…I am God.” While the brew simmers get in a crossed-legged yoga position…meditate …go deep…deeper still…until you’re in a trance, then allow the kundalini energy coiled like a serpent at the base of the spine to run through your body…until an ecstatic experience erupts whereby you will shift between ecstasy and horror……viola, enlightenment!

In his new endeavor to help Saddleback congregants get healthy, Pastor Rick has enticed unsuspecting people, many of them professing Christians, into drinking his witch’s brew.

Many of you are thinking, “Rick Warren wouldn’t do that!” Oh really? Stay with me and you’ll discover what “America’s Pastor” is up to. Many of you will find what I’m about to reveal unbelievable. Don’t take my word for it. At the end of this article I have included a number of links that reveal the truth about this man. Do the research.

AMEN, HYMAN AND OZ

When Rick Warren decided to implement his health plan he enlisted the help of three doctors: Daniel Amen, Mark Hyman and Mehmet OZ. “I am honored to be partnering with these internationally distinguished health experts,” he boasted. Soon the fearsome foursome set out to develop a plan and what they came up with was “The Daniel Plan” (TDP). Amen, Hyman and Oz applied their medical expertise and Warren offered his expertise in spiritual matters. And herein lies the problem. As you will see, Amen, Hyman and Oz also have a great deal to offer in “spiritual” matters.

DR. MEHMET OZ

“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires; and will turn away their ears from the truth, and will turn aside to myths.” –2 Tim. 4:3-4

Oprah Winfrey’s “favorite doctor” is a Muslim and has been influenced by the mysticism of Sufi Muslims. Moreover, he is keen on the ideas of cultist mystic Emanuel Swedenborg:

“As I came into contact with Swedenborg’s many writing I began to understand Swedenborg’s profound insights and how they applied directly to my life.”

Swedenborg believed he could pass between the life to come and the present. What is more he claimed he had conversations with spirits of the dearly departed as well as angelic beings:

“[T]he spirit world was comprised of a number of concentric spheres, each with its own density and inhabitants. There is no such thing as hell or eternal punishment. Those spirits who find themselves in a hellish place after death can evolve toward a higher spiritual plane.

“In spite of it being granted to him ‘to be constantly and uninterruptedly in company with spirits and angels,’ Swedenborg did issue a caution in regard to receiving counsel from just any spirit that might manifest with an alleged personal message. “When spirits begin to speak,” he wrote in Miscellaneous Theological Works (1996), “care should be taken not to believe them, for nearly everything they say is made up by them.…They love to feign. Whatever be the topic spoken of, they think they know it, and if man listens and believes, they insist, and in various ways deceive and seduce.”

Dr. Oz is a practitioner of Transcendental Meditation:

“When I meditate, I go to that place where truth lives. I can see what reality really is, and it is so much easier to form good relationships then.”

Do a Google search on Dr. Oz and you’ll find posts from people complaining that he’s irresponsible because he promotes things which have no scientific evidence to support them. Until something is proven, doctors should not promote it as it could endanger lives. One example of an unscientific practice he promotes is Reiki, which New Agers believe to be a “guided Universal Life Force Energy.” Dr. Oz’s wife is a Reiki Master. “Reiki,” he said, “is my favorite treatment that could change the future of medicine forever.” He also pontificated:

“I think [Reiki] may be ultimately the most important alternative medicine treatment of all. And we are embarking on this whole new vista of opportunities, it broadens dramatically the spectrum of where we might be able to go in our bodies, and this is the area of energy medicine.”

It is rather curious that Rick Warren would team up with a man whose fame he owes in part to New Age High Priestess Oprah Winfrey. Dr. Oz’s worldview more closely aligns to New Age Spirituality than to historic orthodox Christianity.

DR. DANIEL AMEN

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. – Col. 2:8

Dr. Amen is a child and adult psychiatrist and Assistant Clinical Professor of Psychiatry and Human Behavior at the University ofCalifornia at Irvine School of Medicine. In addition he is a brain imaging specialist.

Dr. Amen teaches “techniques that will improve ‘brain health,’ claiming that poor brain health is associated with a host of problems from overeating to depression. … He includes meditation (and in fact this is his primary tool) as a way to have a healthy brain.”

Dr. Amen recommends a meditation called Kriya Kirtan which is from the Kundalini tradition:

“I teamed with Drs. Dharma Singh Khalsa and Nisha Money to study the impact of meditation on the brain. We chose a simple 12 minute form of meditation, Kriya Kirtan, that is easy for busy people to practice. It is based on the five primal sounds: Saa, Taa, Naa, Maa (aa being the fifth sound). Meditators [sic]say each sound as they consecutively touch their thumb to fingers two, three, four and five. The sounds and fingering are repeated for two minutes out loud, two minutes whispering, four minutes silently, two minutes whispering and two minutes out loud.”

Dr. Amen is also a practitioner of Tantric or tantric sex which is the use of Hinduistic-type mysticism during sexual intercourse.Lighthouse Trails Research (LTR) reports:

“In a 6-CD set called Create a More Passionate Night, Dr. Amen has teamed up with advanced certified Tantra educator, T. J. Bartel. … Tantra is the name of the ancient Hindu sacred texts that contain certain rituals and secrets. Some deal with taking the energies brought forth in meditation through the chakras and combining them with love-making to enhance sexual experiences.”

Dr. Amen also teaches Reiki.

“Make no mistake about it” says LTR, “Reiki, meditation, tantric sex – these are very powerful mystical experiences that have the capability to delude and deceive those who are involved with it.”

For Christians who have read to this point, I hope you’re becoming alarmed.

DR. MARK HYMAN

“For Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.” – 2 cor. 11:14

Dr. Mark Hyman is editor-in-chief of Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine which is said to be “the most prestigious journal in the field of integrative medicine, and the medical editor of Alternative Medicine, the Art and Science of Healthy Living.”

In her article, Alternative/ Blended/ Complementary/ Integrated Healing, Marcia Montenegro examines alternative therapies:

“It is called alternative because the technique/ drug/ herb has not been or cannot be adequately tested, or has been found ineffective or dangerous. If it were a safe, tested treatment, it would not be in the alternative category. Many cited studies to support these methods are flawed, short-term, based on anecdotal evidence, conducted by believers in the techniques, & often are not published in a peer-reviewed medical journal. The terms complementary, blended, and integrated are now being used as well since alternative treatments are being combined with traditional medicine. This makes it more difficult to test the alternative methods or to know what is really working when the patient improves. It should be remembered that the placebo effect accounts for 30% or more for a person feeling better.”

Dr. Hyman claims he’s not into meditation but he does recommend yoga to create calm.

In my article Can A Pagan Practices Be “Christianized” I explain why Christians must avoid yoga:

“Christian apologists John Ankerberg and John Weldon maintain that, ‘The basic premise of yoga theory is the fundamental unity of all existence: God, man, and all of creation are ultimately one divine reality.’ To explain the basic premise, the authors quote from an editorial in the Yoga Journal: “We are all aware that yoga means ‘union’ and that the practice of yoga unites body, breath, and mind, lower and higher energy centers and, ultimately self and God, or higher Self. But more broadly, yoga directs our attention to the unity or oneness that underlies our fragmented experiences and equally fragmented world. Family, friends, the Druze guerrilla in Lebanon, the great whale migrating north—all share the same essential [divine] nature.””

Dr. Hyman participated in a program called Yoga, Body & Spirit at Shambhala Mountain. The program included Susan Piver, who offered instruction in the ancient wisdom tradition of Buddhist meditation, and Richard Reoch who presented Golden Ball Chi Kung.

Dr. Hyman retails expensive supplements “critical for supporting lifelong health,” books and CDs in his “healthy living store” online. The UltraWellness Essentials Kit for Women costs $130 for a one month supply. For youngsters it’s a tad less. Only $47 per month because “Like adults, children need a purified source of essential fatty acids to help build healthy brain cells, support focus and attention, and optimize metabolism.”

This is UltraBunk!

Earth to Dr. Hyman! At your exorbitant cost for “high-quality multi vitamin and minerals” most families can’t afford to get healthy! (Visit Dr. Hyman’s store)

Why has this not dawned on Pastor Rick? In one of his promotional videos he held up each of the doctors’ books and urged his congregants to purchase them! This makes one wonder if Dr. Hyman’s books recommend the high priced vitamins, and if this is the case who derives benefit from the sale of these products?

That an evangelical pastor would allow his sheep to be influenced by New Age ideas and questionable medical practices should give us pause. Christians should avoid becoming involved in any sort of assembly where we are powerless to address issues that come up which could cause us to compromise our biblical principles. Moreover, it should give us pause when the minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ teams up with occultists!

RICK WARREN’S ‘PLAN’ TO CHANGE THE WORLD

Jennifer Pekich journeyed to “The Daniel Plan” conference at Saddleback Church as an observer and blogged about her experience:

“To begin, I’d like to state that Saturday Jan. 15th, 2011 will go down in the history books as the day Saddleback Church was sold a bill of goods. The masses had come out in droves for answers to their weight loss difficulties & health problems, but unbeknownst to them, they were being given a prescription for restructuring society & population control.

“The prescription goes by the name Agenda 21, a.k.a. “Sustainable Development” or “Smart Growth.” Agenda 21 is a published document put out by the United Nations with the intent to put limits on population and to restructure nation-states into a global society. Rick Warren’s “new friends” had dubbed it, “The Daniel Plan – God’s Prescription For Your Health.” A more appropriate title would’ve been, “Sustainable Living – Destroying Inalienable Rights, One Community at a Time.”

(For those who are unfamiliar with Sustainable Development, Tom DeWeese explains, “Nature has an integral set of different values (cultural, spiritual and material) where humans are one strand in nature’s web and all living creatures are considered equal. Therefore the natural way is the right and human activities should be molded along nature’s rhythms.”)

Jennifer continues…

“I about fell off my chair when Dr. Hyman stated, “The key to the success of the “Daniel Plan” is “group living”…”individuals” will not succeed, our only hope lies in “community.” And with that, it was announced that the “Saddleback community” would be an example of “sustainable living” and would set the course to “change this world”…and the crowd went wild! I have to admit that visions of the masses being manipulated by Adolf Hitler’s oratory skills came to my mind, only this particular crowd had just been manipulated by a really bad infomercial.”

Most Christians know that our only hope lies in the Lord Jesus Christ. Our only hope does not lie in sustainable living designed to keep American citizens under a microscope and under the thumb of BIG government. America will not succeed because of BIG government; it is falling apart at the seams because of BIG government! Americans who are looking to the nanny state to cure their ills only need to take a gander at the European Union to the see the destruction BIG governments have caused — and it continues to get worse every day.

But this is not about moving America into Eastern-style socialism—as it appears some so-called evangelical pastors would like to see happen–so I’ll move on.

America: Why Ur Peeps B So Dumb?

December 9, 2010 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

Ignorance and courage in the age of Lady Gaga…

If you hang out much with thinking people, conversation eventually turns to the serious political and cultural questions of our times. Such as: How can the Americans remain so consistently brain-fucked? Much of the world, including plenty of Americans, asks that question as they watch U.S. culture go down like a thrashing mastodon giving itself up to some Pleistocene tar pit.

One explanation might be the effect of 40 years of deep fried industrial chicken pulp, and 44 ounce Big Gulp soft drinks. Another might be pop culture, which is not culture at all of course, but marketing. Or we could blame it on digital autism: Ever watch commuter monkeys on the subway poking at digital devices, stroking the touch screen for hours on end? That wrinkled Neolithic brows above the squinting red eyes?

But a more reasonable explanation is that, (A) we don’t even know we are doing it, and (B) we cling to institutions dedicated to making sure we never find out.

As William Edwards Deming famously demonstrated, no system can understand itself, and why it does what it does, including the American social system. Not knowing shit about why your society does what it makes for a pretty nasty case of existential unease. So we create institutions whose function is to pretend to know, which makes everyone feel better. Unfortunately, it also makes the savviest among us — those elites who run the institutions — very rich, or safe from the vicissitudes that buffet the rest of us.

Directly or indirectly, they understand that the real function of American social institutions is to justify, rationalize and hide the true purpose of cultural behavior from the lumpenproletariat, and to shape that behavior to the benefit of the institution’s members. “Hey, they’re a lump. Whaddya expect us to do?”

Doubting readers may consider America’s health institutions, the insurance corporations, hospital chains, physicians’ lobbies. Between them they have established a perfectly legal right to clip you and me for thousands of dollars at their own discretion. That we so rabidly defend their right to gouge us, given all the information available in the digital age, mystifies the world.

Two hundred years ago no one would have thought sheer volume of available facts in the digital information age would produce informed Americans. Founders of the republic, steeped in the Enlightenment as they were, and believers in an informed citizenry being vital to freedom and democracy, would be delirious with joy at the prospect. Imagine Jefferson and Franklin high on Google.

The fatal assumption was that Americans would choose to think and learn, instead of cherry picking the blogs and TV channels to reinforce their particular branded choice cultural ignorance, consumer, scientific or political, but especially political. Tom and Ben could never have guessed we would chase prepackaged spectacle, junk science, and titillating rumor such as death panels, Obama as a socialist Muslim and Biblical proof that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs around Eden. In a nation that equates democracy with everyman’s right to an opinion, no matter how ridiculous, this was probably inevitable. After all, dumb people choose dumb stuff. That’s why they are called dumb.

But throw in sixty years of television’s mind puddling effects, and you end up with 24 million Americans watching Bristol Palin thrashing around on Dancing with the Stars, then watch her being interviewed with all seriousness on the networks as major news. The inescapable conclusion of half of heartland America is that her mama must certainly be presidential material, even if Bristol cannot dance. It ain’t a pretty picture out there in Chattanooga and Keokuk.

The other half, the liberal half, concludes that Bristol’s bad dancing is part of her spawn-of-the-Devil mama’s plan to take over the country, and make millions in the process, not to mention make Tina Fey and Jon Stewart richer than they already are. That’s a tall order for a squirrel brained woman who recently asked a black president to “refutiate” the NAACP (though I kinda like refutiate, myself). Cultural stupidity accounts for virtually every aspect of Sarah Palin, both as a person and a political icon. Which, come to think of it, may be a pretty good reason not to “misunderstimate” her. After all, we’re still talking about her in both political camps. And the woman OWNS the Huffington Post, fer Christsake. Not to mention a franchise on cultural ignorance.

Cultural stupidity might not be so bad, were it not self-reproducing and viral, and prone to place stupid people in charge. All of us have, at some point, looked at a boss and asked ourselves how such a numb-nuts could end up in charge of the joint.

In my own field, the book biz, the top hucksters in sales and marketing, car salesman with degrees, are put in charge of publishing the national literature. Similarly, ex-Pentagon generals segue from killing brown babies in Iraq into university presidents and CEOs. Conversely, business leaders such as Donald Rumsfeld who fancy themselves as battlefield commanders and imagine their employees as troops to be “deployed,” find themselves happily farting behind Pentagon desks. On the strength of having mistaken Sun Tzu’s The Art of War as a business text, they get selected by equally delusional national leaders to make actual war on behalf of the rest of us.

But the most widespread damage is done at more mundane operational levels of the American empire, by clones of the over promoted asshole in the corner office where you work. At least one study demonstrated that random selection for corporate promotions offset the effect significantly. Research again confirms what is common knowledge around every workplace water cooler in the country.

Save my spot in the gulag, I’m off to Wal-Mart

Cultural ignorance of one sort or another is sustained and nurtured in all societies to some degree, because the majority gains material benefit from maintaining it. Americans, for example, reap huge on-the-ground benefits from cultural ignorance — especially the middle class Babbitry — from cultural ignorance generated by American hyper-capitalism in the form of junk affluence.

Purposeful ignorance allows us to enjoy cheaper commodities produced through slave labor, both foreign, and increasingly, domestic, and yet “thank god for his bounty” in the nation’s churches without a trace of guilt or irony. It allows strong arm theft of weaker nations’ resources and goods, to say nothing of the destructiveness of late stage capitalism — using up exhausting every planetary resource that sustains human life.

The American defense, on those rare occasions when one is offered, runs roughly, “Well you commie bastard, I ain’t ever seen a sweatshop and I got no Asian kids chained in the basement. So I’ve got what the guvment calls plausible deniability. Go fuck yerself!”

Uh, don’t look now, but the banksters own your ass, your country has become a work gulag/police state and the most of the world hates you.

Such a thriving American intellectual climate enables capitalist elites to withhold and ration vital resources like health care simply by auctioning it off to the richest. Americans fail to grasp this because the most important fact (that a helluva lot of folks can’t afford to bid, and therefore get to die early) never gets equal play with capitalist political propaganda, to wit, that if we give free medical attention to low income cleft palate babies, a wave of Leninism will seize the nation. That is cultural ignorance. We breathe the stuff every day of our lives.

But when Americans too poor to buy health care nevertheless vote to retain the corporate auction process, that is cultural stupidity.

(Let us now pause to clutch our hair in our fists and scream AAAAAAGGGGGHHHHH!)

Like the old song says, “Them that don’t know don’t know they don’t know.” I venture to say that even if they did, they would not know why. Primary truths elude us because of the junk affluence and propaganda. We get buried under a deluge of commodities that suggest we are all rich, or at least richer than most of the world. A mountain range of cheap shoes, cars, iPods, ridiculous amounts of available foodstuffs, and the entire spectacle of engorgement defines, and is enforced as, “quality of life” under materialistic commodities capitalism. The goods we have in our clutches trump the philosophical, or even the most practical considerations. “I may die early eating unidentified beef byproducts soaked in waste chemicals, but I’ll die owning a 65-inch HDTV and a new five speed automatic Dodge Durango with a 5.7 L Hemi V8 under the hood!”

Even the threat of toasting planetary life is not enough to shake Americans loose from this disconnect. As Professor Emeritus of Natural Resources and Ecology & Evolutionary Biology Guy R. McPherson points out, “79.6% of respondents to a Scientific American poll are unwilling to forgo even a single penny to forestall the risk of catastrophic climate change. Scientific American readers undoubtedly are better informed than the general populace. And yet they won’t pay a thing to avoid extinction of our species. Kinda makes you warm and fuzzy all over, doesn’t it?”

Let us pray the next generation is a tad sharper.

Taser the tots

The “American Lifestyle,” increasingly suspect as it is these days, is heavily soldiered and policed in the name of keeping we self-defined lotus eaters safe and secure from a jealous outside world. Which according to cultural consensus is a world that is at this very moment is stuffing its under drawers with explosives and buying plane tickets to Moline. Cultural ignorance dictates that the best way to stop foreign terrorists flying into the country is by humiliating American citizens flying out of the country. Go ahead, grope me, X-ray my dick and for god sake don’t let anyone bring a large bottle of shampoo on board. In an obedient, authority worshipping police state, physical insult and surveillance are proof of safety.

It’s profitable too, and not just for scanner manufacturers. The brouhaha over body scanners and crotch groping provide media with titillating fuel for ratings, thereby driving up TV advertising rates, which is passed on in the price of products we buy. So we pay to be insulted, have the hell scared out of us, and to unknowingly have our behavior shaped. Under American style capitalism, this mobius strip of cultural ignorance is called a win-win situation for everybody.

This also conveniently distracts us from the everyday human insult we practice on one another, as a result of state manufactured cultural misinformation — fear. Ten years of orange alerts and post 9/11 fear mongering have led us to draw some paradoxical cultural conclusions.

Let us briefly careen off into one of these paradoxes. For instance, that we can taser our way to domestic security and tranquility. Yes, it’s ugly business, but tasing the citizenry must be done. And besides, in these days of high unemployment, it’s a paycheck for somebody — usually, the guy who sat behind us in grade school happily eating chalk.

With taser packing police officers in thousands of schools, even grade schools (a weird enough cultural statement to begin with — needless to say, the resulting deaths and injuries of school kids have personal injury lawyers shouting eureka and contemplating new recreational sail craft moored at Martha’s Vineyard. Such are the rewards of righteous works through cult-ig.

In any case, the chance at a juicy lawsuit is accepted as a satisfactory offset to any screaming and writing in our school hallways. What are 50,000 volts and a little nerve damage, compared to a shot at paying off the credit cards, upgrading the family ride, and maybe remodeling the kitchen too?

But we gotta stick to the subject of cultural ignorance here, mainly because I wrote the title first and am determined to maintain some illusion of a theme here, or at least bullshit the reader into thinking that I have.

Soooo . . .

It can be safely said that cultural ignorance consists of the rational, sensible questions that never get asked. But it also includes the weird ones that are. For instance, one of the questions asked regarding tasering school kids is: What is the allowable weight range of a child to be tased? (Taser manufacturers say 60 pounds.) Somehow, by this geezer’s prehistoric reasoning, that sounds like the wrong question, not to mention one that by its nature leads us away from the cultural truth.

The truth is that we live in a society which sanctions semi-electrocution of its own children on the grounds that it is not fatal, and therefore not true electrocution. It springs from the same streak of cultural cruelty that deems semi-drowning by water boarding not to be torture because it is seldom fatal.

This is not to be uncharitable to American communities willing to pony up tax money for school tasers. They’ve amply demonstrated their affectionate commitment to their children by bringing creationism and pizza-for-breakfast into the schools. But there remains the question, “What kind of community comes up with the idea of tasering its own children?”

The information racketeers

It is the job of our combined institutions to manage cultural information so as to deny the harmful aspects of the rackets they protect through legislation and promote through institutional research. That’s why research shows that cell phone microwaves cause long term memory loss in rats, but do not harm people. Evidently, we are of different, more bullet proof mammalian material.

Our hyper capitalist system, through command of our research, media and political institutions, expands upon and disseminates only that information which generates money and transactions. It avoids, neglects or spins the hell out of information that does not. And if none of those work, the info is exiled to some corner of cyberspace such as Daily Kos, where it cannot change the status quo, yet can be ballyhooed as proof of our national freedom of expression. Here come the rotten eggs from the Internet liberals.

Cyberspace by nature feels very big from the inside, and its affinity groups, seeing themselves in aggregate and in mutual self reference, imagine their role bigger and more effective than it is. From within the highly directed, technologically administrated, marketed-to and propagandized rat cage called America, this is all but impossible to comprehend. Especially when corporate owned media tells us it is.

Take the world recent shaking WikiLeak’s “revelations” of Washington’s petty misery and drivel, which are scarcely revelations, just more extensive details about what we all already knew. Come on now, is it a revelation that Karzai and his entire government is a nest of fraudulent double-crossing thieves? Or that the US is duplicitous? Or that Angela Merkel is dull? The main revelation in the WikiLeaks affair was the U.S. government’s response — which was to bring US freedom of speech policy firmly in line with China’s. Millions of us in cyber ghettoes saw it coming, but our alarm warnings were shouted inside a cyberspace vacuum bell jar.

Bear in mind that I am writing this from outside the US borders and media environment, where people watch the WikiLeaks story unfold more in amusement than anything else.

The WikiLeaks affair is surely seismic to those whose asses ride on the elite diplomatic intrigues. But in the big picture it will not change the way the top lizards in global politics, money and war have done business since the feudal age — which is to say with arrogant disregard for the rest of us. Theirs is an ancient system of human dominance that only shifts names and methodologies over the centuries. Two years from now, little will have changed in the old, old story of the powerful few over the powerless many. In this overarching drama, Obama, Hillary and Julian Assange are passing players. Watching the sweaty, fetid machinations of our overlords with such passionate involvement only keeps us from seeing the big picture — that they are the players and we are the pawns.

Still, I for one am in favor of giving Assange the Médaille militaire, the Noble Prize, 15 virgins in paradise and a billion in cash as a reward for his courage in doing damned well the only significant thing that can be done at this time — momentarily fucking up government control of information. But “potentially stimulating a new age of U.S. government transparency,” (BBC) it ain’t.”

Which brings us to back to the question of cultural ignorance. For ten points, why was Julian Assange forced to do what the world press was supposed to be doing in the first place?

Bulletin: PayPal has caved to government pressure to pull WikiLeak’s PayPal account for contributions. However, the feds generously let PayPal keep its porn and prostitution clients.

The transparency scam

It is a form of cultural ignorance to believe that at some point or other, we were more in charge and that our government was somehow more transparent in the past. Societies declining into obsolescence understandably resist looking forward, and hang onto their past mythologies. Consequently, both liberals and conservatives in America feed on myths of political action which died in Vietnam. The results are ludicrous. Tea Partiers attempt to emulate the 1960s protest gatherings by staging rallies sponsored by the richest beneficiaries of the status quo. For the average TP participant, the goal, near as I can tell, is to “start a new American Revolution,” by wearing foodstuffs, screaming, threatening, and voting for nitwits. Media pundits proclaim the Tea Party “a historic populist movement.”

Neither populist, nor authentic movement, the Tea Party may yet prove historic, however, by seriously fucking things up more than they already are. Spun entirely from manufactured spectacle (and thus void of cohesive political philosophy or internal logic), the Tea Party lurches across the political landscape bellowing at the cameras and collecting the victims of cultural ignorance in sort of a medieval idiots crusade. But to the American public, seeing the Tea Party on television is proof enough of relevancy and significance. After all, stuff doesn’t get on TV unless it’s important.

Progressives also fancy a revolution, one in which they participate through the Internet petitions, and media events such as the risk free Jon Stewart Rally to Restore Sanity, where no one risked even missing an episode of Tremaine. Seeing people like themselves on television was proof fighting the good fight. The Stewart rally was nonetheless culturally historic; we will never see a larger public display of post modern irony congratulating itself.

In the historical view, cultural ignorance is more than the absence of knowledge. It is also the result of long term cultural and political struggle. Since the industrial revolution, the struggle has been between capital and workers. Capital won in America and spread its successful tactics worldwide. Now we watch global capitalism wreck the world and attempt to stay ahead of that wreckage clutching its profits. A subservient world kneels before it, praying that planet destroying jobs will fall their way. Will unrestrained global capitalism, with all the power and momentum on its side and motivated purely by machinelike harvesting of profits, reduce the faceless masses in its path to slavery? Does a duck shit in a pond?

Meanwhile, here we are, American riders on the short bus, barreling into the Grand Canyon. With typical American gunpoint optimism, we’ve convinced ourselves we’re in an airplane. A few smarter kids in the back whisper about hijacking and turning the bus around. But the security cop riding shotgun just strokes his taser and smiles. Not that yours truly has the ass to take on the security surveillance state. Hell no. I jumped out the window when the bus shot past Mexico.

What America needs is some balls

GOP honcho Mitch O’Connell says what America needs is for Republicans to finish beating the snot out of Obama, and strengthen the already rich by eliminating taxes for them and shifting the burden onto us. Obama says America needs to find bipartisan cooperation with the party of ruthlessness. Elton John says that America needs more compassion (Thanks, we never noticed).

What America really needs is a wall-to-wall people’s insurrection, preferably based on force and fear of force, the only thing oligarchs understand. And even then the odds are not good. The oligarchs have all the legal power, police, jails and prisons, surveillance and firepower. Not to mention a docile populace.

Shy of open insurrection, a nationwide refusal to pay income taxes would certainly shake things up. But broader America is happy in the sense they know happiness as an undisturbed regimen of toil, stress and commodity consumption. Despite the way it looks in the news, most Americans remain untouched by foreclosure, bankruptcy and unemployment. So risking loss of their work-buy-sleep cycle in an insurrection looks to be sheer lunacy to them. Like cows, they are kept comfortable in the pure animal sense to be milked for profit. Animal comfort kills all thoughts of revolution. Hell, half of mankind would be thrilled with the average American’s present material situation.

And besides, revolutionary history does not exist for Americans. The 20th Century’s successful revolutions in Russia, Germany, Mexico, China, and Cuba are wired into our minds as history’s evil failures, because all but one were Marxist. (The only successful non-Marxist revolution of the 20th Century was Fidel Castro’s Cuban Revolution).

So if we are talking change through revolt, we’re necessarily talking about deconditioning because the thing we fear already has a life deep in our own consciousness. Deconditioning from cultural ignorance is at the heart of any insurrectionary politics.

Deconditioning also involves risk and suffering. But it is transformative, freeing the self from helplessness and fear. It unleashes the fifth freedom, the right to an autonomous consciousness. That makes deconditioning about as individual and personal act as is possible. Maybe the only genuine individual act.

Once unencumbered by self-induced and manufactured cultural ignorance, it becomes clear that politics worldwide is entirely about money, power and national mythology, with or without some degree of human rights. America still has all of the above to one degree or another. Yet for all practical purposes, such as advancing the freedom and the well being of its own people, the American republic has collapsed.

Of course, there is still money to be made by the already rich. So the million or so people who own the country and the government use their control to convince us that there is no collapse, just economic and political problems that need to be solved. Naturally, they are willing to do that for us. Consequently, the economy is discussed in political terms, because the government is the only body with the power to legislate, and therefore render the will of the owning class into law.

But politics and money are never going to fill what is essentially a public vacuum that is moral, philosophical and spiritual. (The latter was instantly recognized by fundamentalist Christians, disfigured by cultural ignorance, as they may be.) Not many ordinary Americans talk about this vacuum. The required spiritual and philosophical language has been successfully purged by newspeak, popular culture, a human regimentation process masquerading as a national educational system, and the ruthlessness of everyday competition, which leaves no time to contemplate anything.

Still, the void, the meaninglessness of ordinary work and the emptiness of daily life scares thinking citizens shitless, with its many unspeakables, spy cams, security state pronouncements, citizens being economically disappeared, and general back-of-the-mind unease. Capitalism’s faceless machinery has colonized our very souls. If the political was not personal to begin with, it’s personal now.

Some Americans believe we can collectively triumph over the monolith we presently fear and worship. Others believe the best we can do is to find the personal strength to endure and go forward on lonely inner plains of the self.

Doing either will take inner moral, spiritual and intellectual liberation. It all depends on where you choose to fight your battle. Or if you even choose to fight it. But one thing is certain. The only way out is in.

Source: Joe Bageant

Filed Under: Highlights
Tagged: 9/11, America, Asia, Bank, Banks, Biology, Business, capitalism, China, Christian, Church, CIA, Climate, Conservative, Cuba, Culture, Demons, Economy, Education, Empire, Environment, Food, Freedom, Germany, Ghetto, God, Government, Health Care, History, Human Rights, Internet, Iraq, Jobs, Liberals, Literature, Mexico, Middle Class, Oil, Philosophy, Planet, Police State, Politics, Prison, Progressive, Propaganda, Regiment, Republican, Resources, Revolution, Russia, Slavery, Society, Space, Surveillance, Taxes, tea party, Television, Torture, Truth, Unemployment, Vietnam, Voting, War, Water, WikiLeaks, Writing

Secular Humanism Fizzles, Cosmic Humanism Flourishes

August 18, 2010 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

It may surprise some readers to learn that secular humanism, the anti-religious, anti-supernatural belief system liberal reformers and radicals tried to foist on society has fizzled out. Their anti-God worldview failed to sway us away from our religious beliefs and from our obsession with “hidden knowledge.” Instead of the promised Utopia, “secular humanists created two world wars and the death of 200 million.” They also created a modern culture war, an upheaval over social issues such as abortion, guns and gays and, worst of all, they created moral anarchy.

Worldview Weekend radio host, Brannon Howse, examined the reasons secular humanism (SH) failed to deliver the ideally perfect place, socially, politically and morally and why there has been a shift to spiritual paganism or “spiritualism.” The shift happened because of guilt, says Howse:

“Secular humanism denies the soul, the conscience and thus can not address the guilt. Spiritual Paganism is all about removing the guilt. Human reasoning has left an entire generation groping in the dark while spiritualism gives the promise of enlightenment, the revelation of hidden knowledge. Secular humanism has not infiltrated evangelical churches to any real degree but spiritualism is rushing in like a tsunami.”

Theologically, secular humanists are atheists. Philosophically they are naturalists. Humanists reject the possibility of any supernatural phenomena…human beings have no soul…there is no afterlife…no heaven. As for hell? Oh please.

According to Christiananswers.net, SH is a set of beliefs “through which one interprets all of reality—something like a pair of glasses.” They say it is also a religious worldview:

“Do not let the word ‘secular’ mislead you. The Humanists themselves would agree that they adhere to a religious worldview. According to the Humanist Manifestos I & II: Humanism is ‘a philosophical, religious, and moral point of view.’”

But not all humanists want to be identified as religious. Why? Christiananswers.net gives the following reason:

“[T]hey understand that religion is (supposedly) not allowed in American public education. To identify Secular Humanism as a religion would eliminate the Humanists’ main vehicle for the propagation of their faith. And it is a faith, by their own admission. The Humanist Manifestos declare: ‘These affirmations [in the Manifestos] are not a final credo or dogma but an expression of a living and growing faith.’”

Those who experienced years of spiritual depravation—and guilt—have moved on to Cosmic Humanism (CH). President of Summit Ministries, David Noebel, explains CH thusly:

“The Cosmic Humanist worldview consists of two interrelated spiritual movements. One is known as the New Age Movement (NAM), and the other is neo-paganism, which includes occult practices, Native American spiritism, and Wicca. … This worldview is summed up by Jonathan Adolph: ‘In its broadest sense, New Age thinking can be characterized as a form of utopianism, the desire to create a better society, a ‘New Age’ in which humanity lives in harmony with itself, nature, and the cosmos.’”

Humanists and neo-pagans are looking for Utopia, it seems. What they have in common is that both worldviews are man-centered and reject the God of the Bible.

CH is a pantheistic worldview which holds that God is all and all is God (all things are interconnected) including humans, animals, insects, water, rocks, trees, planets, stars and so on. Cosmic humanists believe that humanity is evolving, moving upward toward an age of higher consciousness where we will experience “cosmic unity.” Humans who want to achieve unity with all existing things must get in touch with the “god within.”

Some of their doctrines include: the Divine Mind (“Creating instant manifestation through union of the human and divine mind”), Christ consciousness (“the state of awareness of our true nature, our higher self, and our birthright as children of God”), reincarnation (“rebirth of the soul in one or more successive existences, which may be human, animal, or vegetable”) and karma (a person’s action, either bad or good, determines his or her destiny).

Cosmic humanists “blur the line between physics and metaphysics,” reveals Debra Rae. “To them, all life is energy; composite energy is god; and the promised expectation is ‘life beyond the grave’ by becoming god.”

Throwing off all our cares and woes and becoming god sounds intriguing, doesn’t it?

Not so fast. What this means is that the individual will disappear as a separate person and meld into the “universal oneness.” Is this the sort of afterlife humans can look forward to?

CH is very different from SH in that the secular humanist sees man as the measure of all things and denies the soul whereas the religious humanist sees man as having unlimited human potential because of his “inner divinity.”

“Unity is at the central core of Being,” says one cosmic humanist. So “Let us learn to reflect this greatest Truth in our lives. Let us appreciate the beauty of diversity much as we cultivate the diverse flowers in a garden. Let us not assign God to any one religion, creed, or belief system; for how can the created possibly understand the Creator! Let us come together in love, respect, and share in a humility born of the wisdom that we are a part of everything. Nothing exists independently. Let us grow, let us learn, let us flower and let us bear fruit!” (Online Source)

Let us get real! Let us apply logic! The person who wrote this obviously did not think this through. If God exists, common sense dictates that there can be only one true God. All other gods are counterfeit. So God is either: Jehovah of Judaism; the Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) of Christianity; Allah of Islam; a multitude of Hindu gods; the Ultimate Self of Buddhists; Enlightened Humans of Jainism; the Supreme Architect of Deism; Eloheim of Mormonism; the New Cosmic Consciousness of the New Age movement or what New Thought devotees refer to as Infinite Intelligence; the Higher Power of Alcoholics Anonymous. All these religions/groups say that their god is the one true God. How is that possible?

DARWINIAN EVOLUTION

Getting back to my point, those who embrace CH are naturalists, meaning that they are evolutionists. The theory of Darwinian Evolution (DE) holds that life evolved from one common origin over billions of years. DE also holds to what Darwin called “natural selection” or as Herbert Spencer put it “survival of the fittest.” Which means that,

“Any individual organism which succeeds in reproducing itself is ‘fit’ and will contribute to survival of its species, not just the ‘physically fittest’ ones, though some of the population will be better adapted to the circumstances than others. A more accurate characterization of evolution would be ‘survival of the fit enough’.

“Moreover, to misunderstand or misapply the phrase to simply mean ‘survival of those who are better equipped for surviving’ is rhetorical tautology. What Darwin meant was ‘better adapted for immediate, local environment’ by differential preservation of organisms that are better adapted to live in changing environments. The concept is not tautological as it contains an independent criterion of fitness.” (Online Source )

EVOLVING FROM SLIME INTO GODS

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin said, “Evolution is a light illuminating all facts, a curve that all lines must follow. . . . Man discovers that he is nothing else than evolution become conscious of itself.”

Oh really.

First off, whatever we know about how man became “conscious” and began to think is sheer speculation! Guesswork! Not fact! I don’t hold a biology degree and I’m no expert in any area of science, and I know very little about philosophy, but one thing I do know is that the brain is very complex. It doesn’t take a Ph.D to understand that the brain controls every single bodily function. Which begs the question: Before the brain developed how could any creature draw a breath? Without a fully developed brain, what controlled body temperature…blood pressure…digestion? How did creatures chew their food/swallow…excrete waste…recognize danger? Did the memory evolve? Homo sapiens somehow came to realize that they couldn’t see. So they set about evolving something to see with. And lo, 1 billion years later the eye came into being. So here’s my next question: Did primitive humans have to stay in the swamp to avoid bumping into trees or stepping off a cliff, or did they feel their way around?

One last question: Wouldn’t organs have to evolve at precisely the same time for the body to be able to function? I mean, think about it. If all our vital organs fail to operate in harmony, our bodies shut down and die! Yet we’re supposed to believe that Homo sapiens managed to evolve into modern man sporting all our pretty amazing bells and whistles!

We’re also supposed to believe that the next stage in the evolutionary process is for Homo sapiens to “evolve into the New Age by realizing their godhood.” To reach this new pinnacle, “Cosmic Humanists use a wide variety of occult means in their effort to attain this higher consciousness, resulting in a movement described as metaphysical or paranormal.” (Online source)

The means they use to attain a higher consciousness include meditation, visualization and hallucinogenic drugs. Some become junkies hooked on a spiritual high. These methods are the “sacraments” of the New Age religion and are practiced to experience “interconnectedness of all things.”

So those who wish to evolve to the next step in human evolution must dive into the occult. Those of us who prefer not to take the plunge will simply remain unenlightened humanoids. Sort of like Neanderthals, but with less hair.

HUMANITY AND THE EARTH

“Enlightened” consciousness researcher and spiritual visionary John White believes that humanity and the earth have the makings of a promising future together. But there will be change. “The form of human being that will be here to participate is a primate of a very different order than the human as we know it today. He calls it Homo noeticus—the next step in human evolution.” (Online source)

White and Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell founded the Institute of Noetic Sciences in Northern California. According to the IONS website:

“’Noetic’ comes from the ancient Greek nous, for which there is no exact equivalent in English. It refers to ‘inner knowing,’ a kind of intuitive consciousness—direct and immediate access to knowledge beyond what is available to our normal senses and the power of reason.”

Under the heading: What are ‘Noetic Sciences’? it says,
”Noetic sciences are explorations into the nature and potentials of consciousness using multiple ways of knowing—including intuition, feeling, reason, and the senses. Noetic sciences explore the ‘inner cosmos’ of the mind (consciousness, soul, spirit) and how it relates to the ‘outer cosmos’ of the physical world.” (Online source)

COSMIC HUMANISM AND CHRISTIANITY

As I stated earlier, the CH believes in the god within and the divinity of man. What is hard to fathom is that a large number of what were once evangelicals have thrown off traditional Christianity and adopted CH’s pantheistic (pagan) worldview.

The serious Christian simply cannot ignore this subject any longer. The Bible admonishes us to “be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear” (I Peter 3:15). This includes being ready to have a meaningful, informed dialogue with those who have been drawn into the lie of CH by Satanic forces.

Even though the older generation has dropped the ball it’s not too late to shift gears, says David Noebel:

“Society will flourish in the light of truth only when the emphasis shifts back to a Christian perspective. This dramatic shift in emphasis can be brought about through the leadership of thousands of informed, confident Christian students who think deeply and broadly from a well-honed biblical worldview and emerge as leaders in education, business, science, and government.”

The Christian perspective:

Genesis 1:1, 27 (Creation)

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

John 1:1–3 (Jesus—the Word—is the Creator)

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

John 14:6 (Jesus is the only path to God)

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Acts 4:10–12 (Salvation in Christ alone)

Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Colossians 1:15–20 (Jesus’ credentials)

Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

Hebrews 9:27 (No reincarnation)

And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment.

1 John 1:7–10 (The Bible’s teaching on sin)

But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

Marsha West is a regular columnist for Novakeo.com

She can be reached at:

Filed Under: Marsha West
Tagged: America, Anarchy, Animals, Biology, Business, California, Christian, Christianity, Church, Drugs, Education, Energy, Environment, Food, Future, God, Government, Independent, Islam, Israel, Jesus Christ, Judaism, Love, Occult, Philosophy, Physics, Planet, Religion, Society, Truth, War, Water

Overpopulation in 21st Century America: Humans and the Rest of the Planet

August 8, 2010 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

Part 19: Humans and the rest

In this series, it’s the things that you don’t see that undermine Mother Nature’s ability to function for all living creatures and plants on this planet. While the environment ‘seems’ steady and dependable, look at the tornadoes across the Midwest in the past week or the eruption of Iceland’s volcano that shut down air traffic in the past month. Or huge whale die-offs from eating plastics now endemic to our oceans.

HUMANS AND THE REST OF THE PLANET

In his book, Too Many People, Lindsey Grant addresses such things as our energy depletion, food crisis and much more. You may find his book at www.sevenlockspress.com and . Grant is a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Environment and Population Affairs.

“The President’s Acid Rain Review Committee raised the most frightening environmental issue of all in 1983,” said Grant. “It pointed out that soil microorganisms are particularly susceptible to a change in acidity and warned: “It is just this bottom part of the biological cycle that is responsible for the recycling of nitrogen and carbon in the food chain. The proper function of the denitrifying microbes is a fundamental requirement upon which the entire biosphere depends. The evidence that increased acidity is perturbing populations of microorganisms is scanty, but the prospect of such an occurrence is grave.””

Grant comes to a most anxiety-provoking understanding that human activity could make this planet uninhabitable by destroying microorganisms to stabilize the system.

“We’re all in this together,” said Grant. “Including the microbes.”

You might compare microbes to the tiny circuit cards in a flat screen television. While you see the ‘big colorful picture’, you don’t see the operations behind the screen that make it possible. Most Americans couldn’t explain ‘how’ televisions work. They only know how to push the buttons on their remote controls. If a TV or computer fails to operate, humans must call in an expert.

Unfortunately, when it comes to the microbes that make this planet livable, we humans don’t enjoy any experts that know how to ‘fix’ what we break. They feed on us and they work for us. They can mutate faster than we can mutate to adjust for changes. Microbes will continue on this planet long after our species vanishes.

“We have not yet seriously begun to learn how to live with this cantankerous but essential invisible world,” said Grant. “Until we learn a lot more about our relationship with that microbial world, wisdom would suggest that we pursue the alteration of the environment with much more caution. Technology must not be under pressure to produce more food, or develop new toxins to deal with pests, multiply the pharmacopoeia we already have, or tinker with incessantly with the environment to keep up with rising human needs.

“A sane species, if it had the knowledge we have, would step back from this blind experimentation with our life-support systems. It would deliberately seek to move back to a level of economic activity that left much of the non-human world intact to buffer the changes we inflict on it.”

As Grant describes and I witnessed with my own eyes in my world travels, we humans gallop toward a colossal if not unimaginable collusion with the biology of the planet and our own numbers. Our species represents a ‘malignant’ growth, essentially a ‘cancer’ that feeds on the host until it destabilizes the host and kills it-thus killing itself.

As Grant said, “Our success has become our failure.”

And, as projections show, the U.S. continues on its path to add 100 million people within 25 years. Is this what we want for our children?

Frosty Wooldridge has bicycled across six continents – from the Arctic to the South Pole – as well as six times across the USA, coast to coast and border to border. In 2005, he bicycled from the Arctic Circle, Norway to Athens, Greece.

He presents “The Coming Population Crisis in America: and what you can do about it” to civic clubs, church groups, high schools and colleges. He works to bring about sensible world population balance at his website: www.frostywooldridge.com

Frosty Wooldridge is a regular columnist for Novakeo.com

Filed Under: Frosty Wooldridge
Tagged: 21st century, America, Biology, Cancer, Energy, Environment, Food, Norway, Oil, Overpopulation, Planet, Technology, Television, War

Isolation and Defamation: The cost of thinking differently

May 18, 2010 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

Interview with Michael Behe on intelligent design…

Michael Behe is an American scientist and biochemist. Being an intelligent design advocate, he serves as a professor of biochemistry at the University of Lehigh in Pennsylvania. He is also a senior fellow at Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture.

Behe has controversially challenged the evolution theory of Charles Darwin which underpins the ideology of western though with regards to the material life and universe.

In his 1996 book “Darwin’s Black Box”, Behe has proposed the notion of irreducible complexity which underscores the role of an intelligent designer in the emergence of complex biological systems. According to this theory, certain biological systems are too complex to have evolved from simpler and less complex predecessors.

The theory of Behe undermines the basis of atheism and secularism as it advocates the role of an intelligent, conscious designer in the creation of human being. That’s why Michael Behe has been attacked and insulted by a number of his opponents and the materialist scientists who deny the existence of God.

Michael Behe has been accused of disseminating deceitful falsehood and what is describe as pseudo-science in the scientific circles around the world. Behe’s theory has been labeled as argument from ignorance and the University of Lehigh has clearly distanced itself from his viewpoints regarding the evolution – creation debate.

Here is the complete text of interview with Michael Behe in which he describes why the western society is afraid of the propagation of “intelligent design” theory.

Kourosh Ziabari: Irreproachably, scientists propose theories, hypotheses and premises as an instinctive part of their intellectual mission and these scientific proposals are conventionally discussed in academia; they’d be either accepted or rejected or may simply undergo modifications to be publicly presented; traditionally, we’ve learned that no scientific theory receives political treatment unless it transpires to be politically effectual. The long-disputed theory of intellectual design is one of the most controversial scientific notions which have even evoked judicial indictment and many universities around the world, including the Lehigh University, have clearly distanced themselves from this theory by issuing statements and delivering lectures. What are these frantic reactions to a single scientific theory for?

Michael Behe: Scientific hypotheses are usually uncontroversial unless they have political, moral, or ontological implications. Intelligent design is an example of a theory with ontolgical implications — that is, what sorts of things exist? However, it is hardly the first one. For example, in the 17th century Isaac Newton proposed his theory of gravity. At the time it was controversial because Newton was proposing that bodies could interact without physically touching each other. That went against the view of the time and seemed to say that the universe contained more kinds of things than was thought. A second example is the Big Bang theory. A hundred years ago most scientists thought the universe was eternal and essentially unchanging. Then astronomy observed that galaxies seemed to be speeding away from each other and from the earth. That was the beginning of the Big Bang theory. Many scientists hated the theory because they thought it pointed to a beginning, which may have been the creation of the universe. I think intelligent design theory is controversial for the same reasons — like the Big Bang theory it seems to point to something beyond our universe as an explanation.

KZ: Is the modern, western society whose dominant ideological principal values are predicated on secularism, disestablishment and disbelief in a “talented agent” whom the monotheistic religions call “God”, really afraid of the growing confidence in an intelligent designer who can not be merely described within the frameworks of tangible science? Why do they really prohibit the teaching of evolution theory in the schools and universities if there’s allegedly a freedom of speech and unrestricted debate in the western societies?

MB: There are several reasons why there is such a strong reaction by the scientific community against intelligent design. First, at least in the United States, there has been a history of conflict between science and some religious groups (those who believe in a young earth), so some people automatically view the idea of intelligent design in light of those conflicts. A second reason is that many scientists want to think that they will be able to explain all features of the universe, and they resent people who claim that science may not be able to do that. Finally, many scientists, especially at the more elite institutions, are atheists and simply don’t want there to be a God or anything beyond nature. They strongly resist anything that would suggest they may be wrong.

KZ: The 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial in which you testified as an expert witness has been one of the most disputed indictments where the teaching of intelligent design and creationism were publicly labeled unconstitutional. Do you believe that Judge Jones’ final verdict was impartially objective and unbiased? What happens to a free society which collectively ousts the members of a school board of directors in lieu of proposing an alternative suggestion to its students?

MB: No, I don’t think Judge Jones verdict was objective and unbiased. Actually, I don’t think the judge understood any of the academic arguments that were presented in his court room, whether science, philosophy or theology, or whether presented by the plaintiffs or defendants. If you examine the court records, you see that when the judge’s ruling discusses the nature of science, the judge’s opinion was essentially copied from a document given to him by the plaintiffs lawyers. There is no evidence he himself understood what he was copying. But when the leading scientific societies strongly are arrayed on one side against a local community school board on the other side, the judge went with those who have cultural power in our society.

I regret the judge’s decision, but nonetheless I think the school board elections in which the old board lost and a new board installed is a reasonable example of democratic action. The big issue for many local residents was not what was taught in biology class in the local high school. Rather it was the expense of the trial itself, which was over a million dollars. Residents who had no children in the school, or who knew little of the issues, would still have their taxes increased to pay the legal costs of the trial. That made many of them angry, so they voted against the old school board.

KZ: According to a recent Gallup Poll published in early February 2009, only 39% of Americans say they “believe in the theory of evolution” and a similar trend has apparently emerged in UK as The Rescuing Darwin survey showed that only 25% of Britons believe that Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution is “definitely true”. What’s the main reason behind such a wide gap between the mainstream trajectory and the popular trends in these societies?

MB: I think that the main reason for the disparity is the difference in the philosophies of the elite elements of society versus ordinary people. Much of the elite in our society (such as academics, media, entertainment industry, and so on) is secularized, and an idea like Darwin’s theory is congenial to their view of the world. The bulk of ordinary people, however, are religious and their views are not constricted by the need to explain everything in the world by chance and natural law. So when they view the evidence for Darwin’s theory most people are unpersuaded by it.

KZ: Why do some people argue that a religious world-view of creation, and not necessarily the school of Creationism, contradicts the possible scientific validity of Evolution and thus, science and religion don’t come in conformity? Is it only because of the “metaphorical” 6 days of creation in Bible (which is identically mentioned in Muslims’ Quran the same way) and the longstanding argument over the commencement of life which creationists believe predates to 10,000 years ago? What’s the exact viewpoint of creationist scientists on the extinction of Tyrannosaurus rex which the conventional scholars believe have died out at the end of the Cretaceous period, some 65m years ago?

MB: The basic conflict is the role of randomness in evolutionary theory. Many scientists discount religious views of creation, including ones that agree the earth is very old, because Darwin’s theory requires that life arise and develop solely by chance changes plus natural selection. If God is directing the development of life in any way, then life did not develop by “chance” — it developed by design, or guidance. Many scientists do not like this possibility for the reasons I gave in the answer to question 2.

It is not just that some people think life began only 10,000 years ago. Many scientists are strongly against any theory that has any role for a guiding intelligence. Official science organizations are as opposed to the limited claims of intelligent design as they are to people who advocate a young earth.

KZ: The opponents of intelligent design brand as “argument from ignorance” and resorting to the “God of gaps” creationists’ argument that complex biological systems could not have come to the existence as a result of frequent gradual evolutions. If we take into account a linguistic instance, science again fails to account for the genius polyglots’ ability to speak several languages as a result of their infliction with the Asperger syndrome and this simply demonstrates that material science still seems to be ineffectual to respond to a number of ambiguities. What do you think about that?

MB: I agree that science can say very little about the workings of the human mind. That itself is not too surprising because there are many questions that science cannot answer, even in what most people would agree was its proper domain. The big conflict arises because many scientists do not acknowledge that there is anything that is outside of the domain of science. They will assume, against all evidence, that the mind is just a complex aggregate of matter, and does not point to anything higher. That view is absurd to most nonscientists, but because many scientists view themselves as smarter and better than the bulk of humanity, they disregard other people’s views. Of course, this leads to contradictions, so that a scientist must think that his own mind is just an arrangement of matter, built for survival. But most scientists are poor philosophers, and often don’t see the contradictions.

Kourosh Ziabari is a freelance journalist and media correspondent, Iran

Kourosh Ziabari is a regular columnist for Novakeo.com

Filed Under: Kourosh Ziabari
Tagged: America, Biology, Demons, Freedom, God, History, Philosophy, Religion, Society, Taxes

Overpopulation in 21st Century America: Nobody Ever Dies of Overpopulation

March 10, 2010 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

Part 4

Following the recent loss of life in Haiti, Chile and China due to earthquakes or the loss of life from Hurricane Katrina or the tsunami that killed 100,000 in Sri Lanka in 2005—it reminds me of a 39 year old column by the late Dr. Garrett Hardin: “Nobody ever dies of overpopulation.” It is reprinted with permission from Science, 12 February 1971, Volume 171, Number 3971, © 1971 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. (www.thesocialcontract.com ) Professor Hardin taught in the biology department of the University of California at Santa Barbara.

Not mentioned, but increasing in numbers as the human race accelerates its own populations across the globe—an astounding 18 million human beings starve to death or die of starvation related diseases every year. (Source: World Health Organization) The breakdown: eight million adults and 10 million children perish at the hands of starvation annually. Fully 1.5 to 2.0 billion humans subsist on less than $2.00 per day. That same number cannot obtain a clean glass of drinking water.

For example: India sports 1.16 billion people. Out of that number, nearly one million do not possess a toilet to use, so they squat onto the land every day. They contaminate ground water, lakes and rivers with their human waste. The Ganges runs in raw sewage 24/7 and its dead zone expands to over 10,000 square miles—contaminating and killing ocean life. Result: 1,000 Indian children die of diarrhea, dysentery and other water borne diseases—DAILY. Yet, Indians do not practice birth control as they add another 12 to 15 million people annually on their way to surpassing current-day China and hit 1.55 billion in 40 years.

For whatever reason, Americans as well as citizens of many countries never make the connection of overpopulation and their vulnerability—to disease, famine and Mother’s Nature’s rage. Nature thrives on destruction, i.e., hurricanes, tsunamis, floods, earthquakes, forest fires, famines, hail, tornadoes and epidemics.

INCREASING HUMAN NUMBERS ON EARTH CREATES GREATER SCENARIOS FOR MASS HUMAN DEATHS

For some reason, call it hubris or “false pride”; or massive ignorance or ethnocentrism—Americans cannot and do not think they would ever find themselves on the receiving end of water shortages, food scarcities or energy deficiencies. Thus, they happily grow their numbers, by adding 3.1 million people annually, ironically, mostly through other humans fleeing overpopulation pressures worldwide.

Dr. Hardin brings home our dilemma:

“Those of us who are deeply concerned about population and the environment —”eco-nuts,” we’re called, — are accused of seeing herbicides in trees, pollution in running brooks, radiation in rocks, and overpopulation everywhere. There is merit in the accusation.

“I was in Calcutta when the cyclone struck East Bengal in November 1970. Early dispatches spoke of 15,000 dead, but the estimates rapidly escalated to 2,000,000 and then dropped back to 500,000. A nice round number: it will do as well as any, for we will never know. The nameless ones who died, “unimportant” people far beyond the fringes of the social power structure, left no trace of their existence. Pakistani parents repaired the population loss
in just 40 days, and the world turned its attention to other matters.

“What killed those unfortunate people? “The cyclone,” newspapers said. But one can just as logically say that overpopulation killed them. The Gangetic Delta is barely above sea level. Every year several thousand people are killed in quite ordinary storms. If Pakistan were not overcrowded, no sane man would bring his family to such a place. Ecologically speaking, a delta belongs to the river and the sea; man obtrudes there at his peril.

“In the web of life every event has many antecedents. Only by an arbitrary decision can we designate a single antecedent as “cause.” Our choice is biased — biased to protect our egos against the onslaught of unwelcome truths. As T.S. Eliot put it in Burnt Norton:

“Go, go, go,” said the bird, “Human kind cannot bear very much reality.”

“Were we to identify overpopulation as the cause of a half-million deaths, we would threaten ourselves with a question to which we do not know the answer: How can we control population without recourse to repugnant measures? Fearfully we close our minds to an inventory of possibilities. Instead, we say that a cyclone caused the deaths, thus relieving
ourselves of responsibility for this and future catastrophes. “Fate” is so comforting.

“Every year we list tuberculosis, leprosy, enteric diseases, or animal parasites as the “cause of death” of millions of people. It is well known that malnutrition is an important antecedent of death in all these categories; and that malnutrition is connected with overpopulation. But overpopulation is not called the cause of death. We cannot bear the thought.

“People are dying now of respiratory diseases in Tokyo, Birmingham, and Gary, because of the “need” for more industry. The “need” for more food justifies over fertilization of the land, leading to eutrophication of the waters, and lessened fish production — which leads to more “need” for food.

“What will we say when the power shuts down some fine summer on our eastern seaboard and several thousand people die of heat prostration? Will we blame the weather? Or the power companies for not building enough generators? Or the eco-nuts for insisting on pollution controls?

“One thing is certain: we won’t blame the deaths on overpopulation. No one ever dies of overpopulation. It is unthinkable.”

As Hardin said, we abhor dealing with reality. In fact, in Joel Kotkin’s recent book, he ‘celebrates’ adding 100 million people to the United States as if it amounts to a “Red Badge of Courage” in a diminishing world. He speaks on NPR with glowing reviews from Jennifer Ludden. He enjoys interviews in papers as he crosses the country to pitch his book. He leads Americans down a primrose path of more denial, stupidity and ignorance of their predicament.

Yet, they fully embrace his message. Should he strut his book in Bangladesh, that grows by six children a minute, with a population of 144 million people in a landmass the size of Iowa, they would toss tomatoes into his face. Change that! They would eat the tomatoes and throw sticks! Reality has already manifested in very ugly ways for the people of Bangladesh. They live in pure daily human misery with no way out! They live in what Kotkin celebrates: overpopulation.

If any of us, no matter what our race, creed or color might be, refuse to engage our U.S. Congress as we have not for 30 years as to the immigration equation creating overpopulation in this country—our children will find themselves living in a terribly degraded America where the American Dream will be described by the history books as a ‘fleeting fantasy’ from the era of 1950 to 2010. These are several of the top organizations where you can take action to change the course of American history.

Frosty Wooldridge is a regular columnist for Novakeo.com

Filed Under: Frosty Wooldridge
Tagged: America, Bangladesh, Biology, Books, California, Chile, China, Congress, earthquake, Energy, Environment, Fish, Food, Future, Haiti, History, Immigration, India, Oil, Overpopulation, Pakistan, Truth, Water, Weather

Depopulation by Government Edict

January 29, 2010 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

exxon military In 1922, Margaret Sanger wrote The Pivot of Civilization with an introduction by eugenicist H. G. Wells. The Rockefeller Foundation “enthusiastically supported the concept of ‘eugenics,’ which encourages the reproductive efforts of those deemed to have ‘good’ genes, while discouraging or stopping procreation by undesirables. But Rockefeller and others were anxious to go even further to mold America’s breeding patterns along evolutionary lines.” [1] John D. Rockefeller Jr., per the advice of Raymond B. Fosdick, provided financial backing for Margaret Sanger’s Planned Parenthood movement. [2] Sanger, a feminist and birth control activist established the first family planning clinics in New York City. Several U.S. foundations financed eugenic research, including the Carnegie Institution, which funded Davenport’s eugenic studies at Cold Spring Harbor, and the Rockefeller Foundation, which gave grants in the 1930s for eugenic research at the Galton Laboratory at University College in London and to the Cornell Medical School in New York. [3] Advocates for population control and the study of eugenics include Theodore Roosevelt, Charles Wilson, president of Harvard and Irving Fisher, president of Yale and president of the Eugenics Research Association in the 1920s plus a host of other very public vocal figures. [4] President Theodore Roosevelt appointed Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. to the U.S. Supreme Court where he served from 1902 to 1932. Holmes was an advocate for selective breeding and issued the sterilization verdict in the case of Carrie Buck in 1927. He said, “It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting Fallopian tubes. Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” [5] Sir Frederick Pollock, a Pilgrims Society member and law professor at Oxford, was the editor of Law Quarterly Review from 1885 to 1919. He was in close communication with Harvard-educated Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. during a sixty-year period of time. Researcher Charles Savoie maintains that the Pilgrims Society was closely connected to America’s Supreme Court for more than a century. [6]

The Rockefeller Foundation financed what is known as Psychiatric Genetics, a new specialty. The Foundation restructured medical training in Germany including managing the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry and the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology, Eugenics and Human Heredity under the direction of Swiss psychiatrist Ernst Rudin, supported by his trusty protégés, Otmar Verschuer and Dr. Franz J. Kallmann. In 1932, the British eugenics’ movement appointed Dr. Rudin as president of the worldwide Eugenics Federation. The eugenics movement promoted the killing or sterilization of burdensome people, individuals that Henry Kissinger referred to as “useless eaters.” [7] Rockefeller funded the Kaiser Wilhelm Eugenics Institute in Germany, founded in 1927.

The Bush family joined John D. Rockefeller and the British Royal Family in sponsoring the eugenics initiatives that gave rise to Hitler’s racial hygiene programs. Prescott Bush was later found guilty of trading with the Nazis during WWII. According to court records, the Rockefeller family and their Standard Oil Company supported Hitler more than they did the allies during the war. In fact, one judge declared Rockefeller guilty of treason. Dr. Gary Glum documented the insidious eugenics programs to create a “superior race,” which were initially sponsored not by Adolph Hitler, but by the American elite like the Rockefeller, Carnegie, Harriman, Morgan, DuPont, Kellogg and Bush families. [8]

Hitler, who had been financed by international bankers, became Chancellor of the Third Reich on January 30, 1933. Wilhelm Frick, the minister of the interior, introduced the early sterilization law which was enacted within six months after Hitler was appointed chancellor. Sterilization was used for “life unworthy of life.” Certain individuals who reportedly warranted serialization included those with: “congenital feeblemindedness (now called mental deficiency), an estimated 200,000; manic depressive insanity, 20,000; schizophrenia, 80,000; epilepsy, 60,000; Huntington’s chorea (a hereditary brain disorder), 600; hereditary blindness, 4,000; hereditary deafness, 16,000; grave bodily malformation, 20,000; and hereditary alcoholism, 10,000. The projected total of 410,000 was considered only preliminary, drawn mostly from people already in institutions; it was assumed that much greater numbers of people would eventually be identified and sterilized.” [9]

After the Nazis took power, I.G. Farben and Rockefeller’s Standard Oil merged into a single entity which contained beneficial provisions for each company. I.G. Farben was, until 1937, controlled by the Warburg family who had collaborated with Rockefeller in crafting Nazi eugenics. Standard Oil maintained their alliance with I.G. Farben even after the U.S. entered the war. In 1940-41, I.G. Farben constructed a large industrial complex in Poland adjacent the Auschwitz concentration camp where they planned to use slave labor to make gasoline from coal. Standard-Germany president Emil Helfferich admitted that Standard Oil financed part of the operations at Auschwitz. [10]

In the fall of 1941, Secretary of War Henry Stimson contacted Dr. Frank B. Jewett, president of the National Academy of Sciences, to discuss the further development of biological warfare. This was prior to America’s entry into World War II, but according to his diary Secretary Stimson was well aware of imminent events. Shortly afterwards, President Roosevelt authorized Stimson to create a civilian agency to supervise biological warfare under the jurisdiction of the Federal Security Agency. George Merck, owner of Merck Pharmaceutical and close adviser to Roosevelt, was appointed director of the new War Research Service. [11]

Frank McDougall participated in the area of public health within the old League of Nations. He made the connection between community health, nutrition, and agricultural development and economic policy. The U.N., in a conference in Hot Springs between October 16 and November 1, 1945, formulated the U.N. Interim Commission on Food and Agriculture. Officials drafted the constitution of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). McDougall was a chief architect and promoter of the organization. [12]

The Bureau of Human Heredity relocated from London to Copenhagen in 1947 where they moved into a newly constructed building paid for by the Rockefeller Foundation. The initial International Congress in Human Genetics after World War II was convened in Copenhagen in 1956. Verschuer, Rudin’s protégé, was by then a member of the American Eugenics Society, synonymous with Rockefeller’s Population Council. Dr. Kallmann, a director, also organized the American Society of Human Genetics which directed the Human Genome Project. Later, the Rockefellers relocated the U.S. eugenics movement to their family offices where they also controlled future population control and abortion advocacy groups. The Eugenics Society later became the Society for the Study of Social Biology. [13]

U.S. State Department Policy Planning Study #23, 1948, headed by George F. Kennan, concluded, “We have about 50 percent of the world’s wealth, but only 6.3% of its population. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and daydreaming and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world benefaction. We should cease to talk about vague and unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.” [14]

John Foster Dulles, then chairman of the Rockefeller Foundation, concluded after observations acquired on a number of tours abroad that there was a “need to stop the expansion of the non-white populations.” In 1952, Frederick Osborn, an officer of the American Eugenics Society, assisted John D. Rockefeller III in organizing the Population Council and served as its first administrator. In 1958, Eisenhower selected William H. Draper to head a committee to evaluate appropriate military actions in other countries. Draper suggested that a better focus should be the threat of population explosion and a study on depopulation procedures for poorer non-white countries that pose a national security threat to the U.S. [15] Apparently, a burgeoning non-white population might reduce available resources that would be put to better use by white populations. Additionally, growing populations produce resentful individuals who aggressively oppose elitist policies.

In 1965, the Population Action International (originally known as the Population Crisis Committee), was founded by Hugh Moore, Lammot du Pont Copeland and William H. Draper Jr. The worldwide organization is headquartered in Washington, DC. Since 2001, in conjunction with the Population Action International, and with the encouragement of Congress, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) distributes information in foreign countries in an effort to initiate family planning and cover other reproductive health programs.

In 1961, John D. Rockefeller III presented the Second McDougall Lecture to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization. This predated by a decade Rockefeller’s population protocols that would become part of Kissinger’s NSSM 200. Rockefeller, in his address, said, “To my mind, population growth is second only to control of atomic weapons as the paramount problem of the day.” [16]

The Rockefeller Foundation funded England’s eugenics movement. The Rockefeller family had early ties to the House of Rothschild to which the gigantic Standard oil trust owed its beginnings. Presumably, the Rothschilds, a Talmudic family with early Masonic and Illuminati connections, actively promoted and financed eugenics and depopulation behind the scenes. By the 1960s, the Eugenics Society of England embraced Crypto-eugenics, under which they would participate in eugenics without actually calling it eugenics. The Rockefellers lent their support to England’s Eugenics Society by establishing the International Planned Parenthood Federation, in conjunction with the Eugenics Society. This formed a private, global system in which the elite could choreograph an international holocaust, within the context of offering humanitarian services, all under the jurisdiction of the U.N. flag, another Rockefeller front organization. [17]

George H. W. Bush of Texas, who served in Congress from January 3, 1967 to January 3, 1971, originated a legislative investigation of world overpopulation. [18] Dr. D. M. MacArthur, Deputy Director of Research & Technology for the Pentagon, Department of Defense, requested $10 million from the Congressional House Subcommittee on Appropriations to develop a biological weapon through House Bill 15090. On June 9, 1969, the House Republican research task committee, chaired by George H. W. Bush, heard testimony from General William H. Draper, of the Population Crisis Committee and Dr. William Moran of the Population Reference Bureau. Draper reported that there were three issues relevant to population control – the census of 1970 in the U.S. and of 1971 in Britain should be worldwide and not limited to two countries, accelerating contraception, and the World Health Organization should implement their international programs such as inoculations, etc. [19] Leading World Health Organization scientists, as noted in the Bulletin of the World Health Organization, had requested that viruses be created in order to study their affects on humans.

The Department of Defense, now funded with $10 million, intended to conduct studies on immune-system-destroying agents for biological warfare. In 1983 Dr. Robert Strecker, an internist and gastro-enterologist who is also a trained pathologist with a Ph.D. in pharmacology, produced The Strecker Memorandum wherein he claims that the AIDS virus is man-made. Working in conjunction with his brother, attorney Ted Strecker, they discovered thousands of documents verifying the man-made origin of AIDS. Strecker maintains that it was virologically impossible for HIV to have emanated from monkeys; the disease was unknown in Africa before 1975. Strecker claims that the World Health Organization (WHO), funded by the Department of Defense, initiated testing on a lymphotrophic virus, a bovine virus that could also infect humans. In 1977, the WHO instigated a massive campaign in Africa to eradicate smallpox among the urban population. Over 100 million Africans were deliberately inoculated with AIDS-contaminated smallpox vaccine. In 1978, over 2,000 white male homosexuals were inoculated against hepatitis B by the Centers for Disease Control and the New York Blood Center, also with AIDS-contaminated vaccine. [20] Merck, Sharp and Dohme (MSD) funded the hepatitis B vaccine research that Dr. Strecker claimed spread HIV to homosexuals in the U.S. [21] These kinds of weapons were apparently a viable concern immediately after 9/11 as John Bolton gave an address at the Biological Weapons Convention on November 19, 2001 in Geneva, Switzerland, stating our concerns about “terrorists” using biological and chemical weapons. [22] We have trained many foreigners in the use of biological and chemical weapons at Fort McClellan, Alabama.

Kissinger received the Nobel Peace Prize after he directed the dispersion of tons of Monsanto’s toxic Agent Orange in Vietnam. This chemical, containing dioxin, continues to negatively affect Vietnamese citizens and former U.S. military personnel and their children with horrendous birth defects and neurological disorders. Conversely, Ali Hassan al-Majid, who dispersed chemicals in Halabja, was recently executed for the same activities. Kissinger orchestrated the precedent-setting secret bombing of neutral Cambodia over a four-year period, allegedly to protect Americans in Vietnam. From 1970 onward, Congress had prohibited bombing in Cambodia in every military appropriations bill except for that open-ended purpose – protecting U.S. citizens – but apparently not from Agent Orange. [23] According to Time magazine of April 19, 1976, “Since the Communist victory last year, an estimated 500,000 to 600,000 people, one-tenth of Cambodia’s population, have died from political reprisals, disease or starvation . . . To escape the bloodbath; at least 25,000 Cambodians have fled across the border into Thailand. They tell tales of people being clubbed to death to save ammunition. Others have been bound together and buried alive by bulldozers, or suffocated by having plastic bags tied over their heads.” [24]

Generating further resentment, the U.S. installed Lon Nol, who collected millions of dollars in U.S. economic aid. He declared himself Chief of State, Prime Minister and Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces after he disbanded the Assembly in October 1971 in order to declare emergency rule. He then permitted the U.S. to carpet bomb Cambodia. [25] Lon Nol retired to Hawaii on April 1, 1975 with half a million dollars, compliments of the U.S. taxpayers. [26] Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge with its killing fields, the essential liquidation of the middle class, famine, the destruction of the economy and concentration camps followed America’s activities in the area.

From Kissinger’s Indochina bio warfare experiments, President Richard Nixon commissioned Kissinger to direct the compilation of a National Security Council population policy. The work was completed during President Gerald Ford’s administration. Their efforts resulted in The National Security Study Memorandum, NSSM 200, Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests, dated December 10, 1974. It was officially adopted as U.S. policy on November 26, 1975, with Memorandum 314 by President Ford. It is still in effect, as it has never been rescinded. Each succeeding administration implements the population policies using its own methodology. The NSSM 200 was declassified on February 8, 2007.

Population control serves the U.S. strategic, economic, and military interests at the expense of the developing Third World or Lesser Developed Countries (LDCs). The plan claims that their population growth is detrimental and a grave threat to U.S. national security in four ways: (1) large nations may gain political power (2) The U.S. and its allies need the strategic materials from those countries. (3) A high birth rate means more young people who are more likely than older people to challenge global power structures (4) Population growth in relatively disadvantaged countries jeopardizes U.S. investments. [27]

NSSM 200 has special implications for thirteen countries – India, Brazil, Egypt, Nigeria, Indonesia, the Philippines, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Mexico, Thailand, Turkey, Ethiopia and Colombia. NSSM 200 listed Brazil which, at that time, had a population of over 100 million which dominated the continent demographically. By 2000, the population projections totaled about 212 million people. [28] That kind of population growth was unacceptable to the elite.

In 1975, Kissinger traveled with Gerald Ford to Indonesia, where they met with the U.S.-backed and armed dictator Suharto, who oversaw the killing of millions during his 35-year reign. The day after Ford and Kissinger left, Indonesian forces invaded the independent territory of East Timor. One-third of the territory’s population was exterminated during the subsequent 20-year occupation, but this had little impact on continuing American and Western arms shipments to the regime in Jakarta. Recently released documents establish that Suharto received a green light for the invasion from the U.S. President and Secretary of State.

Nixon and Kissinger, along with John Negroponte, a Kissinger aide and the officer in charge of Vietnam on the National Security Council, arranged a chaos-creating government coup in Cambodia in March 1970. Negroponte would later act as Ambassador to Iraq from 2004 to 2005 and as director of national intelligence from 2005 to 2007. On March 26, 2001, the Los Angeles Times reported, “While ambassador to Honduras from 1981-85, Negroponte directed the secret arming of Nicaragua’s Contra rebels and is accused by human rights groups of overlooking—if not overseeing—a CIA-backed Honduran death squad during his tenure.” The CIA had unlimited funds to assist the government in its depopulation efforts. In concert with Oliver North, “He also helped orchestrate a secret deal, later known as Iran-Contra, to send arms through Honduras to help the Contras overthrow the Sandinista government.” [29] Negroponte had charge of the US Embassy in Honduras when hundreds of Hondurans labeled as “subversives” were seized, raped, tortured and slaughtered by Battalion 316, a Honduran intelligence unit trained, funded and supported by the Pentagon and the CIA. Battalion 316 also participated in the CIA’s covert operations in Nicaragua. [30] Negroponte was Deputy Secretary of State under Condoleezza Rice.

On October 2, 1979, Robert S. McNamara, president of the World Bank and former secretary of defense during the Vietnam War, in speaking to a group of international bankers said, “We can begin with the most critical problem of all, population growth,” concluding that, “Either the current birth rates must come down more quickly, or the death rates must go up…There are, of course, many ways in which the death rates can go up. In a thermonuclear age, we can accomplish it very quickly and decisively.” It is a surprising statement in view of the crypto-eugenic position taken by the American Eugenics Society, a stand which McNamara, evidently a dedicated eugenicist, would have certainly been aware of. It can only be assumed that he did not agree with the society’s stand, and was arrogant enough to ignore it.” [31] McNamara and Maurice Strong, a Rockefeller operative and ecological agitator, organized the UN Earth Summit in Stockholm in 1972. [32] The New York Times claimed that Strong was the “Custodian of the Planet.” Strong is indebted to George H. W. Bush who maneuvered Strong into the position of Secretary General of the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development, the Earth Summit, convened in Rio de Janeiro, which elevated global economic and environmental regulations. [33] Strong thinks that people should be required to have a license in order to have a baby.

The Population Plan was initially implemented by Brent Scowcroft, a long-time Kissinger colleague and Vice-Chairman of Kissinger Associates and National Security Advisor under Ford from 1974–1977 and George H. W. Bush from 1989–1993. CIA Director George H. W. Bush (November 1975 to January 1977) assisted Scowcroft who co-authored A World Transformed with George H. W. Bush. In addition to the National Security Advisor, the Secretaries of the Departments of State, Treasury, Defense, and Agriculture are responsible for executing the population plan. Each administration uses those agencies and determines its own strategy for depopulating the planet. Scowcroft was President George W. Bush’s Chairman of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board from 2001 to 2005 and also assisted President Barrack Obama in selecting his national security team. Scowcroft apparently facilitated Obama’s efforts to continue Bush’s warfare depopulating strategy in the Middle East.

In 1974 the United Nations convened the World Food Conference in Rome where they focused on two issues, as suggested by the U.S. The first topic was worldwide population growth and food shortages. The second agenda item was escalating food prices as a consequence of an allegedly decreasing world food supply. Both oil and grain prices were increasing at about 300 to 400 percent annually. A supposed food crisis coupled with America’s capacity as the world’s biggest food producer placed the U.S. government in charge of food and prices resulting in an alliance between grain traders and the U.S. government which lead to genetic tampering. [34]

The Reagan Administration accommodated Monsanto and other private companies who manufactured questionably safe food products designed for worldwide trade. Genetically modified (GMO) products, with little or no testing, were introduced in the U.S. market. Vice President George Herbert Walker Bush, former CIA Director, was the chief proponent within the Reagan Administration for this innovative field of genetically modified products. [35] U.S. citizens were intentionally vulnerable, as GMO labeling had been forbidden by the FDA. [36] Monsanto’s expensive, elite Terminator seeds, fertile only for one planting, “in the hands of one or more governments intent on using food as a weapon, Terminator was a tool of biological warfare almost ‘too good to believe.’” [37] Given that so many third world countries are managed according to Anglo-American eugenics interests, Terminator seeds provide ample opportunity for tyrants to stage famines.

During the 1960s and 1970s the indigenous non-white population of the U.S., through the Indian Health Service of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, operated an methodical lost generation program against Native American women of childbearing age wherein they sterilized about forty-two percent of those living on reservations without informing them. This was accomplished in conjunction with other medical procedures. Allegedly, this program was terminated in 1976 after allegations were made and confirmed. No officials lost their jobs or suffered judicial consequences as a result of implementing of participating in this program. They were, after all, simply following government procedures as it pertained to domestic non-white populations. [38]

More recently, in the 1990s, the World Health Organization dispensed tetanus shots among women between the ages of fifteen and forty-five in Nicaragua, Mexico, the Philippines and some African countries. Unknown to the women, the tetanus shots were laced with Chorionic Gonadotrophin or (hCG), a natural hormone, which, when combined with tetanus toxoid, prevents a women from sustaining a pregnancy. This program, to impose a state of permanent sterilization, was financed by the Rockefeller Foundation and began in 1972.

Sterilization is incredibly appalling but it does not stop there. The depopulation efforts, conducted by the World Health Organization and the U.S. Department of Defense, include more aggressive protocols. The British military, whose tactics we have frequently adopted, first used biological warfare as early as 1385 when they tossed the remains of plague victims and diseased animal carcasses into their enemy’s towns. In North America, Lord Jeffrey Amherst had his men distribute smallpox-laden blankets among the vulnerable Indian population in order to decimate their enemy without firing a bullet.

Amherst’s tactics created an epidemic among the Cherokees in 1783 which helped George Washington’s forces and ended the Cherokee’s resistance. The Masonic-based Smithsonian Institution has acknowledged Amherst’s use of biological warfare, “During the bitter fighting in 1763-1764 General Jeffrey Amherst ordered that the Indians around Fort Pitt be infected with gifts of smallpox (laden) blankets. The Indian uprising failed, and Fort Pitt was easily relieved after a smallpox epidemic broke out among the warriors besieging the fort.” [39] The U.S. Army repeated Amherst’s biological warfare tactics by distributing smallpox-infected blankets to the Mandans at Fort Clark in present day South Dakota. This led to the smallpox epidemic of 1836-40. The Mandan, out of about 2,400 there were only thirty-one survivors. [40] The U.S. Army repeated this deadly tactic by introducing blankets laden with the same disease to the Missouri River Mandans during the 1830s.

Biological warfare became U.S. government policy after the British used it against France’s Indian allies during the French and Indian Wars (1754–63). Accordingly, during the 19th century, the U.S. Army disseminated contaminated blankets to the Indians for extermination purposes. Smallpox, now available in a dry state, and cholera were very effective. [41] Quite possibly, smallpox, a highly contagious disease, had claimed the lives of more Northern Plains Indians, a “virgin population,” in one year, 1837-1838, than all the military expeditions sent against them. The Indians used a very descriptive name for smallpox – rotting face. [42] The U.S. military also conducted germ warfare by injecting Filipino captives with plague and beriberi germs during our occupation of the Philippines beginning in 1898.

In 1998, in South Africa at the Truth and Reconciliation Commission the following testimony was given, “The United States encouraged South Africa’s apartheid regime to develop a Chemical Biological Weapons program that was aimed at the country’s black population. Dr. Wouter Basson, the South African general who headed the project from its inception in 1981, testified from notes he made of a meeting with US Major General William Augerson. He (Augerson) feels that chemical warfare is an ideal strategic weapon because infrastructure is preserved together with facilities and only living people are killed. The warm climate of Africa is ideal for this type of weapon because the diffusion of the poison is better and the absorption is increased by perspiration and increased blood flow in the persons who are targets.” [43]

Genocidal war is about body counts – un-armed men, women and children are all total war targets to fulfill the objective of world population reduction. However, war destroys a lot of infrastructure. Accordingly, other methods were developed that are equally effective and might even increase profits in other service industries, also affiliated with the elite who consistently view other humans as sources of profit or commodities, even in death. Genocide, under other pretenses, is regularly practiced to limit “excesses” in order to preserve the earth and its resources for the “fittest.” Elite-controlled governments are indifferent to the slaughter, starvation, slave labor, and suffering of others, as evidenced by a callous response from former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright when questioned about the 500,000 children who died in Iraq as a result of the U.S.-imposed sanctions. She said, “It was worth it.” [44]

The Malthusian-mentality elite believe in the survival of the fittest rendering the vast majority of the earth’s population as expendable. Choreographed economic crisis, sanctions (government-imposed famines), man-made famines, wars, directed energy warfare, diseases, and mass migrations into hostile territory are all methods of thinning out the population. Abortion, peddled as pro-choice, and homosexuality, promoted as an alternative life style, all contribute to birth reduction rates. Both Alfred Kinsey’s sexual revolution and Gloria Steinem’s women’s movement were funded and facilitated by the elite. The greedy elite manage to conceal their miserable machinations by distracting the masses with mindless entertainment and addictive substances from which they also derive profits.

Many Americans think that God sanctions our every action against other ethnic groups just because we are American. God almost certainly does not sanction everything that the U.S. government does. In reality, the fallacious claim of divine sanction cloaks the enormity of state-sanctioned wickedness. The U.S. could and should use its power for good. Apparently, we establish our own ethical standards, totally exempt from all culpability and, according to Henry Kissinger, our behavior should not be internationalized. In other words, we condone and even support unilateral attacks on other countries but other countries may not act in the same manner. The children of every country should have the same rights and protections as white American children. [45]

[1] Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences , the Red Queen and the Grand Scheme by Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D., Institute for Media Education, Scottsdale, Arizona, 1998, p. 202

[2] The Proud Internationalist, the Globalist Vision of David Rockefeller, also available in Nexus Magazine: Vol. 10, No. 5 (August-September 2003); Vol. 20 No.6 (October-November 2003); & Vol. 11 No.1 (December 2003-January

2004); 2006, p. 38

[3] Eugenics: A Reassessment by Richard Lynn, edited by Seymour W. Itzkoff, Praeger, Westport, Connecticut, 2001, p. 27

[4] Ibid

[5] War Against the Weak, Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race by Edwin Black, Four Walls Eight Windows, New York, 2003, pp. 120-122

[6] Pilgrims by Charles Savoie, Silver Investor, May 2005,

www.silver-investor.com/charlessavoie/cs_may05_pilgrims.htm

[7] Population Control, Nazis, and the U.N! by Anton Chaitkin, http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/new_world_order/UN_Rockefeller_Genocide.html

[8] American Bar Association, http://www.healthfreedom.info/BAR%20Association.htm

[9] The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide by Robert Jay Lifton, Basic Books, New York, 2000, p. 25

[10] Population Control, Nazis, and the U.N! by Anton Chaitkin, http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/new_world_order/UN_Rockefeller_Genocide.html

[11] Emerging Viruses: AIDS and Ebola, Nature, Accident or Intentional? by Leonard G. Horowitz, Tetrahedron, Inc. Rockport, Massachusetts, 1996, pp. 38, 40-41

[12] FAO Conference 31st session: Twenty-second McDougall Memorial Lecture, Rome, November 2-13, 2001, http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/004/Y2255e.htm

[13] Population Control, Nazis, and the U.N! by Anton Chaitkin, http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/new_world_order/UN_Rockefeller_Genocide.html

[14] U.S. State Department Policy Planning Study #23, http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/2010/Nsc68.pdf

[15] Bush, Eugenics and Population Control by Alf Mendes, http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/07/344113.html

[16] Seeds of Destruction, the Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation by F. William Engdahl, Global Research, Centre for Research on Globalization, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2007, p. 71

[17] Population Control, Nazis, and the U.N! by Anton Chaitkin, http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/new_world_order/UN_Rockefeller_Genocide.html

[18] Emerging Viruses, Aids & Ebola, Nature, Accident or Intentional? By Leonard G. Horowitz, Tetrahedron Publishing, Inc., Rockport, Massachusetts, 1996, p. 521

[19] Ibid, pp. 156, 159

[20] Ibid, pp. 3-5

[21] Ibid, p. 12

[22] Biological Weapons Convention, http://www.state.gov/t/us/rm/janjuly/6231.htm

[23] Sideshow: Kissinger, Nixon, and the Destruction of Cambodia by William Shawcross, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1979, p. 277

[24] Kissinger, the Secret Side of the Secretary of State by Gary Allen, Shambhala Publications, 1979, p. 14

[25] Sideshow: Kissinger, Nixon, and the Destruction of Cambodia by William Shawcross, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1979, p. 229

[26] Ibid, pp. 357-358

[27] National Security Study Memorandum NSSM 200, Implications of Worldwide Population Growth, For U.S. Security and Overseas Interests (NSSM 200) – December 10, 1974, pp. 57-58

[28] National Security Study Memorandum, NSSM 200, Implications of Worldwide Population Growth, For U.S. Security and Overseas Interests, (The Kissinger Report), December 10, 1974, p. 31

[29] Bush UN Choice Faces a Fight By Maggie Farley and Norman Kempster, Los Angeles Times, March 26, 2001

[30] John Negroponte & The Death-Squad Connection, Bush Nominates Terrorist for National Intelligence Director by Frank Morales, World War 4 Report, http://www.ww4report.com/negropontedeathsquad

[31] Bush, Eugenics and Population Control by Alf Mendes, http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/07/344113.html

[32] Seeds of Destruction, the Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation by F. William Engdahl, Global Research, Montreal, Canada, 2007, p. 127

[33] Who is Maurice Strong? by Ronald Bailey, National Review, Sept 1, 1997

[34] Seeds of Destruction, the Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation by F. William Engdahl, Global Research, Centre for Research on Globalization, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2007, p. 43

[35] Ibid, p. 4

[36] Ibid, p. 13

[37] Ibid, p. 261

[38] A Little Matter of Genocide, Holocaust and Denial in the Americas 1492 to the Present by Ward Churchill, City Lights Books, San Francisco, p. 249

[39] The State of Native America: Genocide, Colonization, and Resistance edited by M. Annette Jaimes, South End Press, Boston, Massachusetts, 1992, p. 7 Jaimes Notes: Jacobs, Wilbur R., “British Indian Policies to 1783,” in Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 4: History of Indian-White Relations, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., 1988, p. 10). As regards inculcation of smallpox among the Mandans in 1837, see Connell, Evan S., Son of the Morning Star: Custer and the Little Big Horn, North Point Press, San Francisco, 1984, pp. 15-6.

[40] Catlin and His Contemporaries: The Politics of Patronage by Brian W. Dippie, University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, 1990, p. 331

[41] Death Stalks the Yakama: Epidemiological Transitions and Mortality on the Yakama Indian Reservation, 1888-1964 by Clifford E. Trafzer, Michigan State University Press, East Lansing, Michigan, 1997, p. 151

[42] Rotting face : smallpox and the American Indian by R. G. Robertson, Caxton Press, 2001, Introduction, pp. 107-113

[43] Rogue State, a Guide to the World’s Only Superpower by William Blum, Common Courage Press, Monroe, Maine, 2005, pp. 120-121

[44] “We Think the Price Is Worth It” By Rahul Mahajan, http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1084

[45] Howard Zinn in his lecture: Howard Zinn: The Myth of American Exceptionalism, http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8632.htm

Deanna Spingola has been a quilt designer and is the author of two books. She has traveled extensively teaching and lecturing on her unique methods. She has always been an avid reader of non-fiction works designed to educate rather than entertain. She is active in family history research and lectures on that topic. Currently she is the director of the local Family History Center. She has a great interest in politics and the direction of current government policies, particularly as they relate to the Constitution. Her website is at: www.spingola.com
email:

Deanna Spingola is a regular columnist for Novakeo.com

Filed Under: Deanna Spingola
Tagged: 9/11, Africa, Agriculture, America, Bangladesh, Biology, Books, Boston, Brazil, Britain, Cambodia, Canada, China, CIA, Climate, Colombia, Colorado, Congress, Democrat, Economy, Education, Egypt, Energy, Environment, Fish, Food, France, Freedom, Future, Genetics, Germany, God, Government, greed, History, Hitler, Holocaust, Honduras, Independent, India, Iran, Iraq, London, Los Angeles, Massachusetts, Mexico, Middle Class, Middle East, Military, National Security, NATO, Nazis, New York, Nobel Peace Prize, Oil, Overpopulation, Pakistan, Philippines, Planet, Politics, Psychology, Republican, Resistance, Revolution, Sex, Society, Supreme Court, Talmud, Technology, Torture, Truth, Turkey, Victory, Vietnam, World War I, World War II

Death of the West: Our Sexual Identity Crisis

September 30, 2009 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

Sexual Identity Crisis Perhaps you’ve heard the tragic story of David Reimer. Born in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada in 1966, David was the victim of a botched circumcision that left his penis charred beyond surgical repair. His parents Ron and Janet, no doubt beside themselves, were confused about the best way to proceed. Then, one day, they saw a man named Dr. John Money on television.

Money was talking about his theory of “gender neutrality,” which states that “gender identity” is learned rather than innate. The idea was that the sexes were the same except for the superficial physical differences; this implies that if a child were altered so as to superficially resemble the opposite sex and was raised as one of its members, he would be happy with that sexual identity. Hearing this, the Reimers hoped they had found their salvation.

They took their boy to Money, who told them that their son’s penis could not be restored and that he stood a much better chance of living a happy life if “sex-reassignment surgery” (in reality, reassigning sex is about as possible as reassigning species) were performed and he was raised as a girl. The Reimers agreed, and the surgery was performed when the boy, who would be named “Brenda,” was 22 months old.

In reality, the kindest way to describe Money’s theory is fanciful. His idea of “gender neutrality” was still in vogue when I was a youth, and “vogue,” in the most frivolous sense, is the correct term. It was always more style than science; it was something that I, even as a teen, knew was bunk. Yet who would listen to people such as me? We were old-fashioned, behind the times. And it didn’t matter that Money was Alfred Kinsey redux and believed pedophilia was lovely if it was for “love.” It didn’t matter that David and his twin brother, Brian, said that Money sexually abused them during photo shoots. He was a “doctor,” a Ph.D. on the cutting edge of a brave new world.

Only, David (“Brenda” at the time) wanted nothing to do with that world. Although he was never told he was a boy, had been surgically altered, was dressed and raised as a girl and was regularly seeing Money for therapy, he resisted his “gender assignment” from the outset. He acted like a boy, played with boys’ toys and objected to seeing Money from the age of seven. It wasn’t going well — and it wouldn’t end well.

At the age of 14, in a rare commendable act of teen rebellion, David threatened suicide if he were forced to continue with Money’s prescriptions. This prompted his parents to finally tell him the truth about his condition. With his eyes opened, he then replaced his estrogen treatments with male hormone therapy, took the name “David,” started living as a boy, underwent reconstructive genital surgery and later married a woman who already had children. Yet the damage had been done. His tormented life which began in such a tragic way came to a tragic end: he did commit suicide, at the age of 38.

Dr. Money, too, is now dead. Yet he died with his ideological boots on; not only did he fail to repent, he fraudulently portrayed David’s case — the one for which he was most famous — as a success for years after its failure was obvious. This, and his refusal to ever own up to the failure, only increased the chances that other children would be thus scarred.

As a testimonial to how quickly fashions pass away, Money’s theory has joined him in the grave. The stake through its heart came in the 1990s, with brain research and an improved understanding of intrauterine development proving conclusively that the sexes are different even within the womb and the skull. These new findings expressing old wisdom were related as revelation, reflecting the idea that nothing is truly valid until vindicated by “science.” So there was no collective mea culpa from the psychological establishment for clouding reality and misleading generations of naïve parents. They just continued without missing a beat, as if it were a matter no more significant than recommending the wrong size shoes for the kids. Worse still, they have now moved on to their next mistake.

We have heard about the curious case of Caster Semenya, the 18-year-old South African runner who has been competing as a woman. Semenya has become the focus of suspicion (I’ll use masculine pronouns, as I’m convinced this individual is a boy who experienced abnormal intrauterine development) because of his masculine physique, deep voice, development of facial hair, male mannerisms and the fact that he has been winning races by wide margins. As a result, a battery of medical exams to determine his true sex has been conducted, although the results have not been officially released. Yet the real story here is not what investigation may tell us about Semenya. It is what our reaction to Semenya tells us about ourselves.

This is reflected in comments found throughout the Internet. For instance, consider “JimBob” posting under this Daily Mail piece, who said,

“Why is everyone talking about genetics? What about Caster’s own mind – if she believes within herself that she’s female, then she is.”

Echoing this sentiment here, “Green Is Good” wrote,

“SHE identifies HERself as a female. Done.”

Then, back to the Mail, “Livio” opined,

“This is a clear case of gender identity discrimination. What if she is a man who identifies himself as a woman?”

That’s interesting. What if you’re a lunkhead who identifies himself as intelligent?

Yet it isn’t sufficient to just dismiss this with sarcasm, as this isn’t the rambling of only a few twisted minds.

What these posters are expressing is the handiwork of today’s Dr. Moneys, “transgender” theory. This is the idea that your “gender” can be whatever you want it to be — male, female, both male and female or neither, etc. — that it isn’t limited by biology. If you have a problem with this, bravo, but then you should have a problem with the word “gender” itself. Why? Because its current usage (it used to apply only to words) was originated by people such as Money for the purposes of facilitating the relation of their theories. Understand that while many people use “gender” as a synonym for “sex,” that is not its social sciences definition, which dictates that it refers to social rather than biological differences. Yet people love to use this and other elements of the lexicon of the left. It’s a fascinating phenomenon. If you replace a simple, one-syllable word such as “poor” or “sex” with impressive sounding terms such as “underprivileged” or “gender” for ideological reasons, people, oblivious to the underlying agenda and wishing to sound sophisticated, will glom onto them. You see, simpletons, who are relatively rare, prefer simple words. And the only other group that does is rarer still: true intellectuals. But I digress.

So, returning to Semenya, many people express the shocking idea that his actual sex should have no bearing on whether he should be allowed to compete with women. It’s that modern phenomenon — image is everything, reality is negotiable.

This notion has so taken hold that we’ve recently heard of two stories out of Britain wherein young boys, ages 12 and 9, showed up in school earlier this month as “girls,” sporting girls’ clothing and ponytails and bearing feminine names. And the schools are kowtowing to them, telling other pupils that they’ll be punished if they don’t handle the “sex change” “sensitively.” Yet sensitivity is not for the other children, who are upset and confused. In just the way that David Reimer’s body was mutilated in deference to yesterday’s latest theory, their minds must be mutilated in deference to today’s.

Now, even if someone subscribes to “transgender” theory, it is striking that he would allow a child who is too young to decide to have sex decide what sex he should be. How did we get to this point?

These parents, like Ron and Janet Reimer before them, are listening to the respected social scientists of their day. These “experts” tell them that there is something called “gender dysphoria,” which is the persistent feeling that one is a member of one sex trapped in the body of the other. It’s enough to convince many parents, such as those of German Tim Petras, who received female hormone “treatments” at age 12 and now goes by the name of Kim. Yet on what basis is this diagnosis really made?

Feelings.

It is truly reflective of this age, where relativism has obviated reason. That is to say, if there are no absolutes, no Truth to use as a yardstick for judging among feelings, the feelings themselves become the ultimate arbiter. Then, of course, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a Fig Newton if it feels like one.

But one of the problems with emotion is that it is by its very nature irrational. And if anyone would defend an emotion-based diagnosis such as “gender dysphoria,” note that it’s brought to us by the same psycho-babblers who have given us something dubbed “body dysmorphia.” This is this persistent feeling that a certain body part, such as an arm or leg (or multiple body parts), doesn’t belong on one’s body. And if you think it isn’t taken seriously, know that doctors have amputated healthy limbs on this basis.

Be shocked — that is, unless you accept “gender dysphoria” as legitimate. Then you’d better be introspective. For what is the difference? Why would you accept the emotion-based diagnosis of gender dysphoria but not the emotion-based one of body dysmorphia? Why are the feelings of those who suffer from the latter invalid but the feelings of those who suffer from the former a credible arbiter? Both groups have persistent feelings that their bodies aren’t as they should be. Both groups cannot bear to live in their bodies as they are. Both groups want to have their bodies altered. And both groups have found “experts” willing to put them under the knife. Sure, it strikes us as the most horrid malpractice when a doctor amputates healthy body parts, such as a pair of legs. But, then, should we view it any less dimly simply because those healthy body parts are between the legs?

Lamentably, today the answer is often yes, and this speaks volumes about our society. That is, we’ve all heard that old stereotype of a lunatic, the guy in an asylum who thinks he is Napoleon. Now the asylums have largely been emptied, and I think I know why: we’ve turned the outside world into an asylum. What was once only acceptable to a small group within the scariest of walls — detachment from reality — has now been mainstreamed. You can be a man who thinks he is a woman, yet no straitjacket is slapped on you. It is slapped on the mouths of those who dare say self-image isn’t reality.

And that is the point: there is something called reality. When feelings tell one he is, or should be, something he is not or shouldn’t be — a girl, a legless man or Napoleon — the sane conclusion is that you’re confronted with a psychological problem, not a physical one. It may be intractable, and it is certainly easier to mutilate the body than cure the mind. But you cannot mutilate reality, only obscure it. If a man loses his genitalia in an accident, does he cease to be male? Or, if “gender” is a continuum as today’s Moneys say, is he less male? Did David Reimer cease to be a boy because he was mutilated and given estrogen against his will? Of course, the “experts” would say the answer is no, since he never saw himself as a girl. Again, though, feelings cannot be the arbiters of reality. After all, I may have hypertrichosis like Jo-Jo the Dog-Faced Boy, undergo operations to create a snout, paws and a tail, howl under the moonlight and change my name to Spot. Yet am I sane if I call myself a different species?

So what are we to conclude about “gender” science? Decades ago its “experts” said society could turn your boy into a girl if it felt like it; now they say he can turn himself into a girl if he feels like it. Is it just a coincidence that Dr. Money’s “gender neutrality” theory accorded with his day’s feminist claim that sex roles should be discarded because the sexes are essentially the same? Is it just a coincidence that the current “transgender” theory accords with our day’s homosexual claim that sex roles should be discarded because everyone and his values are essentially different? It is at all possible that these theories have less to do with sound science than the spirit of the age?

We have gone from the proposition that “gender” can be whatever society says it is to the proposition that it can be whatever the individual says it is without ever stopping to wonder if the second idea is just a crank like the first. But most won’t wonder because today we place more faith in doctors than doctrine, and today’s doctors say that eternal common sense and yesterday’s doctors’ nonsense are wrong. Yet the most significant thing that distinguishes them from Dr. John Money is that they are still alive — and their theory is not yet dead.

Selwyn Duke is a writer, columnist and public speaker whose work has been published widely online and in print, on both the local and national levels. He has been featured on the Rush Limbaugh Show and has been a regular guest on the award-winning Michael Savage Show. His work has appeared in Pat Buchanan’s magazine The American Conservative and he writes regularly for The New American and Christian Music Perspective.

He can be reached at:

Selwyn Duke is a regular columnist for Novakeo.com

Filed Under: Selwyn Duke
Tagged: Africa, Biology, Britain, Canada, Genetics, Gold, Internet, Love, Money, Moon, Sex, Society, Television, Truth

Why Won’t Universal Healthcare Be Provided?

August 13, 2009 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

The heath-care debate is not about care at all. Instead, it’s about the amount of profits that government, HMO and pharmaceutical leaders are personally willing to give up. Accordingly, it’s clear that many Congressional representatives have no interest in evaluating even a few of the successful models of universal coverage that numerous other countries can provide. Instead, they are, typically, in collusion with big business to stymie any meaningful reforms.

Healthcare Upon receipt of a B. S. degree in biology, an acquaintance of mine — let’s call her Linda — decided to spend the summer in Asia working at a small medical clinic that had a staffing shortage. The clinic was near a major river on whose banks were crowded thousands of families living in small densely packed hovels whose heaped together mass stretched as far as the eye could see.

Meanwhile, the shacks, tents and slapdash dwellings did not have access to electricity, indoor plumbing, nor cooking facilities. Consequently, hoards of people spent countless hours every day trekking to locate semi-private spots to undertake their toileting and find materials that could be burned for outdoor pit cooking. They, also, spent an inordinate amount of time trekking to and from the river to collect water for food preparation, cleaning and baths, as well as for any livestock and small gardens that a minority of the households maintained.

In addition, many people would become unwell from drinking the river water, particularly because lots of fecal waste, garbage and trash inevitably wound up in its currents. Especially young children whose immune systems were not fully functional and elders became stricken with intestinal infections, and would, doubled over with cramps, drag themselves to the clinic, a claustrophobic closet-like facility, for any sort of cure.

However, there was such a shortage of medicine that nothing of real value could be offered and, certainly, no one could suggest that avoidance of the river water was a necessity in order to make the illness, whichever type it was, permanently go away. As such, only sympathy could be offered, along with any other needed treatments that actually were available.

These included antiseptic ointment and gauze for wounds, splints made from slender tree branches for broken limbs, several other items and suggestions for bed rest, the latter of which was often an impossibility since one needed to move about to get the river water, fuel (primarily animal dung and small scraps of brush) and food from hawkers that included river fish and eels for meal preparation. On account, many people’s health further deteriorated to the point that they prematurely died and, then, another problem arose.

This additional difficulty concerned a way to dispose of the bodies since the majority of the deceased persons’ kinfolk did not have sufficient funds to carry out burials or cremations. As such, the waterway served another function, which was corpse recipient, and Linda noted that, nearly every day, bloated water-logged remains could be seen quietly gliding downstream.

A compassionate person, she found the sight disturbing and, while she enjoyed aiding individuals as best as she could at the treatment center, she felt largely helpless during her experience there. On account, she came to realize that, while she was grateful for the small remedies that she could provide in some instances, she really could not change much in the quality of life for the often desperate mobs, who patiently sorted themselves out so as to line up every day in a continual stream seeking help that, more often than not, couldn’t be rendered.

Meanwhile, her realizing her limits was simultaneously sad, humbling and vexing. After all, it is demoralizing to have great hopes to help the world improve and learn that certain troubles are so great in magnitude that one will always feel insufficient unless he chooses to focus on the few small successes that he does occasionally manage to pull off. With such a conflicted understanding, she was relieved upon coming back to the USA after her summer job abroad was over.

At the same time, she felt grateful for the medical care, reasonable homes, clean water, indoor plumbing and food stores available in America. In a flash, she came to realize the reason that so many legal and illegal migrants want to come to first world nations even if those countries have job shortages.

It’s really quite simple in the end. The alternatives seem dreadful.

Especially they would be so, she surmised, when their rivers and other water sources dry up after the glaciers that feed them disappear on account of climate change factors. She wondered about what they would do then.

Considering that the 18,000-year-old Bolivian Chacaltaya glacier, on which 77 million people rely for water, recently disappeared shocked her. She didn’t wish to imagine that the many people who she’d met in Asia would, eventually, face the same plight.

Where would they all move? How would they eek out a living? Who would feed them and provide a new source of water? Where would they find homes and a sufficient number of healthcare clinics? She couldn’t imagine any realistic answers to her questions.

At the time that Linda was embarking for Asia, another woman, who’ll be called Anne, had just received her undergraduate degree in philosophy from a different college than Linda’s. She, too, entertained an idea to engage in social service volunteerism for the upcoming summer months. Yet instead of Asia, her plans inevitably took her to Africa where it had been arranged that she would work with the one doctor available in a region that covered roughly a hundred square miles.

In the territory, various interconnected tribes lived in small communities. Therefore, the doctor’s job was to make the rounds and visit one site after another each month after which he would repeat his tour unless an emergency, like a major fire at one of the locations, were to immediately redirect him.

At the same time, each village had at least one paraprofessional health care worker, generally a woman, who delivered babies and provided a modicum of aid in the doctor’s absence. So she would be the first person with whom he would consult upon arrival to each tribal compound so as to get an overview about what he was to do next.

Meanwhile, the American lived with one of the health workers near the doctor’s hut so that she could learn further about medical intervention from the assistant. As a result, she learned many details about therapeutic care.

Likewise, she learned about its limits. For example, there was in this region, as there was in the area that Linda visited, a dire shortage of medical supplies. Therefore, they had to be doled out very sparingly and only to the recipients who best qualified (i.e., the ones who had the best chances of showing improvement upon receipt of intervention).

This choice naturally precluded people who were either too sick to get well or who were otherwise rejected, as were very old and very injured people. Moreover, the villagers all had a policy that, if someone were somehow grossly defective, he would be left to his own devises and shunned as there simply were not enough food and other supplies to give any to anyone who was severely impaired.

With such a custom in place, it was regretful that approximately a decade earlier a mother, who noted that her child had infrequent seizures, was forced to place him in the dump near to her settlement and he, despite being thought of as doomed to die, managed to stay alive by eating garbage, small grubs, worms, bugs and other discovered fare. So he somehow coped year after year in the trash, outgrew his early childhood convulsions and was, nonetheless, an outcast due to his prior history.

In addition, no one openly communicated with him except for Anne during which time she discovered that he felt ill. As such, she pleaded with the doctor to briefly visit with the boy, who was now a young teen.

In response, the physician got very angry with her and told her that he could get in trouble with the clan’s rulers if he did so. Yet, she persisted about it and, finally, he, reluctantly, went to the dump and lightly examined the lad after which he gave him a few tablets and told him to take one a day.

After leaving the youth, he told Anne that she should never ask him to do such an act again and that he only gave the teen sugar pills. Why?

He explained that, aside from having to save the “real” medicine for the strongest members of his community, he realized, upon checking the boy, that he had less than two months to live from parasites that were currently in his intestines, but that were slated to move throughout his body. In short, he was bound to die in short order. Moreover, there simply were no pain drugs to spare to help him through that two month crisis period. No, there were none at all.

He further added, “I neither have the time, nor the supplies, to spend on a hopeless case like him. I need to use my energy and treatments for people who I CAN help.”

“Unfortunately, your country and other wealthy ones have lured our doctors and nurses away with promises of high salaries. I am sorry that you have such a scarcity, too, but it makes my time all the more difficult as I have far too many people to tend and not enough money to pay for life saving medication, equipment and stores of simple things like thermometers.”

“So if you pray, then pray for that boy. It is all that we can offer him.”

To make up for shortfalls such as this doctor described, the Cuban government, thankfully, sends medical goods and personnel out of the country every year. “Cuban medical internationalism is the Cuban programme, since the 1959 Cuban Revolution, of sending Cuban medical personnel overseas, particularly to Latin America, Africa and, more recently, Oceania [1], and of bringing medical students and patients to Cuba.”

In 2007, “Cuba has 42,000 workers in international collaborations in 103 different countries, of whom more than 30,000 are health personnel, including no fewer than 19,000 physicians.”[2] Cuba provides more medical personnel to the developing world than all the G8 countries combined,[2] although this comparison does not take into account G8 development aid spent on developing world healthcare. The Cuban missions have had substantial positive local impact on the populations served…”

“In August 2006 the United States under George W. Bush created the Cuban Medical Professional Parole program,[28] specifically targeting Cuban medical personnel and encouraging them to defect when they are working in a country outside of Cuba.[5] Of an estimated 40,000 eligible medical personnel, over 1000 had entered the United States under the program by October 2007, according to the chief of staff for U.S. Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart.[29] However the promised fast-track visa is not always forthcoming, and some applicants are trapped in limbo, unable to enter the US and unable to return to Cuba.[30] ” [1]

Meanwhile, the plot to entice Cuban medical staff to the USA fits well with the overall vision held by many American officials. As George Kennan, former Head of the US State Department Policy Planning Staff, makes clear: “We have about 60% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its’ population. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world benefaction. We should cease to talk about such vague and unreal objectives as human rights, the raising of living standards and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.” – George Kennan, former Head of the US State Department Policy Planning Staff, in Document PPS23

However, George Kennan, when he wrote this commentary, did not realize that American would be involved in a quiet class warfare in which the country would be increasingly divided between the haves and have-not. In other words, the nation is increasingly losing its middle class.

Left in its place are very affluent individuals and a rising number of poverty stricken ones whose homes have been foreclosed, whose jobs have been offshored or simply eliminated and whose medical coverage is nonexistent. What’s more is that the latter group have as little worth to most of the wealthy crowd as do the nearly destitute, sick foreigners from whom the Cuban medical workers were enticed.

Who cares, after all, whether the destitute masses get any healthcare delivery abroad or in the USA? Instead, all’s quite well, according to some politicians, as long as America can stick it to Cuba and pick up some great human resources along the way!

In a similar vein, the American healthcare industry, itself, is doing quite fine despite the economic downturn and loss of some customers who could no longer afford high premiums. A typical example is provided by the UnitedHealth Group with sales of $75.4 billion and a profit margin of $4.7 billion. This largess is particularly lucrative for its CEO, Stephen Hemsley, who received $744,232,068 in unexercised stock options.

If he seems out of the ordinary in terms of personal gain, then consider that prior BCBSMA chairman and CEO William Van Faasen received over $16 million as part of his overall retirement benefits in 2006 while BCBSMA President and CEO Cleve Killingsworth obtained over $3.6 million in payment for 2007. Of course, there’s always plenty to spare for them both as the company produced almost $209 million in net income in 2007.

Even so, greed, itself, often has no boundaries. So when the insurer’s net income dipped 49% a year later, Cleve Killingsworth was expected to have garnered around $4.3 million during 2008 at the same time that board members gained a 33% income increase to $40,000 for being on a few committees and going to occasional meetings.

Further, many health care insurers routinely deny required benefits to their customers. Yet, they managed to come up with more than $1.4 million a day and $40 million to date to lobby on the Hill in addition to coughing up almost $170 million to federal lawmakers in 2007 and 2008.

Like CIGNA’s Edward Hanway, who vacations in a $13 million beach house on the New Jersey shore, they’ll fight like demons to keep their cushy compensations unless absolutely forced to yield up a few grudging concessions. After all, that’s the American way.

As in other similar corporatist plutocracies, you get ahead by taking all that you can get for yourself regardless of the consequences for anyone else. You peddle influence, talk about trickle down effect and patience to placate the opposition, and make out like a crook in the meanwhile.

Indeed, this view correspond well with the positions held by many legislators. Certainly, they, too, are combating medical reforms as they do not want to see their own gargantuan profits shrink.

As Lindsay Renick Mayer states in “Congressional Lawmakers Invest in Their (Financial) Health”:

“In past years, congressional debates over health care may have been shaped, in some instances, by such personal investments, said Charles Silver, a professor of law at the University of Texas. Campaign contributions and the revolving door between the private and public sector also play a role, Silver said.

“‘Obviously, there is a conflict, unless the investment is in a blind trust or similar vehicle so the officeholder is not aware of it,’ Silver said. ‘The conflict may be mild or severe, depending on many factors, such as the nature of the investment, whether the company is publicly traded and, therefore, held by mutual funds, pension funds, and other funds in which large numbers of Americans participate.'”

“After hearing from experts, we talked to some of the lawmakers on the five committees that have been primarily responsible for drafting comprehensive health-related proposals. In 2007, 54 current members of these committees had between $31 million and $57.9 million invested in health companies (including in health sector targeted mutual funds). Here’s how a few of their finances looked in 2008 and 2007, and their thoughts on whether they see any conflict of interest in these investments…” [2]

All in all, then, the US is much like the described locations that the two American volunteers visited. We simply will continue to have a shortage in health-care provision just as much as these other places do in which some receive adequate care while others are completely cast aside as discarded members of society much in the way that the homeless Americans, the street people and the tent-city dwellers, are treated today.

Even as this is the case, the USA differs from those foreign counterparts because their deficit in medical provision derives from real critical shortages in funds, medical personnel and supplies. In contrast, the American lacks arise from avarice, self-interest and corrupt legislative policies aimed to maintain the status quo entirely at the expense of the American public.

In the end, the heath-care debate is not about care at all. Instead, it’s about the amount of money that government, HMO and pharmaceutical leaders are personally willing to give up.

Accordingly, it’s clear that many Congressional representatives have no interest in evaluating even a few of the successful models of universal coverage that numerous other countries can provide. Instead, they are, typically, in collusion with big business to stymie any meaningful reforms.

As Thomas Paine succinctly put it, “Beware the greedy hand of government, thrusting itself into every corner and crevice of industry.” It’s a far stretching hand with an iron grip that won’t let go of its gains until forced to do so.

Emily Spence is an author living in Massachusetts. She has spent many years involved in human rights, environmental and social services efforts.

REFERENCES

[1] Cuban medical internationalism – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_medical_internationalism.

[2] Congressional Lawmakers invest in health companies,

http://www.hispanicvista.com/HVC/Opinion/Guest_Columns/072509_Congressional_Lawmakers_invest_in_health_companies.htm.

Emily Spence is a regular columnist for Novakeo.com
She can be reached at:

Filed Under: Emily Spence
Tagged: Africa, America, Asia, Banks, Biology, Business, Climate, Combat, Congress, Cuba, Democrat, Demons, Drugs, Electricity, Energy, Environment, Food, Garbage, Government, Health Care, History, Medicine, Middle Class, Money, Nationalism, Oil, Philosophy, Revolution, Society, War, Water

Urban Cavemen

August 3, 2009 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

Living life out of balance…

Urban Cavemen Balance: A harmonious or satisfying arrangement or proportion of parts or elements

In early 2000, I was walking through Manhattan with three friends on our way to meet a fourth member of our party. This was well before cell phones had become so completely pervasive but still, I was the only one in our group without one. I sarcastically commented on this and was prompted mocked as a Luddite. Then it was on to the essential business of figuring out how to meet up with friend #4.

Out came a cell phone. A call was placed to another cell phone. A meeting place was agreed upon and we were on our way. Friend #1 hung up his phone and turned to me, declaring that this was “one of those times” when a cell phone was indispensable. To which I replied:

“If we didn’t have access to your cell phone or any cell phones at all, we would’ve been simply been more creative in order to come up with a plan that would’ve gotten all of us together without a major hassle. Instead, the phone made us lazy because we knew we could just wing it. Instead of problem-solving, we opted for reliance on consumer electronics.”

A similar rant, of course, could realistically be applied to calculators. Not to mention, the spell-check function on your computer, most software programs in general, and yeah…the computer itself. We no longer have to learn how to spell or remember phone numbers or do math in our heads or memorize directions or even walk up a single flight of stairs. Thanks to the marvels of industrial civilization, we happily delegate such tedious tasks to technology so we can have time to focus on the truly important stuff, like…um…well…uh…removing 90% of the large fish from the ocean, perhaps?

Harmony: Agreement in feeling or opinion

We each possess a physiology that evolved to negotiate the Stone Age. Unfortunately, we live in the Space Age. There’s the rub. We are urban cavemen – overmatched in our daily battle to navigate an artificial reality because we have lost contact with our instincts.

“Pediatricians nowadays see fewer kids with broken bones from climbing trees and more children with longer-lasting repetitive-stress injuries, which are related to playing video games and typing at keyboards,” writes Sally Deneen at The Daily Green. Richard Louv, author of Last Child in the Woods, calls this “nature deficit disorder.” As a fourth-grader quoted in Louv’s book explains: “I like to play indoors better, because that’s where all the electrical outlets are.” Nature deficit disorder is obviously not a medical term; it’s more of a social trend…a trend that plays in factoids like this: American children between the ages of 8 to 18 spend an average of 6.5 hours a day indoors using computers, video games, television, and MP3 players.

The payoff for all this spectator-ship is a lifestyle based on imitation, competition, materialism, and self-delusion. The dominant culture keeps us inactive while our biology desires movement. The dominant culture sells us junk food while our bodies crave nutrients. The dominant culture trains us to be obedient while our minds yearn for freedom. The dominant culture teaches conformity while our souls demand individuality. The dominant culture denies our biology and puts us out of balance with nature.

Among many others things, it can be posited that we did not evolve to experience artificial light after sundown, live inside four walls under that artificial light, eat processed and refined food products, ingest chemicals and pharmaceuticals, sleep during the day and stay up all night, drive cars, travel in an airplane across time zones with such rapidity, become obese, remain sedentary, consume animal flesh or mammary secretions, usurp our immune system with toxic vaccines, exist on a man-made time schedule, be surrounded by copious human-induced electromagnetic radiation, climb giant mountains, travel to space or underwater, wear shoes or eyeglasses, lift weights and develop hypertrophied muscles, exist without community, give birth lying down, live in a world devoid of top soil and nutrient-rich food, smoke cigarettes, be hyper-exposed to toxic pesticides, endure global warming and the greenhouse effect, use cosmetics, or manage the high level of stress and noise that is synonymous with our so-called progress.

Koyaanisqatsi…this is what the Kogi Indians of Colombia call “life out of balance” and this is what we have created as our culture. When I say “culture,” I am referring to what Jason Miller calls “the pitiless, soulless, murderous machine of capitalism and industrial civilization inculcates, indoctrinates, entices, bribes, and coerces nearly everyone to participate in its bloody, rapacious, and relentless assault on the Earth and its sentient inhabitants.” This culture has quickly fucked up the entire planet. So much so that the elusive Kogi have issued a warning to us, their Younger Brothers.

Equilibrium: A condition in which all acting influences are canceled by others, resulting in a stable, balanced, or unchanging system

Even the eyes of veteran activists glaze over when I talk about 80% of the world’s forest being gone. They want to debate the latest political minutia while all life on this planet is under relentless assault. It’s cliché to declare that our problems cannot be solved by the same type of thinking that created them. Cliché but accurate. Elections, legislation, protests, petitions, and so on will not stop the flow of pesticides or the use of nuclear power or the glorification of war and its volunteer soldiers or our culture’s relentless march toward total destruction.

Life on Earth is out of balance. Corporations, politicians, judges, cops, and soldiers can’t fix this. In fact, most of them can’t even perceive the imbalance. The change has to come from somewhere else. The change will come from somewhere else…of that we can be sure. The details of outcome, however, are far less certain.

Symbiosis: A relationship of mutual benefit or dependence

One final note, on the medium by which I have shared these thoughts: The aforementioned Kogi have no written language. In part, this is to assure they remember. They talk, they pass down stories, and they remember. “The Kogi attach great importance to memory,” explain the editors of Ode Magazine. “The memory of events with which the community has been confronted, the memory of social regulations within the group and so forth. ‘Memory,’ they say, ‘is like eyes which were made to see. If they close, everything becomes darkness.’ For them, this memory cannot be written down, it must be spoken, passed down by members of the group. In writing, memories are separated from the people and lose their effectiveness.”

So, I ask: what memories are we creating and what are we doing to ensure there will be someone left to appreciate and remember them?

Synergy: Cooperative interaction among groups

Mickey Z. is a self-educated writer, personal trainer, martial artist, and vegan who lectures on US foreign policy at MIT in his spare time. He has appeared in martial arts films and was known as the Underground Poet for hanging his poetry in the NYC subway. He is the author of numerous books, including, most recently, “CPR for Dummies” and “No Innocent Bystanders”. He lives with his wife Michele in New York City. You can contact him at: . Visit him on the web at Mickeyz.net

Mickey Z is a regular columnist for Novakeo.com

Filed Under: Mickey Z
Tagged: America, Biology, Business, Colombia, Elections, Food, Freedom, Global Warming, India, Libertarian, Oil, Planet, Technology, Television, Video, War, Water

America Galloping Towards Its Greatest Crisis In The 21st Century

May 23, 2009 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

Overpopulation The United States gallops headlong into its greatest crisis early in the 21st century. At current growth rates, America expects to add 100 million people by 2035-a mere 26 years from now. Ironically, you hear nothing about it! Not one word from the main stream media! No alarm bells sounded by political leaders!

You might think that George Will, Jim Hoagland, Thomas Friedman, Ellen Goodman, Froma Harrop and the brilliant Kathleen Parker, all incredible national columnists would turn their mighty quills to THE greatest issue facing America and the world in the 21st century. You would expect Brian Williams, Katie Couric, Jim Lehrer and Charles Gibson to speak up. You would appreciate NPR’s Robert Siegel and Liane Hanson to ramp up the discussion. How about President Obama or any of our 50 governors? But instead, silence!

While mountains of evidence and symptoms of overpopulation erupt in TV news reports and newspapers, the general public continues its daily nonchalance with indolent disinterest. No matter how many water shortage reports, climate change indicators, mass species extinctions or air pollution stories you read about, America blissfully adds 3.2 million people annually. Another 77 million humans add themselves, net gain, to the planet annually and 1.0 billion add to the globe every 12 years.

The population issue accelerates at Warp 9, but it cannot be sustained. Religious and cultural interests push it ever faster. Capitalism drives it with gusto. Money begets power and power drives the money.

While I write many columns about our accelerating dilemma, hundreds of articulate and totally out of touch writers blast at anyone that might write a cogent piece on hyper-population growth. They write with passionate emotions that overpopulation is a New World Order myth or that the ‘Illuminati” expect to kill off half the human population or some other nonsense based on nonsense! As of today, Mother Nature kills 18 million humans from starvation and related diseases annually. She’s the ultimate population Nazi! Others scream racism, but again, Mother Nature takes the cake for being the supreme racist.

Environmental groups, like Sierra Club, try to save habitat and animals from extinction, but they won’t address the core cause of it all: overpopulation. Everyone has created a different dance to waltz or tango around the root cause.

You all know Paul and Anne Ehrlich who wrote, “The Population Bomb” and “Population Explosion”. Many say they were discounted by the Green Revolution. But the fact is, they hit the nail on the head. Ultimately, they prove the final reality facing America and the human race.

You cannot fool Mother Nature for long! Let’s take a look at Ehrlich’s work:

“WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE” by Paul R. Ehrlich and Anne H. Ehrlich, Department of Biology, Stanford University, November 6, 2008, said, “The monumental task before us is to solve the human predicament – the combined crises of overpopulation, wasteful consumption, deteriorating life-support systems, growing inequity, increasing hunger, toxification of the planet, declining resources, increasing resource wars (especially over oil and gas reserves and water), and a worsening epidemiological environment that increases the probability of unprecedented pandemics. The basic views of the scientific community on the predicament can be found at www.dominantanimal.org (click on “Further Information”). Here we just outline some of what needs to be done as a series of interrelated steps in which we hope you will exercise leadership:

One: put births on a par with deaths

“The United States has been way behind in the population area. First, as the most overpopulated nation on Earth (because of its combination of a giant population and high per-capita consumption), it still lacks a population policy. Furthermore, its population is projected to increase from 304 million to 439 million people by 2050. And, despite earlier pledges, the US in recent years has failed to help curb population growth in poor countries. Worse yet, the Reagan administration’s “Mexico City policy” for killing women worldwide by suppressing access to legal abortion had only a hiatus during the Clinton years and was reestablished by Bush II. That policy should be dropped immediately, along with ideological restrictions imposed on government websites dealing with reproductive health.

“Human beings have always fought against early death from accident, hunger, and sickness, and in the past century or so have employed improved sanitation and the use of pesticides and antibiotics to raise life expectancy. But given the frightening potential consequences of the explosion in human numbers that has followed reductions of the death rate, it is essential to pay equivalent attention to reducing high birthrates as well. Programs to educate and open job opportunities for women, and to make effective contraception universally available, must be an integral part of development policies in poor countries. Placing women in important cabinet posts in a new U.S. administration should have high priority and would send a strong signal in support of women’s empowerment (even in developed nations, prejudice against women is widespread).

“Public support of prudent population policies needs to be encouraged everywhere. The United States must play a crucial role in supporting such policies, providing both moral and financial support. The goal must be to halt population increase as soon as humanely possible, and then reduce human numbers until births and deaths balance at a population size that can be maintained with desired lifestyles without irreparable damage to our natural life-support systems. And, of course, a global discussion over the next several decades will be required to reach a consensus on those lifestyles and thus on the appropriate maximum population size – which we already know must be smaller than the present 6.7 billion. Fortunately, the target can be tentative, since (if we’re lucky) it may well be a half century or more before a worldwide decline can begin, so there will be decades to consider and evaluate the best level at which to stabilize our numbers. This leads us to point two.

Two: emphasize conserving more than consuming

“At any given level of technology, there is a trade-off between the numbers of people in a society and the level of per capita physical affluence that can be sustainably supported. The more people there are, the smaller each one’s share of the pie must be. One way of dealing with this unavoidable trade-off would be a cultural shift away from creating ever more gadgets to creating more appreciation and better stewardship of Earth’s aesthetic assets. That step, if it were combined with a decline in population size, careful husbandry of manufactured and natural capital (our ecological assets), and a crash program to abandon the use of fossil fuels and transition to sustainable energy technologies, would eventually permit most people to live satisfactory lives. Of course, it would require abandoning the irrational idea that constant growth in consumption is automatically good and can continue forever. That malignant notion is still alive and well, as demonstrated by the 2008 rush to bail out the sleazy de-regulated financial industry in the United States, and even to further subsidize our nation’s staggering, incompetent automobile industry, in order to perpetuate economic growth among the rich.

“It is clear that most politicians and most citizens do not recognize that returning to “more of the same” is a recipe for promoting the first collapse of a global civilization. The required changes in energy technology, which would benefit not only the environment but also national security, public health, and the economy, would demand a World War II type mobilization — and even that might not prevent a global climate disaster. Without transitioning away from use of fossil fuels, humanity will move further into an era of resource wars (remember, Africom has been added to the Pentagon’s structure — and China has noticed), clearly with intent to protect US “interests” in petroleum reserves. The consequences of more resource wars, many likely triggered over water supplies stressed by climate disruption, are likely to include increased unrest in poor nations, a proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, widening inequity within and between nations, and in the worst (and not unlikely) case, a nuclear war ending civilization.
Three: judge technologies not just on what they do for people but also to people and their life-support systems

“A novel synthetic chemical added to the plastic in a sports bottle may increase its durability, but if it leaches into a baby bottle’s contents or into the environment and functions in tiny doses as an endocrine-disrupting agent, is the risk worth the benefit? In general, benefit-cost analyses are not done frequently or carefully enough before the introduction of new technologies. Freons (chlorofluorocarbons) looked extremely beneficial as refrigerants until it was discovered they could destroy the ozone layer and with it all life on land. Risk cannot be avoided completely. But a cultural change toward more careful analyses and deployment only of technologies that carry very clear benefits will help humanity keep the odds in its favor. It should not always rate consumption as trumping safety – especially when the evidence indicates that the toxics problem, especially the hormone mimics with non-linear dose-response curves, might be even more disastrous and less reversible than climate disruption.

Four: transform the consumption of education

“Education is what economists call a “non-rival good” – something that can be consumed without reducing the amount available to others – and as such it is an ideal consumption good for a sustainable society. It is widely recognized that literacy and civic education are keys to “development;” they could also be keys to sustainable development. Reform of education to help us solve the human predicament is thus crucial, with much emphasis on values such as satisficing for the many as opposed to optimizing for the few. In the future, both the need for sustainability and the multi-dimensional environmental, social, political, and economic requirements to achieve it must be central elements of education around the world. Many more people, especially politicians, should be familiar with the I=PAT equation, should know how agricultural systems work, and grasp the relationship between population size and epidemic disease. Unless a much larger fraction of the human population becomes aware of the predicament we all face and the science of that predicament’s basic elements and possible solutions, sustainability is unlikely to be reached.

Five: rapidly expand our empathy

“We’re a small-group animal, trying to live in large groups. Although we no longer can associate exclusively with a clan of, say, 125 relatives, most of us have a group of “pseudokin” – friends and close associates of about the same number. In both cases, people tend to develop a sort of “we versus them” culture, with the “themness” increasing with physical and cultural distance. Thanks in part to global communications, people are gradually gaining more empathy toward others distant from us in skin color, gender, religion, class, culture or physical space, but our ability to inflict harm on them has also increased. Cultural evolution is not reducing this discounting by distance (caring less about situations the further away they are) fast enough. The same can be said about discounting by time – not caring enough about the world we will leave to our descendants in the more distant future. Can affluent people in the West learn to empathize enough with a child in Darfur so as to take real action to save her? Can they learn to care about the world her grandchildren will live in, and act to move that society towards peaceful sustainability? If the global community takes step five, the answers to both questions will be “yes,” and we’ll be on the kind of road that could lead to a level of global cooperation that might allow a billion or two, perhaps three billion, small-group animals to live together sustainably in relative peace, in the next century.

Six: decide what kind of world we all want

“What are the ultimate goals of our lives? Most development literature simply assumes that “modernization” in the style of today’s rich countries should be the goal of all nations – and perhaps that is what people want. Still, are Americans really happier traveling to work an hour or more each day wrapped in a ton or two of steel and breathing smog that threatens their lives? While the U.S. GDP has multiplied almost five times since 1958, satisfaction, as shown by surveys, has not increased at all. The situation in other rich countries is similar. Must all nations then strive to emulate the American super-consuming, petroleum-based life style? The situation looked bleak enough in 1972 when political scientist Dennis Pirages and Paul first asked (in an NYT op-ed) what the world would be like if the then half a billion Chinese got automobiles? Now 1.3 billion Chinese apparently have that goal.

“Or should such goals be discouraged and all of humanity strive together to seek a more equitable global society, which could replace today’s bipolar super-rich – desperately poor population in which the split widens as growth continues? We could initiate a Millennium Assessment of Human Behavior (MAHB) to begin a discussion of what economic, social, and political systems will best fulfill human desires as we struggle to live in gigantic, culturally diverse groups. How, for example, do we take advantage of the enormous benefits that market mechanisms provide to societies while constraining their propensity to do enormous damage when unregulated? Starting and maintaining a global cultural-ethical discussion is a step that would help determine the kinds of lifestyles and relationships people really want. As we’ve already indicated, armed with that knowledge, we could try to establish as accurately as possible the conditions of population size, consumption patterns, economic arrangements, and technologies required to make such lifestyles and relationships sustainable. All of this, of course, would go against the often-recognized “stickiness” (inertia) of culture. But as many cases show, that stickiness can be overcome. It may be that even the Weberian work-to-grow-forever culture that long has had development experts in its death grip can be altered in ways that could lead to a sustainable global culture. The United States, for example, could adopt some ideas from other cultures – like more vacation time from European cultures or a tradition of siestas from Mexico, or a more contemplative view of life from various aspects of Buddhism. The USA could meet developing cultures halfway by focusing less on “standard of living” and more on “quality of life,” and it could bring the experts along with it.

Seven: determine the institutions and arrangements best suited to govern a planetary
society with a maximum of freedom within the constraints of sustainability

“This is closely related to step six. In the ~200,000 year history of modern Homo sapiens, nation-states are a recent invention, existing for only a tiny fraction of our existence. In their modern form, they are little more than 200 years old. We need to look closely at possible alternatives that could combine greater awareness of the problems of living at a global scale while retaining small-group psychological comfort. More cooperation at a global level is clearly necessary for civilization’s long-term survival. Problems such as climate disruption, global toxification, resource wars, decimation of the planet’s biodiversity and thus of the crucial services that flow from humanity’s natural capital, and escalating chances of global epidemics cannot be solved one nation state at a time.

Pollyannaish conclusion

“We hope you are willing to attempt to dramatically change how the U.S. and the world work. We hope you will not employ conventional economists who will try to restore the same old growth machine that is destroying the world. Equally important, we urge you not to allow a (reasonable) fear of being accused of being “soft” on terrorism or on China, Iran, or North Korea to prevent you from starting the difficult task of cutting back our overgrown military structure and commitments. Similarly, we hope you will take steps to transform our energy economy so the otherwise nearly inevitable eventual war with China over fossil fuels can be avoided. Then there is the awesome issue of curbing rich-world consumption. The U.S. with 4.5% of the global population cannot continue to consume roughly a quarter of Earth’s resources; similar statements apply to the other rich nations. McCain in his concession speech showed some sign of his old self – and you could certainly use the help of a maverick who has shown the ability to move away from some aspects of Neocon nonsense. Maybe the Senate could get back to a situation, like that when Tim Wirth (D) and Jack Heinz (R) were working together to try to solve environmental problems.

“These are no tiny tasks, salted with unanswerable questions (e.g., is there any hope that a temporary increase in U.S. troops in Afghanistan can accomplish anything? Is it likely that if we move toward sustainability, China and India will follow?). You surely cannot do it all – we’ll all need to help you as much as possible. If you can’t get a good start toward real solutions, then global collapse in the not-so-distant future seems nearly inevitable.” Paul R. Ehrlich, Bing Professor of Population Studies http://www.stanford.edu/group/CCB/Staff/Ehrlich.html , Anne H. Ehrlich, Senior Research Scientist, Policy Coordinator, Center for Conservation Biology, Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-5020
http://www.stanford.edu/group/CCB/Staff/Ehrlich.html

While these two brilliant educators spell it out, I have seen the devastation around the globe on my world bicycle travels. I encourage anyone and everyone to drive this issue to the top of the U.S. agenda. We desperately need a “US Sustainable Population Policy” and we must lead the world toward a sustainable future. I cannot think of anything more important for the future of our children and this civilization.

Frosty Wooldridge is a regular columnist for Novakeo.com

Filed Under: Frosty Wooldridge
Tagged: Afghanistan, America, Automobiles, Biology, China, Climate, Darfur, Demons, Economy, Education, Energy, Environment, Europe, Freedom, Future, Government, History, India, Iran, Literature, Mexico, Military, Money, National Security, New World Order, North Korea, Oil, Overpopulation, Planet, Religion, Revolution, Society, Technology, Terrorism, War, Water, World War I, World War II

Next Added 100 Million Americans: Environmental Refugees

February 9, 2009 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

Chapter Fifteen…

Environmental Refugees “Scholars are predicting that 50 million people worldwide will be displaced by 2010 because of rising sea levels, desertification, dried up aquifers, weather-induced flooding and other serious environmental changes.” ~ Andrew Simms

With continued U.S. population growth rates, California tops an added 20 million by 2035. Texas grows by 12 million by 2025. Every state suffers its share of the next added 100 million people.

Experts at Vanderbilt University tell us that the U.S. population stands at 327 million people–and the growth-rate is even faster–so we may reach 400 million sooner than 2040.

California, already at 37.5 million, absorbs the lion’s share of this population “Human Katrina.” At each stage along the way, as those 20 million additional people hit that state, what do you think will happen? Is it not possible that people will fight one-another for the shrinking natural resources?

How about water? What about clean air—California smog? How about farmland? What about growing-fields sanitization? How about gridlock traffic? What about housing? How about schools? What about standard of living? How about quality of life? What about greenhouse gases?

Ever hear the sound of a toilet flushing? Ever see one backed up? Ever see and smell the results of both? How many times can you expand a sewage-treatment plant? Where do you put the trash? That’s California population-density predicament in twenty odd years.

“Environmental Refugees”

What can we expect from adding 100 million? Call them “environmental refugees” for lack of a better term. You can bet your bottom dollar they’re coming to America. If you doubt me, just travel to the Mexico border to watch the “pulgas” that come across illegally every night. The U.S. Border Patrol only intercepts 20 percent of them.

Human beings become environmental refugees when they exceed the carrying capacity of that portion of the planet that supported them.

Religion and Population-Growth Impacts

For better or worse, the Catholic and Islamic religions encourage unlimited birth rates. With more numbers come more power, and more money for churches.

If you look at the results on the world stage, environmental refugees stream into Europe out of Africa and the Middle East. Central and South America along with Mexican refugees stream into the U.S. at accelerating rates of speed.

Can realities like starvation and deaths from overpopulation change religious doctrine based on books written 2,000 years ago? Not likely! Even in the face of severe environmental consequences, do not look for the Pope to change his stand. Neither will any Muslim leader stand up against 1,400 years of doctrine! Ancient religions lock followers into the past.

The most frightening aspect of the next added 100 million Americans stems from the fact that they won’t be Americans. Do they speak English? Which national flag hangs in their home? Where does their primary allegiance rest?

Mexico grew from 50 million to 104 million in the last century. At the minimum, Mexico’s growth will exceed 300 million by 2095 if not sooner. If they can’t feed, clothe and house countless millions today, what can we expect when they triple their population?

No less than 30 to 90 million destitute Mexicans — if they can’t feed, water and clothe themselves — will move from their homeland in the 21st century into the United States. Over 12-15 million Mexicans already moved into the U.S. As conditions worsen in their home country, millions more will migrate. Major portions of Central America will migrate as they leave similar situations.

“The vision of a world teeming with environmental refugees is daunting, even for wealthy countries such as the United States,”

said John Cairns, University Distinguished Professor of Environmental Biology at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia.

“When countries capable of absorbing refugees are at or beyond their carrying capacity, every individual on the planet becomes a potential refugee with no place to go. The world’s human population is increasing at 77 million net gain per year, but natural support-systems are decreasing.”

Ecological Footprint Growing

For every human added to the USA, at the current standard of living, 12.6 acres of land must be destroyed in order to build houses, schools, grow food, add roads, malls, hospitals and other infrastructure. It’s called the “ecological footprint.” As you can see, it stomps around at an ever increasing rate of speed as people migrate to the USA and other successful nations.

“It’s abundantly clear that many countries have exceeded their carrying capacity, and can only survive by exporting surplus populations,” Cairns said.

Additionally, since the United States, with five percent of the world’s population, creates 25 percent of greenhouse gases — will we take responsibility for environmental refugees flooded out of their countries or islands by rising oceans from global warming? That number could reach into the hundreds of millions.

Global Warming – Ocean Levels Rising – Resource-Competition Wars

At the same time, what about our own refugees if global warming floods Florida?

“It is becoming increasingly probable there will be teeming millions of environmental refugees — it will mean that we were terribly wrong about the carrying capacity of the world for our species,” Cairns said. “Disease, starvation and resource-competition wars will doubtless occur — but the root cause will be a social disequilibrium resulting from overpopulation and bad long-term management of natural capital.”

With the world adding 77 million people annually, that equals 3.08 billion more by 2047.

Today we stand at 6.7 billion in 2007. (Source: www.populationmedia.org)

In 40 years, the human race will be pushing ten billion people. As mentioned before, we’ve got 10.5 million children under 10 years of age dying annually of starvation or starvation related diseases. (Source: World Health Organization) In addition, an average of eight million adults die of starvation annually. (Source: Time Magazine, March 14, 2005) As mentioned previously, we suffer from 1.5 to 3.5 million homeless in the United States today. (www.nationalhomeless.org)

Have you traveled to the border of Mexico recently? From Brownsville, Texas to San Diego, California, on our side of the border, refugee Mexicans build shanty towns of cardboard and wooden pallets. Have you seen the hundreds of tons of trash, garbage, bottles, cans, abandoned cars, human waste, clothes and filth? Have you seen the ‘colonias’ that add tens of thousands of Mexico’s poor annually? Did you know the New York Times predicted colonias, which mean ‘new colonies’, currently at 1.5 million will grow to 20 million by 2021?

Do you understand that when a Third World person reaches America, their ‘ecological footprint’ changes from zero to 10 as soon as they take a job, buy a car, rent a house, buy goods and produce waste? This occurs into the millions with legal and illegal immigration annually.

Environmental refugees that survive will converge on America and other successful Western societies at all costs.

We Can Awaken –- Stop the Onslaught – But will we?

That number could be reduced:

1. If world leaders accept that infinite population growth on a finite planet is not possible.
2. If humans understand this planet’s ecological support systems cannot continue without suffering severe consequences.
3. If leaders understand that achieving sustainable use of the planet will not be possible if human population and/or per capita consumption continues increasing.
4. If leaders understand birth control is the only human solution that assures we remain sustainable on a finite planet.

The most astounding aspect of this book stems from the fact that the average citizen doesn’t seem to have a clue about what approaches — and not one national leader will address it.

Why? Money! Follow the money! Every time any environmental shock wave surfaces — like global warming, fisheries collapsing, species extinctions and oil depletion — our leaders think of a dozen ways to obfuscate, cloud, deny or ignore our accelerating calamity. Meanwhile, citizens go about their business completely clueless.

Are We Willing to Change?

Can we stem this impending environmental refugee flood? We better! We cannot continue as the world’s lifeboat. If allowed, two billion world citizens would immigrate to the USA today.

In order to stem that human tide, first world countries may attempt agricultural assistance to overloaded countries. Most important, first world countries might provide advanced birth control methods to stop the cycle of poverty and overpopulation. Citizens of the world will be better off if they are empowered in their own countries.

As in the past, until another “Hurricane Katrina” knocks American society upside the head with a whopping sledge hammer– cultural and social changes of the magnitude illustrated in this book— won’t be heeded.

While Americans may ignore nature, nature won’t ignore America.

The United States tiptoes along the edge of a dangerous cliff in the 21st century. Americans skipped along that cliff for 40 years. At least two billion of the earth’s humans live on less than $3 each per day. Very few Americans comprehend that kind of existence. I’ve seen it and it’s ugly, depressing and it mushrooms by 77 million annually.

We’re seeing environmental refugees stream into America from Mexico, Central America, India, China, Africa and a hundred other countries. They’ve added most of the 106 million people to our country in the past four decades. Are you ready for the next 100 million in 30 years — and then, the next 100 million added in 25 years? The rate of growth increases exponentially.

Ready or not, they stream into America.

Frosty Wooldridge is a regular columnist for Novakeo.com

Filed Under: Frosty Wooldridge
Tagged: Africa, America, Biology, Books, California, China, Environment, Europe, Florida, Food, Garbage, Global Warming, Illegal Immigration, India, Islam, Mexico, Middle East, Money, Oil, Overpopulation, Planet, Religion, Society, War, Water, Weather

Nobody Ever Dies of Overpopulation

May 15, 2008 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

In the past week, a cyclone ripped through Burma with devastating results. Death estimates exceed 100,000 and may rise to a million if survivors do not find food, water and housing. What the cyclone didn’t render, diseases may bring even greater disaster.

China suffered an earthquake at 7.9, which caused thousands of deaths.

In America’s heartland, dozens of tornadoes destroyed entire communities while killing American citizens. Wildfires rage across California, Florida and other states at this moment. The destruction and death toll continue mounting as Colorado and other states race into the upcoming fire season.

Eleanor Roosevelt said it 50 years ago; “We must prevent human tragedy rather than run around trying to save ourselves after an event has already occurred. Unfortunately, history clearly shows that we arrive at catastrophe by failing to meet the situation, by failing to act when we should have acted. The opportunity passes us by and the next disaster is always more difficult and compounded than the last one.”

After a typhoon hit Bangladesh thirty some years ago, Garrett Hardin wrote a piece for Science, February 12, 1971, volume 171, Number 3971, American Association for the Advancement of Science. The late Professor Hardin taught biology at the University of California at Santa Barbara.

“Those of us who are deeply concerned about population and the environment —”econuts,” we’re called,” Hardin said, “are accused of seeing herbicides in trees, pollution in running brooks, radiation in rocks, and overpopulation everywhere. There is merit in the accusation.

“Pakistani parents repaired the population loss in just 40 days, and the world turned its attention to other matters. What killed those unfortunate people? “The cyclone,” newspapers said. But one can just as logically say that overpopulation killed them. The Gangetic Delta is barely above sea level.

“Every year several thousand people are killed in quite ordinary storms. If Pakistan were not overcrowded, no sane man would bring his family to such a place. Ecologically speaking, a delta belongs to the river and the sea; man obtrudes there at his peril.

‘Go, go, go, said the bird: human kind cannot bear very much reality.’

inventory of possibilities. Instead, we say that a cyclone caused the deaths, thus relieving ourselves of responsibility for this and future catastrophes. “Fate” is so comforting.

“People are dying now of respiratory diseases in Tokyo, Birmingham, and Gary, because of the “need” for more industry. The “need” for more food justifies over-fertilization of the land, leading to eutrophication of the waters, and lessened fish production — which leads to more “need” for food.

“One thing is certain: we won’t blame the deaths on overpopulation. No one ever dies of overpopulation. It is unthinkable!”

Hardin poked the population balloon with his razor-sharp reality pin. Today, Bangladesh houses 144 million people in a landmass the size of Iowa. Within 40 years, Bangladesh expects to add 144 million MORE people in that delta region—total 290 million people living in a sardine can of space! We can expect a monumental human disaster that will make the recent cyclone in Burma look like a church picnic when it hits—and it will hit. Do the Bangladeshi’s possess a contingency plan? Yes! Allah declares that they must have as many babies as possible. It’s Allah’s will!

Does the United States possess a plan for the future? Yes! We continue importing 180,000 to 200,000 worldwide refugees in the form of immigrants into this country every 30 days, month in and month out, year in and year out. Demographers expect the USA to add 100 million people in 30 years and hit 1 billion within 90 years. Do you find that comforting for your grandkids and your civilization?

As China, India, Bangladesh, Burma, Mexico and other nations bumble and stumble into the 21st century, the citizens of United States follow as if deaf, blind and dumb to the realities of their fate. Will the projected 40 million added to California in four decades become our “Burma Cyclone” or “Bangladesh’s monsoon” or “China’s earthquake”?

Per Eleanor Roosevelt’s sage advice, will America create a strategic plan to avoid those other countries’ fates?

No!

Will America suffer horrific environmental consequences, countless American deaths and more misery than anyone can imagine?

Yup!

Frosty Wooldridge is a regular columnist for Novakeo.com

Frosty Wooldridge has bicycled across six continents – from the Arctic to the South Pole – as well as six times across the USA, coast to coast and border to border. In 2005, he bicycled from the Arctic Circle, Norway to Athens, Greece.

He presents “The Coming Population Crisis in America: and what you can do about it” to civic clubs, church groups, high schools and colleges. He works to bring about sensible world population balance at his website: www.frostywooldridge.com

Filed Under: Frosty Wooldridge
Tagged: America, Biology, China, Environment, Future, History, India, Mexico, Overpopulation, Weather

The New World Order, Separation of Church & Hate

November 19, 2006 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

Part Eighteen

According to the globalists, the Constitution must be crushed in order to establish global governance. Every freedom must be revoked; the Bill of Rights must be misrepresented with persuasive propaganda from the most trusted sources. The entire deceptive operation must appear to benefit the masses. It must be shrewdly executed with focused determination or the populace may awaken and revolt.

“The religious persecution that drove settlers from Europe to the British North American colonies sprang from the conviction, held by Protestants and Catholics alike, that uniformity of religion must exist in any given society. This conviction rested on the belief that there was one true religion and that it was the duty of the civil authorities to impose it, forcibly if necessary, in the interest of saving the souls of all citizens.” [1]

Religious intolerance and persecution is rampant in many countries. Because of the religious intolerance directed at my own ancestors I am adamant about separation of church and state. Religious reformer John Rogers, a distant but direct ancestor (11th great grandfather), was burned at the stake on February 4, 1555 at Smithfield, near Warwick, Nottinghamshire, England during the reign of Mary Tudor. He was a close associate of William Tyndale and an editor of the “Matthew Bible.” Rogers was the first British Protestant martyr under Queen Mary. “On the Monday morning of his death, the Sheriff had shown Rogers a document promising pardon if he would recant. ‘That which I have preached with my lips will I seal with my blood,’ was the answer.” [2]

The Constitution established our federal government. That document is a two way agreement; it is every citizen’s social contract with their government. Accordingly, all of our rights are protected – except the ones we willingly give up. Driven by government-provoked fear, we frequently give up sovereignty for alleged security. We are relinquishing, little by little, our God-given freedoms and will eventually wake up enslaved in a tyrannical, controlling state.

Mass persuasion by public officials, news commentators, teachers and some church leaders falsely claim that we live in a democracy rather than a republic. Some of those same individuals claim that “separation of church and state” is not a constitutional concept. Repetitive lies, accepted as fact, soon gain acceptance by those who fail to read the available documents. “The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly… it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.”— Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propaganda Minister.

Individual rights were completely absent from the first draft of the Constitution. “Unless assured that a bill of rights would be passed, many states threatened to withhold ratification of the Constitution. Consequently, in 1789, the First Congress of the United States adopted the first ten amendments to the Constitution, known collectively as the Bill of Rights. Ratification of these amendments by the required number of states occurred in 1791.” [3]

First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Madison’s first draft of the First Amendment read: “The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretence, infringed.” [4] It is highly significant that religion, of all the liberties embodied in the Bill of Rights, is the very first freedom mentioned. The First Amendment, possibly the most important in the Bill of Rights, enumerates five freedoms: religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition. Those God-given freedoms facilitate individual participation in the process of self-government.

The Bill of Rights pertains to and was designed to protect the individual rights of each and every person. The specific tenets of the Bill of Rights were not rights granted to the government, an artificial body created by the citizens. The right of “free exercise” pertains to individuals, not to government. Therefore, a government entity or any person representing that entity cannot claim or seize “free exercise.” The “free exercise” of an individual’s religion, not the government’s religion, is constitutional. Consequently, a government employee may not constitutionally direct any type of religious observance while functioning in that government-sponsored occupation.

The Religious Right and their minions endorse their versions of school prayer. My children attended school to study math, grammar, penmanship, history, biology, science, and to enhance their already developed reading skills. I did not send them to school to learn to pray. We pray regularly in our home and at church. Citizens should not be obligated to pay taxes for students to learn how to pray. Given America’s diversity, what kind of a prayer would it be: Catholic, Baptist, Seventh-day Adventist, Episcopalian, Jewish, Methodist, Mormon? Which students are going to feel discomfort or suffer mild to aggressive persecution for not being the “right” religion? Will the students who belong to the “right” religion feel compelled to openly pray for the “sinful” student – to save his or her soul from hell? Governments should not sponsor any activity that contributes or provokes persecution or aggression towards others based on religion or ethnicity.

“The Establishment Clause thus stands as an expression of principle on the part of the founders of our Constitution that religion is too personal, too sacred, too holy, to permit its ‘unhallowed perversion’ by a civil magistrate. Another purpose of the Establishment Clause rested upon an awareness of the historical fact that governmentally established religions and religious persecutions go hand in hand.” [5]

Thomas Jefferson stated: “No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority.”

Despite the intentionally secular foundation of the constitution, there have been and will continue to be controversial court cases, many perpetuated by stables of high-priced attorneys retained by different factions of the Religious Right to publicize the questionable premise that America’s Christians are consistently persecuted. The actual objective of such lawsuits is to outrage the voters who will then demand specific religious freedoms even if it means incremental loss of religious freedoms or discrimination for others. The very people who should make every effort to protect religious freedom are, in fact, jeopardizing it.

In colonial times, many European monarchs referred to their nations as Christian countries. However, sinners and hypocrites comprised the bulk of their local populace. Nations, like people, are defined by their national character and moral fortitude. To the colonial, Roger Williams, residency in a particular place did not equate to Christianity. [6] Likewise, given our duplicitous propensity for class discrimination, abortion, offensive war, the economic destabilization of other countries and deathly sanctions, referring to America as a Christian nation casts super serious doubt upon our interpretation of a Christian.

Many, particularly in the Religious Right, claim that the United States was established as a Christian nation rather than a free nation. They perpetuate this erroneous theory in order to attract other morally upright people who might naïvely embrace the Religious Right’s spurious agenda. However, to appeal to others, they downplay the word “Christian” and include others they may have previously attempted to discredit as non Christian. “By referring more ecumenically to the United States as a religious nation, they invite other religious traditions to join a family-values crusade launched originally by a particular form of Christian faith.” … “A shift in rhetorical strategy to widen political appeal does not affect the substantive issues at stake.” [7]

Every decent person is for “family values” but not through government enforcement. People who endorse separation of church and state do not hate religion! Justifiable objections arise when some “Christian leaders” demand that their particular version of religion be incorporated into the nation’s laws.

In every age, religious advocates have attempted to influence others through government enforcement. Individuals seeking political office frequently use religion to draw support from the religious community. Campaign customs have significantly changed in the last four to five decades. Candidates discuss ideology instead of specific political issues that detrimentally affect every single citizen. View one of John F. Kennedy’s campaign speeches and then evaluate contemporary candidate rhetoric – it is a night and day difference.

The founding fathers had respect for religion and it is because of that respect that they resisted some of the religious leaders of the day and refrained from merging the operations of government with religion. To serve Dominionist goals, it is relatively easy to harvest ambiguous quotes from the founders that appear to endorse the merging of church and state. There are sufficient public examples that history revisionists use to “prove” that religion and politics are compatible.

The phrase “In God we trust” is on our money as a result of the pressure and ranting of Horace Bushnell, a Connecticut preacher, who said that the Civil War was “divine retribution” for America’s acceptance of “speculative and infidel” ideas that government was not ordained by God. It is a blasphemous insult to put God’s name on worthless paper printed by the international bankers who hijacked our economy and are currently draining America’s resources. The majority of people may actually trust money and the power it gives more than they trust God. In today’s corrupt climate, anyone can literally “buy anything in the world for money” and it is outrageous to attach God’s name to filthy lucre, made filthier by the mass destruction that it causes in the hands of those who seek total control.

“Render, therefore, to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.” – Mark 13:17 and Luke 20:25

Blaming Lincoln’s war of northern aggression on infidels is akin to some current religious leaders who claim that 9/11 is the result of our country’s homosexual tolerance. Falwell remarked: “I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say ‘you helped this happen.’” [8] How discomforting that some religious leaders, who have similar, though secret lifestyles, reject individuals and dispel them from their midst rather than inviting everyone into their realm in order to love and teach them. Isn’t it time that we separate church and hate. What happened to true worship – emulation?

Perhaps Falwell’s apology was insincere considering that he continues to define others in negative terms such as being anti-Christ. This “Christian” preacher’s unabashed comments are regularly heard in the “conservative,” administration-friendly media. [9] This is so radically different from his methodology before he combined his abilities with those who spearheaded the most current assault on the religious clauses within the First Amendment.

The suddenly star-struck Falwell was a typical preacher who understood the gospel process up until his merger with the ultra conservative New Right. Falwell said the following during the civil rights movement of the 1960s: “We have a message of redeeming grace through a crucified and risen Lord. Nowhere are we told to reform the externals. We are not told to wage a war against bootleggers, liquor stores, gamblers, murderers, prostitutes, racketeers, prejudiced persons or institutions, or any other existing evil as such. The gospel does not clean up the outside but rather regenerates the inside.” [10]

Changing society begins with changing oneself. Religious practitioners need to address the individuals in their congregations – that is their job. The churches must get back to doing what they are supposed to do – not lobby government officials to instill additional mountains of repressive, bigoted regulations designed to disenfranchise certain groups and strip others of their individual freedoms. That is hardly moral or just. Morality, especially from an apparently immoral human entity like the government, cannot come from the top down. It will deliver quite the opposite.

Many prefer fast food religion rather than repentance and “feasting upon the word of God.” Repentance changes hearts which then results in better behavior including a desire to bury the weapons of war, support peace and view one’s alleged enemies in a completely different light. Good behavior as a result of government enforcement, a function that many want the government to assume, does not impact the heart and soul.

Personally, I would not entrust a government that kills the citizens of weaker countries with the task of saving my soul. Nor would I trust the very vocal religious practitioners who support such senseless slaughter. It appears that many individuals, including religious leaders, have created the “Uncle Sam” golden calf. Rather than self-reliance, a by-product of accepting responsibility and repenting for one’s own behavior, many rely upon “Uncle Sam” to solve every dilemma and enforce better behavior. It is all a diabolical deception to strip us all of our free agency and the very ideals and principles we cherish.

[1] America as a Religious Refuge: The Seventeenth Century
[2] Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, Chapter XVI — Persecutions in England During the Reign of Queen Mary
[3] Individual Rights
[4] 1 Annals of Congress 434 (June 8, 1789)
[5] Engel vs. Vitale, US Supreme Court, Decided June 25, 1962, Hugo Lafayette Black, Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court
[6] The Godless Constitution, the Case Against Religious Correctness by Isaac Kramnick & R. Laurence Moore, p. 51
[7] Ibid, p. 13
[8] Falwell apologizes to gays, feminists, lesbians
[9] Falwell called NOW “the National Order of Witches”
[10] Jerry Falwell, as quoted in Jerome L. Himmelstein, To the Right, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1990, p. 118 as quoted in Blinded by Might, Can the religious Right Save America? By Cal Thomas and Ed Dobson, p. 85

Deanna Spingola is a regular columnist for Novakeo.com
Deanna Spingola has been a quilt designer and is the author of two books. She has traveled extensively teaching and lecturing on her unique methods. She has always been an avid reader of non-fiction works designed to educate rather than entertain. She is active in family history research and lectures on that topic. Currently she is the director of the local Family History Center. She has a great interest in politics and the direction of current government policies, particularly as they relate to the Constitution. Her website is at: www.spingola.com
email:

Filed Under: Deanna Spingola
Tagged: 9/11, America, Biology, Christianity, Climate, Congress, Economy, Euro, Europe, Freedom, Government, History, Justice, Money, New World Order, Politics, Religion, Society, Taxes, War

I’d Rather Enjoy Life

August 7, 2006 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

So Give Me My Junk Food!

One of the ladies I know, who’s well up into her sixties, was a vegetarian when I met her nearly fifteen years ago. Since then, she’s progressed to the vegan stage, living on fake pastrami made with soy and fake meats of all kinds made from soy and other beans, legumes, weeds, grasses and berries. (The berries are okay if they’re sweet.) But she avoids milk that isn’t milked from pregnant soybeans, eggs that aren’t made by Dow or Monsanto, all fish and other sea creatures (I haven’t inquired whether this food chain avoidance extends to algae, but who cares?)

Me? I like my bacon, eggs, pancakes, biscuits made with lard, and milk, especially chocolate milk. Actually, I’m not a big meat eater, never was, but if there’s lightly battered fried shrimp on the menu, give me a double helping and give her my salad. I prefer slaw anyway. Don’t skimp on the hush puppies either. That’s good food.

Back in other eons, when I was born in a foreign country (California, c. 1935) there was a Great Depression in progress. My folks didn’t have much “stuff” as people catalog their possessions now, but we did have a radio, a 1928 Buick that I remember when I was around three or four years old, and we traded that for a 1939 Ford when I was close to five. My dad was a union man, as all members of the entertainment industry must be, he belonged to the IATSE and worked as an electrician in the movie studios (later television also). For that period of national deprivation, my dad’s salary of $35 a week plus overtime for more than 48 hours a week was good working class money. Very good! My mom, whose photos show her as a slender, beautiful woman holding an infant (me) blossomed out in all directions, one might say we grew together but I think she grew more rapidly. We ate baked ham with yams, she made french-fried potatoes from scratch … that is, she began by peeling huge russet potatoes … my dad loved T-bone steaks, and we ate off the fat of the land. Literal fat in many cases. Mama loved cakes, and she made them from scratch (that is, she started off with flour, baking powder and salt and progressed from there to butter, eggs and whole milk etc.). We didn’t have much of a house, it was a rental in Palms, California, close to the MGM studios where dad worked, but was I to know? The back yard was resplendant with foliage, shaded by an enormous fig tree that bore gen-yew-wine figs, edible to birds and man, and my dad had a time beating the birds to the crops. One year they made fig jam, but I preferred the tree-picked article, unfooled around with by human ingenuity and the stove.

While I never had a large appetite (I am not a large woman like my mother, my genetics gave me small bones and a high metabolism so I was a skinny sort until I passed age 30) we did put away a lot of food at our house. Good food. Oh there was the mandatory vegetable and until I was ten or older, I didn’t realize there were other green vegetables outside of squash, peas and stringbeans. We had meat and potatoes, and my dad preferred mashed potatoes and gravy (with meat juices, butter, flour and whole milk) to any other kind of potato. I mixed my peas in with the mashed potatoes to hide the taste … an early sign of my rebellion against healthy foods.

About the time I was seven or eight, I made a marvelous discovery, called the chocolate malted milk. Somehow I just didn’t like plain milk, but this mixture was the nearest thing to ambrosia ever created. Those malts tasted entirely different than the soft-freeze chemical compounds that come from fast food joints today. I pity the children who have never tasted the cholesterol-saturated gen-yew-wine malted milk! Three scoops of decadently fat ice cream, about an ounce of chocolate syrup, whole milk, and malted milk powder. It was spun into a thick liquid and sucked up through large, heavy duty paper straws (no plastic stuff yet) and, not only did the buyer get the original glassful but the mixing tin was left at the table and whatever was left in it was ours to pour out and drink through the somewhat mutilated straw. No, we can’t get them like that any more, the health food gestapo has ruined it all.

Oh, the cost of that delectible chocolate malted? A quarter. Twenty-five cents. But wait a minute … butter was fifteen cents a pound, cheese was around a dime, and those t-bone steaks sold for around forty-five cents a pound, which was outrageously high. Ordinary hamburger was a dime a pound. But my dad was supporting a family of three on $35 a week plus some overtime, so put it in perspective. If he averaged $150 a month, we were living in tall cotton. Or tall kitchen fixins. Now, one trip to a discount warehouse store costs more than $150. So, a quarter was a lot of money to spend on a single malted milk, which is why they were considered something of a luxury. And a child’s allowance of a quarter a week was real money.

Yes, Virginia, there really was a time when coins counted for something other than tax. In fact, bubblegum used to sell for a penny, wrapped or obtained from the bubblegum machine. One penny.

When World War II started, we lived too close to Douglas Aircraft for my dad’s comfort, so he moved us to Hollywood, into a brick apartment house with a basement. Bomb shelter? If we’d been hit, that would have been a sorry graveyard, but then homegrown citizens of the US hadn’t seen war since 1865, few were alive who recalled that at all, and that generation of adults knew zero about bombshelters. Anyway, we moved away from the giant fig tree but not away from corner grocery stores owned by the grocers who sometimes lived upstairs over the market. Small business was the major business in the US in those days.

My mother and I walked to the grocery store almost every day. We had an “apartment” refrigerator, which means a small compartment that held one day’s food and perhaps a pint of ice cream if the ice cube trays were taken out. Food was fresh then, the produce vendors, meat purveyors and dairymen all visited the stores before they opened at 10 a.m. People worked long hours but not under pressure. They came home with tired feet but their nerves weren’t coming apart like loose threads.

I don’t recall exactly when mama began the ritual of having fried chicken, mashed potatoes and gravy, and peas, with a side of fresh or canned fruit, as Sunday dinner. When some ladies she would chat with bragged on how they cut corners on the groceries to save for a new hat or shoes, mama would speak right up and say, “I feed my family the best! I won’t cut corners on good, healthy food.”

Little did we know that forty years hence, the substance called “cholesterol” would take the joy out of eating, and the world’s vegans would conspire to guilt-trip anyone who dared to eat a … gasp … steak! In their worldview, eating steaks and chops is a form of cannibalism, unbefitting the status of human being. Of course, when my family and I were downing our steaks, chops and fried halibut (all with some form of potato or corn), cows weren’t being butchered for being mad, insane and dangerous. I was taking a microbiology class at UCLA when I first learned of E-coli, and never stopped to think it could get into our food supply. As to chickens and other fowl having the flu — forget it. That would be sci-fi, way out, nut-case thinking.

The way my granny seasoned vegetables (mostly “greens”) with bacon grease kept in a can beside the stove, she must have been tossing cholesterol molecules into the air as she walked. But she died at ninety from a staph infection resulting from a fall and fractured hip. Mama passed on to her eternal reward in 1999 at the age of ninety-seven, cholesterol and all.

Over the last sixty-five years our entire culture has changed, and we’re daily subjected to ads about pills that help conditions we never thought of until we heard about it on television. If you aren’t on a cholesterol medication, you’re either a rebel like me who refuses to take it, or you simply don’t manufacture it in your system. Or, maybe, just maybe, you’re a vegan! This same vegan ladyfriend took up an hour of my time on the phone a few months ago telling me about eating nothing but raw foods. Delightful. She can eat all of them she desires. Right now, I am waiting for a friend to bring me a couple of tacos, a soda pop and, for dessert, a fairly tasty sort-of milkshake. It comes from a convenience store and claims to be mixed with gen-yew-wine milk and ice cream. What can I do except believe them? I hate yogurt.

Thus, having been brought up eating the best of what was thought to be good, healthy food in the stone age of the nineteen-thirties and forties, I’ve been intractable about changing my habits.

I’ve seen human beings outlive their minds and their bodies, with healthy hearts and lungs but rotten bones (which runs in my family, it’s called degenerative bone disease, a form of Arthritis). It is not a pretty sight. Actually, I have nothing against eating healthy but I’m not certain how one does that now. We have genetically modified grains, transfats, meats filled with antibiotics, harmones and bug repellents, river waters made toxic from farm wastes containing pesticides, artificial fertilizers and other chemicals. Every time I see one of those blurbs on television (about poisoned river waters) I think “hey, that poison is still in our food, why shouldn’t we swim in it?”

In January of 2006 I awoke from a nap to find I could not walk. I couldn’t stand up. Twelve years and three months after a serious slip and fall on an unbuffed, waxed tile floor in the breakroom at work, my spine had finally taken its last step. It’s as useful now as a wet noodle. The spine had been degenerating since that fall, but slowly. Finally, after three days of noticing that my back seemed more painful than usual, it just popped out of alignment so that the x-rays look like a rough road with a jog in it. The upper body has no support. There is no viable surgery for this, I’ve been to all the orthopedic surgeons in the area who specialize in difficult cases. Mine is medically impossible to correct.

Shock? Yes indeed. I walked to the couch for a nap, bad back and all. I awoke crippled for life. All the warning signs were there, but we humans never quite expect these things to happen the way they do. It’s always “someday” that age, some disability or disease, some unexpected event, will change our lives forever. I gave up writing except for an occasional observation on minor things. Writing from a motorized chair is uncomfortable and seldom attempted, other than to email my friends.

That’s why it seems so stupid for the doctors to want to monitor my cholesterol or take away the few little things in life I can still enjoy. When a person is homebound, the loss of freedom is the worst of all possible circumstances. Freedom has meant everything to me, within the bounds of those laws that make society orderly, laws against murder, assault and violent behavior to name a few.

It’s a sorry world when there are laws against personal murders but no laws against nations killing thousands in that pathetic state called “war.” I may be in a motorchair, but thus far I am free inside my own condo complex, the skies aren’t raining bombs, and my pain medication is available by prescription. The news makes me happy that my time on this planet is running out, not beginning.

So, while Americans by the millions are taking pills by the hundreds of millions, to enrich the pharmaceutical houses by the billions, all I say is, “pass the tacos, please.” I’ll eat while I can, and hope to pass on with a smile on my face for having taken my stand for freedom and personal choice.

Dorothy Anne Seese is a regular columnist for Novakeo.com
Dorothy Anne Seese is retired and lives in Sun City, Arizona. She majored in political science at UCLA in the mid-1950s. Visit her website at: The Flagship. She can be reached at:

Filed Under: Dorothy A. Seese
Tagged: America, Biology, Freedom, Genetics, Money, Society, Television, War

The New World Order, Deliberate Decline into Decadence

June 2, 2006 by Administrator · Leave a Comment

Part Six

In conjunction with the deliberate dumbing down of America, the populace has surreptitiously been indoctrinated to abhor, tolerate, and then embrace the basest behavior in human sexuality. It is not coincidental that the raging, rebellious, out-of-control, bra burning sixties followed the deliberately decadent “research” of Alfred Charles Kinsey (1894-1956), a biologist and a professor of entomology and zoology, given credibility by the Indiana University in Bloomington. His insidious influence drastically affected American culture and society.

Kinsey was brought up in a “strict churchgoing Methodist household where dancing, tobacco, alcohol, and dating were forbidden.” [i] He joined the Boy Scouts at 17 and enjoyed camping and the other outdoor activities associated with scouting, an interest he retained for years. He later claimed that “adolescent homosexuality is a common phenomenon.” [ii] Whether this claim is a result of observation or participation is unknown. He went from agnosticism to atheism by the time he turned 26 – if God does not exist then neither does morality and right and wrong.

In 1914 he entered Bowdoin College in Brunswick, Maine, initially affiliated with the Congregational Church. In 1916 “Kinsey was elected to Phi Beta Kappa and graduated magna cum laude with degrees in biology and psychology. Charles Darwin was such a major influence that Kinsey quoted him in his commencement address when he graduated from Bowdoin.

Kinsey continued his graduate studies at Harvard University’s Bussey Institute, “a hotbed of Darwinism and the ‘New Biology’ that led scientists to envision improvement of the human species through ‘eugenics’.” Bussey Institute “had one of the most highly regarded biology programs in the United States… Kinsey was granted a Sc.D. degree in 1919 by Harvard University.” [iii] During his time at Harvard, Kinsey was active with the Bethany Boys’ Club. Kinsey preferred the company of boys and continued camping with younger males past college graduation.

Kinsey became a big proponent of Aldous Huxley and his brother Julian, a geneticist and the first director-general of UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization). Aldous Huxley wrote Brave New World (1932), required reading in many American schools. “It is often misunderstood as ‘science fiction,’ but was actually an exposé of the cosmopolitan eugenic vision of state-controlled free love and selective breeding.” [iv] Those who embraced the eugenics movement felt nothing but contempt for Judeo Christian beliefs. Unfortunately, “non-admiring” individuals researching the foundations of Kinsey’s personal and professional attitudes are not permitted entrance into the Kinsey Institute archives. [v] There are apparently many secrets that lay hidden from public scrutiny in those archives.

A Kinsey biographer said that he was “one of the scholarly pre-World War II eugenicists who issued a ‘terrifying’ call for the mass sterilization of ‘lower level’ Americans and a breeding plan for superior classes.” [vi] Not surprisingly, Margaret Sanger (1879-1966), a eugenicist and the founder of Planned Parenthood (population control) also believed that the lower classes should not be allowed to have children even if that meant sterilization. “The Margaret Sanger Papers Project is supported by the National Endowment for the Humanities, the National Historical Publications and Records Commission, and such private foundations as the Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Samuel Rubin Foundation, among others.” [vii] The Rockefeller Foundation and others support population control for the rest of us. [viii]

In 1920 Kinsey joined the Department of Zoology at Indiana University in Bloomington as an assistant professor. Once there, he joined a faculty discussion group whose friendship and support helped him to overcome some controversy later.

Despite a misogynistic attitude and frequently abusive treatment toward women, he married Clara Bracken McMillen, a chemistry student at Ohio State, after a casual, platonic relationship. They married on June 3, 1921 and spent their honeymoon on an all weather camping trip, climbing mountains and eating trail foods. They had four children, the first of which died at a young age. Clara and Alfred Kinsey, along with their surviving children, attended church and gave every indication of being a respectable, conservative, average Midwestern family.

While camping as a professor, he was quite comfortable parading around camp in the nude and participating in community baths with his male students. “Kinsey seemed totally oblivious to sexual taboos…as though he was determined to flaunt them…Kinsey had become a sexual rebel…manipulative and aggressive, a man who abused his professional authority and betrayed his trust as a teacher.” [ix]

Kinsey, who had gathered sexual data since 1935, aggressively created interest in a prospective human sexuality class through his controversial lectures. Eager students, future teachers and leaders allegedly petitioned the University to offer this class which he began teaching in 1938. Its popularity increased with each semester despite some justified general objections from other faculty members. However, “Indiana University marketed Kinsey, the free-sex crusader, as a disinterested scholar in an attempt to pacify Kinsey’s colleagues and the public.” [x] For whatever reason, the University president, Herman Wells, unmarried and living at home with his mother “enthusiastically approved Kinsey’s proposals for everything.” [xi]

In his classes, Kinsey promoted biological information devoid of any moral, legal or ethical instruction. He apparently had the same mentality as Magnus Hirschfeld, a professed homosexual, who headed the Institute for Sexology in Berlin, Germany. Hirschfeld was an active proponent of abortion, gay rights, and feminism and a participant in a global sexology movement which demanded worldwide elimination of prudish sex laws and sexual repression. [xii] Kinsey, an alleged Midwestern family man would prove to be a deceptively acceptable advocate of the same social, cultural suicide that Hirschfeld was disseminating in Germany.

Kinsey came to the attention of the Rockefeller Foundation which earmarked funds for sex “research.” The National Research Council and the Medical Division of the Rockefeller Foundation provided thousands of dollars towards studies in sexual physiology and behavior. The Rockefeller Foundation initially helped to organize and fund the American Social Hygiene Association in 1913 to alter public attitudes regarding prostitution, and to work for birth control and other social reforms. During the 1920s faulty research, designed to satisfy a specific agenda, was produced by Margaret Mead and others “while misleading the West with effusive claims about the supposedly positive, happy nature of wildly promiscuous ‘primitive’ sexuality.” [xiii]

Herman Wells, the president of Indiana University was in attendance in New York when the Rockefeller Foundation celebrated its prestigious fiftieth anniversary in 1963. For five full decades they had made important research grants that greatly impacted society. Dr. Robert S. Morison, head of the Medical Division of the Foundation explained to Wells, when asked, that the reason he was invited was because of the wide spread influence of Kinsey’s work which now appeared in the newest and best gynecology book for medical students. “You’re here because we consider the Institute financing one of the most significant things we ever did.” [xiv]

Kinsey, along with specially selected individuals – no prudes, no Christians, no females, began conducting surveys consisting of 350 questions, supposedly approved by the Indiana University Board of Trustees. These “research” assistants had to divulge their sexual history to determine their attitudes. Individuals who expressed negative attitudes towards premarital or extramarital intimacy, homosexuality, or relations with animals were not hired. Project secrecy, a source of power and/or blackmail, was essential in the ostensibly embarrassing sexual surveys which would currently constitute an invasion of privacy or worse – sexual harassment.

Those interviewed were purportedly randomly chosen, ordinary individuals. However, in order to skew the survey results to facilitate his agenda, the Kinsey group “resorted to reclassifying prostitutes as married women.” In addition, most women would be reticent to reveal such personal information. [xv] Obviously, this skewed the research results to accommodate that specific agenda. Other major irregularities should also be noted:

Kinsey interviewed imprisoned sex offenders and portrayed them as normal
Kinsey’s tactics included “unethical, possibly criminal, observations of children”
Kinsey and cohorts classified 1,400+ criminals and sex offenders as normal
Kinsey sought out the worst sex offenders avoiding the more common offenses such as statutory rape
Kinsey professed interviewing many thousands more men than he did
His scientific methodology was flawed – he only used the data that fit his hypothesis
Kinsey and cohorts rejected anyone who had not experienced some form of sexual perversion
Kinsey included so-called feebleminded subjects from the Michigan State Training School
All the subjects were portrayed as average no matter their “unconventional” behavior [xvi]
Clandestine homosexuality is relatively commonplace
Most normal Americans hypocritically and secretly engage in illicit sex
People are commonly bisexual
Prejudice against homosexuality is hypocritical and based on ignorance [xvii]

Kinsey’s notorious books referred to as reports are a result of the imbalanced sex surveys: Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953). “For Kinsey, ‘normal’ was a non-word, as were ‘criminal’ and ‘crime’ … the terms ‘love’ and ‘childbirth’ do not appear in the indices.” Kinsey also rejected the idea of “motherhood” as a legitimate, average aspiration. Kinsey produced spurious statistics of babies born out of wedlock. [xviii] Otherwise the amoral Kinsey and cohorts didn’t define the very serious consequences of irresponsible, depraved behavior – one of the most profound – loss of one’s soul.

It is of interest that Hugh Hefner also published a book Playboy in 1953. Hefner provided generous financial support through his Playboy Foundation for the Kinsey Institute. One can only imagine the kinds of projects this foundation supports. Apparently each had their own targeted audience designed to tear society apart with an “anything goes” mentality. The trash they produced changed the mutual respect that the genders previously expressed for each other. It promoted crimes against the vulnerable, influenced the lonely, destroyed faith, and promoted pervasive flawed information that indoctrinated the masses. For what – money, fame? Money at the expense of morality!!

Kinsey’s books immediately created shock and outrage. “They challenged conventional beliefs about sexuality and because they discussed subjects that had previously been taboo. The belief that heterosexuality and abstinence were both ethical and statistical norms had never before been seriously challenged.” [xix] No matter the initial reactions – Kinsey’s noxious notions received Madison Avenue mass media acceptance.

“The Rockefeller Foundation believed that the media constituted a uniquely powerful force in modern society for imposing the will of the elite on the masses. Secret psychological war projects to control public opinion were supported by America’s tax-exempt foundations. For example, campaigns were developed to induce Americans to support U.S. entry into World War II.” [xx]

Kinsey’s “research” results were compatible with Rockefeller’s New World Order goal of changing “America’s way of life” – altering “breeding patterns”, respect for life and the sanctity of marriage and family. Kinsey contended that there was pervasive promiscuity throughout America in the late 1940s and early 1950s. There wasn’t – it would take a few decades for his influence to permeate the media the schools, and stealthily filter into America’s homes.

There were massive advertisements, free advance copies directed at the medical profession, and wining and dining of journalists. The publicity was designed to create a spontaneous clamor and curiosity for the books possibly similar to the same buildup for Dan Brown’s book and movie – The Da Vinci Code. Well known journalists and personalities endorsed and therefore lent credibility to Kinsey’s sexual philosophies which made them palatable to the public and led to manipulated mass purchases. W. B. Saunders, a very well known medical publisher, authenticated the books by publishing them.

In 1946, The Rockefeller Foundation began providing funds for “library” activities such as Kinsey’s production of very explicit films which soon found their way into medical schools. This activity became so important that a sophisticated photographic laboratory with a full time photographer was hired – all compliments of the Rockefeller Foundation. “Vernon Mark, a professor at Harvard Medical School, noted that the introduction of pornographic films into medical training, and the unwholesome influence of the films on individual doctors and the profession as a whole, was brought about by Kinsey. Physicians had traditionally been a highly respected class of spokesmen for sexual conservatism. Kinsey’s obscenity training served to erode that standard.” [xxi]

After Kinsey died, his close associate Wardell Pomeroy took charge of The Sex and Drug Forum, later called the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality (IASHS) located in San Francisco. This organization spews forth the same decadent, culture destroying refuse that the Kinsey Institute did. It is the “leading institution in the sexology field (controlling conference selections, journal publications, lectures, etc.) IASHS has trained more than 100,000 sex educators, doctors and ‘safe sex’ instructors.” [xxii] After learning about desensitization (eradication of inhibitions) through a program like SAR (Sexual Attitude Restructuring) they are teaching this nation’s children unless parents have opted to home-school and save their offspring from nefarious programs like “No Child Left Behind.” The mass media has gradually desensitized anyone foolish enough to watch and/or read it day after day.

Then there is SIECUS (Sex Information and Education Council of the United States) which was initially funded by the Playboy Foundation. Were parents given an opportunity to evaluate any of the data or corporate connections? Do parents know that some of the same people who worked with Kinsey sit on the SIECUS Sex Education Curriculum Board? Just exactly what have they been teaching your children? Unfortunately, teachers who have also been influenced by this so-called credible “research” spend more hours influencing children than a lot of parents do.

Pomeroy explains that Kinsey’s “grand scheme” was to move “American society from its traditional moral standard based on marriage, to one predicated on ‘free love’. Images intended to promote and legitimize deviant behaviors were critical to this moral and cultural conversion.” [xxiii] He has attained a large measure of success – Our moral decline is not a coincidence but a devilish design. Rampant immorality tarnishes our national character. One does not have to look hard to discover the cause and effect surge of homosexuality, pervasive illicit sexual activity, loss of peace, self esteem, innocence, and self discipline often followed by physical consequences such as abortion, illness and death.

Kinsey’s books, data, fetid films, and his despicable amoral, totally insensitive brutal behavior and utter disrespect for others are unconscionable. He did not merit the title of scientist but brings dishonor to those engaged in true scientific research for the benefit of mankind. He was nothing more than an educated complicit, compromised sexual predator/criminal that was bent on bringing others down to his hellish level of perversity and immorality while destroying the basic unit of society – the family. And, unfortunately, his influence has outlived him.

“What is liberty without wisdom and without virtue? It is the greatest of all possible evils, for it is folly, vice, and madness, without restraint…” Edmund Burke

[i] Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences, by Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D. 2nd Edition, Revised & Expanded 1998, 2000, p. 4. This is a must-read book that will open anyone’s eyes to what has occurred in America.
[ii] Ibid, p. 8
[iii] Alfred Kinsey, Wikipedia
[iv] Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences, by Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D., 5
[v] Ibid, p. 5
[vi] Ibid, p. 5
[vii] The Margaret Sanger Papers Project
[viii] Robbing the Cradle: The Rockefellers’ Support of Planned Parenthood
[ix] Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences, by Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D., p. 10
[x] Ibid, p. 25
[xi] Ibid, p. 25
[xii] Ibid, p. 23
[xiii] Ibid, p. 28
[xiv] Ibid, p. 80
[xv] Ibid, p. 31
[xvi] Ibid, p. 52-60
[xvii] Ibid, p. 94
[xviii] Ibid, p. 65
[xix] Kinsey Reports
[xx] Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences, by Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D., p. 38
[xxi] Ibid, p. 79
[xxii] Ibid, p. 80
[xxiii] Ibid, p. 83

Deanna Spingola is a regular columnist for Novakeo.com
Deanna Spingola has been a quilt designer and is the author of two books. She has traveled extensively teaching and lecturing on her unique methods. She has always been an avid reader of non-fiction works designed to educate rather than entertain. She is active in family history research and lectures on that topic. Currently she is the director of the local Family History Center. She has a great interest in politics and the direction of current government policies, particularly as they relate to the Constitution. Her website is at: www.spingola.com
email:

Filed Under: Deanna Spingola
Tagged: America, Biology, Christianity, Elections, Government, History, India, Money, New World Order, Politics, Secrecy, Society, War, Weather

« Previous Page

Quotidian Acumen

How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.

Adolf Hitler

Feeds

Rick Warren introduces “The Devil Plan”

America: Why Ur Peeps B So Dumb?

Secular Humanism Fizzles, Cosmic Humanism Flourishes

Overpopulation in 21st Century America: Humans and the Rest of the Planet

Isolation and Defamation: The cost of thinking differently

Overpopulation in 21st Century America: Nobody Ever Dies of Overpopulation

Depopulation by Government Edict

Death of the West: Our Sexual Identity Crisis

Why Won’t Universal Healthcare Be Provided?

Urban Cavemen

America Galloping Towards Its Greatest Crisis In The 21st Century

Next Added 100 Million Americans: Environmental Refugees

Nobody Ever Dies of Overpopulation

The New World Order, Separation of Church & Hate

I’d Rather Enjoy Life

The New World Order, Deliberate Decline into Decadence

Subscribe

Follow On Google +

Quotidian Acumen

Talking About

Viral Today

Featured Videos

Top Hits

Feeds