But as for me and my house ...
Even after becoming a British colony in 1890, Uganda suffered with inter-tribal warfare for millennia. When Uganda gained independence in 1962, Russian-funded, Marxist guerrillas and Saudi-funded, Islamists moved in to derail the young nation and continue the slaughter of its people. If these things weren't enough to bear, in the 1970s, brutal President, Idi Amin Dada, persisted in murdering his own people (possibly 300,000+). With this history, one wouldn't expect much to change in Uganda; but, the country has made great strides toward becoming a true republic, including elections and prescribed citizens rights. Uganda celebrated 50 years of independence in 2012. Current President, Yoweri Museveni, stood before his people and formally dedicated the nation to God (only the third nation in history to do so); and, repented of his sins and the sins of the whole nation, as the kings of Israel did in ancient times. Here is what President Museveni said: "Father God in heaven, today we stand here as Ugandans, to thank you for Uganda. We are proud that we are Ugandans and Africans. We thank you for all your goodness to us. I stand here today to close the evil past and especially in the last 50 years … I stand here on my own behalf and on behalf of my predecessors to repent. We ask for your forgiveness. "We confess these sins, which have greatly hampered our national cohesion and delayed our political, social, and economic transformation. We confess sins of idolatry and witchcraft, which are rampant in our land. We confess sins of shedding innocent blood, sins of political hypocrisy, dishonesty, intrigue, and betrayal. Forgive us of sins of pride, tribalism, and sectarianism; sins of laziness, indifference, and irresponsibility; sins of corruption and bribery that have eroded our national resources; sins of sexual immorality, drunkenness, and debauchery; sins of unforgiveness, bitterness, hatred and revenge. “Lord forgive us and give us a new beginning. Give us a heart to love you, to fear you, and to seek you. Take away from us all the above sins.” "We want to dedicate this nation to you so that you will be our God and guide. We want Uganda to be known as a nation that fears God, and as a nation whose foundations are firmly rooted in righteousness and justice to fulfill what the Bible says in Psalm 33:12: Blessed is the nation, whose God is the Lord. A people you have chosen as your own. I renounce all the evil foundations and covenants that were laid in idolatry and witchcraft. I renounce all the satanic influence on this nation. And I hereby covenant Uganda to you, to walk in your ways and experience all your blessings forever. I pray for all these in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen." ---- ---- ---- Upon landing in the 'new world', British colonists enacted Compacts with God to govern their towns. It was the people's faith throughout American history, and not the popularly taught strivings of a few founders, that built this country to remain a nation dedicated to God as it was from its inception. (Over 80 of those Compacts were used to provide the content of the Declaration of Independence.) Since this nation was founded upon a contract with God, breaking that contract by removing his laws and principles as our laws and principles has already begun to have devastating consequences. Our leaders must confess their sins and the sins of the nation in order to have a renewed relationship with God. But, I can see nothing that would lead me to believe that will ever happen. When George Washington was inaugurated on April 30, 1789, he stood on the balcony at Federal Hall in New York City with his hand on the Bible, and warned: "No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than the people of the United States." I dwell on this prospect with every satisfaction which an ardent love for my Country can inspire: since there is no truth more thoroughly established, than that there exists in the economy and course of nature, an indissoluble union between virtue and happiness, between duty and advantage, between the genuine maxims of an honest and magnanimous policy, and the solid rewards of public prosperity and felicity: Since we ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven, can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained: And since the preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the Republican model of Government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people." After the inauguration ceremony, the President, Vice-President, the Senate, and House of Representatives, proceeded to St. Paul’s Chapel, where a service was led by the chaplain of Congress. This nation was a nation of faith in the Almighty God and belief in his power to form and dissolve nations. As if to prove God's unhappiness with the direction the United States has chosen, when the towers fell on September 11, 2001, the foundation of Federal Hall was cracked yet, the Chapel was unharmed - protected by a sycamore. This nation has much for which to answer to its Creator. If national repentance does not begin soon, it will be too late. Wouldn't it be nice to have leaders in this country like President Museveni.
0 Comments
Another company joins those who believe the healthcare mandates violate our Constitutional right to freedom to observe religious beliefs without interference. Thirty-one lawsuits have already been filed, including seven states, two individuals, and three organizations. Why? Many Catholics, Christians, and Jews already use birth control. It was not that long ago that all insurance plans excluded all forms of birth control. It was a personal choice and not medically necessary. With changes brought about by Planned Parenthood (see article from Dec. 2012) and the intrusion of federal government into citizens' personal lives, irresponsible behavior has been sanctioned for several generations under the guise of the inability of underprivileged people to contribute as does the rest of society. This is patently untrue. The 'underprivileged' are being kept slaves to the federal government by requirements, including not having bank accounts and saving money, in order to receive assistance. Taxpayers have been forced to fund this great deception, and the result is a society with an increasing percentage of people capable of working, but who feel it is their due to be provided for by those who do work. It is in this light that I reprint this letter of explanation from the family-owned Hobby Lobby. Here is a business run the way I recall all businesses being run when I was young. They are Christian. While I disagree that their principles are 'Christian principles', but originate in the Commandments given by God to the Israelites during the Exodus from Egypt, and the fact that Sunday is the prescribed day of rest (Sabbath), I stand behind the fact that once conceived, a 'fetus' is a human being. I reiterate: if a person who murders a pregnant woman is charged with two murders, then the fetus is just as human as the mother - at all times. Hobby Lobby has prospered under their faithful principles and so have their employees! Under Obamacare, it might be better for them, and other organizations like them, to close their doors rather than serve man rather than God? "We’re Christians, and we run our business on Christian principles. I’ve always said that the first two goals of our business are (1) to run our business in harmony with God’s laws, and (2) to focus on people more than money. And that’s what we’ve tried to do. We close early so our employees can see their families at night. We keep our stores closed on Sundays, one of the week’s biggest shopping days, so that our workers and their families can enjoy a day of rest. We believe that it is by God’s grace that Hobby Lobby has endured, and he has blessed us and our employees. We’ve not only added jobs in a weak economy, we’ve raised wages for the past four years in a row. Our full-time employees start at 80% above minimum wage. But now, our government threatens to change all of that. A new government health care mandate says that our family business MUST provide what I believe are abortion-causing drugs as part of our health insurance. Being Christians, we don’t pay for drugs that might cause abortions, which means that we don’t cover emergency contraception, the morning-after pill or the week-after pill. We believe doing so might end a life after the moment of conception, something that is contrary to our most important beliefs. It goes against the Biblical principles on which we have run this company since day one. If we refuse to comply, we could face $1.3 million PER DAY in government fines. Our government threatens to fine job creators in a bad economy. Our government threatens to fine a company that’s raised wages four years running. Our government threatens to fine a family for running its business according to its beliefs. It’s not right. I know people will say we ought to follow the rules; that it’s the same for everybody. But that’s not true. The government has exempted thousands of companies from this mandate, for reasons of convenience or cost. But it won’t exempt them for reasons of religious belief. So, Hobby Lobby – and my family – are forced to make a choice. With great reluctance, we filed a lawsuit today, represented by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, asking a federal court to stop this mandate before it hurts our business. We don’t like to go running into court, but we no longer have a choice. We believe people are more important than the bottom line and that honoring God is more important than turning a profit." May God bless them in their efforts to remain faithful! Note: Scimitar (Islamic sword) & gas mask The reason the United Nations wants to remove guns from the American people is simple: A society able to defend itself cannot be easily controlled. No dictator has allowed those he rules to own guns. For years, the American public has been propagandized to believe guns are evil and too easily accessible. Over the years, laws have made it more difficult to obtain guns, yet gun crimes have increased. Obviously, the laws don't work. Fact: Those who intend to break the law, don't find ways around gun laws. According to those who seek total removal of our Second Amendment right, there is only one answer: remove the guns totally. Yet, the FBI reported that hammers were used more often than guns! So: no more hammers, either? Most likely, guns or hammers won't be a threat to most Americans: the greatest threat to your health and longevity are vaccines, fluoride, engineered foods, sweeteners, chem-trails dumping aluminum into the atmosphere, and the myriad of other things the FDA has pronounced 'safe.' (I can only wonder at the many advertisements pandering money to those who took drugs and/or had procedures pronounced 'safe' by the FDA that were anything but.) Here, in Jesse Ventura's show, 'Conspiracy Theory', is a very small sample of the truth. This is not all the information, but it will give you a 'heads up' about what is happening. The plan is evil in its origins and has been orchestrated since ancient times. Generation upon generation willing to work toward the end result with no guarantee of seeing it happen. Now, that is something to wonder about! Their 'god' has made promises and these 'families' have maintained wealth and power. The evil plan sounds so unbelievable, no one wants to believe it! This is no conspiracy theory - it is the truth! Four years of study of the Illuminati, Rothschilds, Bilderbergers, Satanism, Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations, et al, has convinced me. Now, it is time for you to start learning the truth - if you're not too scared. Knotted gun sculpture outside the UN building From its inception, the United States of America has been hated around the world because of its successes. In the past, countries attacked the United States with "armies by day," but now it is with "guerillas by night" that their insidious plan to remove the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution - the only provision which ensures continued freedom from tyranny - is in the works. If successful in their efforts to dismantle the Bill of Rights, this will be the only war in U.S. history that will result in our defeat and enslavement. Is there any wonder why attacks against vulnerable citizens are occurring in greater frequency? I could not argue the importance of the right to bear arms any better than Wayne Lapierre in his Epilogue from "The Global War on Your Guns: Inside the U.N. Plan To Destroy the Bill of Rights": "Stripped bare of cheap drama and shrill emotion, the right to keep and bear arms in defense of self, family, and country is ultimately self-evident. Reduced to its essence, our Second Amendment avows profound respect for human freedom, worth, and self-destiny. "But two centuries after the Second Amendment was codified into our culture, the United Nations declares that this civil liberty is a cause of the world's gun problems. In turn, it claims unspoken jurisdiction over sovereign American citizens by crafting a treaty that calls us to surrender our firearm freedom to their global thugocracy and accept whatever lesser standard of freedom - if any - the U.N. deems appropriate. "Indeed, so insistent and insulting is the U.N. mandate that it chose to conduct its largest ever global gun ban conference on U.S. soil on the Fourth of July, 2006. "The global gun ban treaty is, then, a ticking time bomb - just a gavel-slam away from becoming the law of our land once enough sympathetic politicians occupy the White House and the U.S. Senate. Which may be very soon. "...I have shown that the U.N. anti-gun axis is no sideshow struggling on a shoestring. It is a global collective of five hundred member organizations from a hundred nations, well funded through a maze of countries, grants, foundations, and benefactors. Their proclaimed mission is to endow themselves with global control of all firearms, long guns or gand guns, civilian or military, legal or illegal, everywhere, for everyone. "Yes, that means you. "They don't stop there. If you study the words of those who advocate global gun control, you will find sweeping police powers offensive not just to the right to keep and bear arms, but to the entire Bill of Rights. You will find that you are subject to record-keeping, oversight, inspections, supervision, tracking, and tracing. You will read about surveillance, documentation, verification, paper trails, and massive data banks for new global agencies and international data centers where your privacy is on display. "But what you will not find are any provisions by which oppressed people may be liberated from tyrants and dictators. You will not find the barest mention of anyone's rights to self-defense, to privacy, to property, to due process, or protection of personal freedoms of any kind. Nor will you find demands for arrest, prosecution, conviction, and mandatory sentencing or imprisonment of illicit traffickers or gunrunners. "Such gaping omissions expose the U.N. mission for what it is: a powerful reemergence of the socialist imaginings of the twentieth century. Fantasies that prey upon citizens who fall for social engineering, like students on campus, journalists in media, the intellectuals in think tanks, self-important U.N. leaders, and insulted billionaires with too much time and money on their hands. "The U.N. is a gang of governments led by unelected elitists who think they know better how to live our lives, how to spend our money, how to educate our children, and how to protect our homes. People who believe that, if they could just be in charge, they could make our lives perfect. "How perfect are their peoples' lives? None of the one hundred countries backing the U.N. gun ban allows its citizens the individual freedoms guaranteed to Americans in our treasured Bill of Rights. On the contrary, most of those countries openly flaunt the institutionalized anti-American sentiment so pervasive at the U.N. "What's more, the U.N. counts among its "members in good standing" nearly fifty dictatorships and at least six states that sponsor terrorism. Combined, these "members in good standing" of the U.N. have murdered more than 100 million of their own citizens in the past century. That's four times more than died in their wars. "The U.N. proves that among the world's police are its worst offenders. Member countries are notorious for corruption, greed, scandal, and butchery. "The Sudan - the only country that still allows slavery - is in charge of the U.N. Human Rights Commission. Human rights gladiators Libya and Cuba are seated members. "The U.N. was blind to mass murder by Pol Pot in Cambodia, a U.N. member. The U.N. famously ignored genocide in member state Rwanda, where nearly one million people were slaughtered - not by guns but with machetes. Yet your Second Amendment rights make the world a more dangerous place? "The U.N. presided over the Oil-for-Food debacle, where billions of dollars varnished into the pockets of insiders. As this book goes to press, U.N. staffers are under investigation for a sex-for-food ring in West Africa, drug trafficking in Cambodia, sex slaves in the Balkans, extortion in Kenya, and food program fraud in South Africa. And that's just for starters. "Why should the United Nations, with its shocking record of inaction, failure, and corruption, be given supremacy over any honest man or woman on the globe? We can no more leave our freedom in the hands of freedom's enemies than drop off our child at Molester's Daycare. "Still, too many fall for the U.N.'s bargain: If you will surrender your right to own a firearm to the new Global Godmother, you will be safer. "But wait. If you study nations where the gun banners had their way, you'll not only decline the bet, you'll condemn the gambler. The people of Australia, England, Canada, South Africa - and others who voluntarily turned over their guns - now enjoy far less safety in return for their freedom. "The promise of "you'll gain security if you'll give up this liberty" is precisely the bargain our forefathers rejected. America must reject it again and forever, especially in the form of foreign intervention. "So we are at a crossroads. This is America's cultural war gone global. With every sun that sets, our planet is growing not more free but less free, as more and more nations cave to the pressures of the U.N. and international gun prohibitionists. "The United States is the last standing truly free nation, offering every law-abiding human the greatest measure of freedom mankind has ever experienced. "The Bill of Rights is why that's so. The Bill of Rights is not ours to possess or revise. It is only ours to enjoy, to preserve, and then to bequeath. In their absence, we must speak out for the visionaries who founded our great nation." Criminals and Dictators prefer unarmed victims. Courtesy of Breitbart.com by BEN SHAPIRO 24 Dec 2012 While liberals on Twitter pointed at the shooting of four firefighters in upstate New York as evidence that more gun control is necessary, NBC News reports that the gunman, one William Spengler, was already banned from owning guns. Spengler served 17 years in prison for killing his grandmother with a hammer in 1980. He was convicted only of manslaughter, and was paroled in 1998. It seems that stronger sentencing for convicted murderers might be a more worthwhile goal of liberals seeking to prevent gun violence. Spengler shot the firefighters just before 6 a.m. ET in Webster, New York. He’d set the fire, then waited for the firefighters to show up before shooting them. “It does appear that it was a trap that was set,” said Webster Police Chief Gerald Pickering. “People who get up in the middle of the night to fight fires, they don’t expect to get shot and killed.” Spengler shot himself. New York already has some of the most stringent gun laws in the nation. Felons, like Spengler, are already barred by law from owning guns according to federal law. Brand USA was established in May, 2011, under the Travel Promotion Act of 2010 to "increase inbound travel to the United States, resulting in increased U.S. exports and increased employment", according to the website. While the program was to be funded through a combination of private and public support, a $10 fee was to be assessed on travelers from countries who participate in the Visa Waiver Program to be deposited in a special fund in the U.S. Treasury. The Act specifies that Brand USA can draw from this fund if it receives matching donations from the private sector. In 2012 Brand USA received two dollars from the Treasury for every private dollar it collected and one dollar from the Treasury for every private dollar in subsequent years. The Act allows only 20% of the donations be received be in cash - the remainder in in-kind donations. Unfortunately, this effort has been an economic boon only to those associated with the 'public-private' company. The Daily Caller reports it obtained documents revealing "extensive waste and mismanagement at the public-private partnership". The Washington Free Beacon reports in its article, “The Cronyism Board Tourism Board Stacked with Obama Cronies” that numerous Brand USA Board members were 'heavy' contributors to President Obama and Democratic campaigns. Documents show that many members of the Board of Directors of Brand USA are also significant cash contributors to the corporation. Of the eleven members of the board, eight have made cash contributions to the corporation. The board members were appointed by John Connor, director of the Office of White House Liaison at the U.S. Department of Commerce. Mr. Connor led Obama’s LGBT outreach efforts in the northeastern U.S. during the 2008 presidential campaign. An October Congressional report, “Initial Investigation of Brand USA and the Department of Commerce’s Oversight,” detailed some of the partnership's unusual activities. And KTS Business Consulting performed a comprehensive audit of Brand USA the agency’s management. According to the audit, “Although The Brand USA has a mission statement, not one staff member was able to recite it.” “Furthermore, a majority of the staff did not have any idea what the mission was. … It became very clear that The Brand USA needs a strong vision. Staff’s responses were all varied, and it identified that there is not a consensus on the direction of the organization." Further, Brand USA "[s]taff spends money without any checks and balances or funds tied to a budget.” The Report highlights serious concerns about how the federal matching funds were spent and asserts abuses by Brand USA in its pursuit of unjustified federal funds, and alleging Brand USA has refused to fully respond to Congressional inquiries. The October 1, 2012 deadline (when “donations” to Brand USA were reduced to a one-to-one value) created an urgency at Brand USA that led to numerous questionable donations. Amtrak donated $10,000 in cash, in addition to train tickets, corporate information technology support, and 22 luxury baseball seats. These weren't just good seats, but located in the 'Lincoln Suite'. Forbes.com reported, “[t]he Lincoln Suites, starting at $300,000 per year, include access to the private Stars and Stripes membership club, a private entrance off the main concourse, and inside the suite, marble countertops with an induction heating range to keep catered food warm.” How does a luxury night at a baseball game further Brand USA’s mission? Amtrak defended its contributions, stating they originated from ticket revenue; however, Amtrak's ticket revenue is not easily distinguishable from federal taxpayer funds provided to the company - currently, $1.5 billion annually. Essentially, Brand USA received additional federal funds from Amtrak. Brand USA also attempted to collect over $10 millions dollars in federal funds for the market value of advertising it received free of charge from newspaper articles and television interviews, and the value of time spent by the company's Chairman. A 2 1/2-minute interview with Travel Channel International was valued at $4.9 million by the company; and, an interview with Eurosport was given a value of $272,172. A $4.9 million donation alone would have netted the company almost $9 million in federal funds. Board members also inflated 'expenses' as donations. One trip to London by Board member, Randy Garfield (Disney Destinations), listed the total cost of round trip airfrare from Orlando to London as $10,037.60, although the roundtrip direct flight on British Airways from Orlando to London was $1,951.92. Tom Klein of Sabre Holdings, listed a $379 in car fare between meetings on October 5, 2011, and $95 on November 11, 2011, with hotel charges of $365. The fare from Union Station to the Capitol Hilton was $13. The distance from the Corporation for Travel Promotion to Reagan National Airport is 5.5 miles, and taxi fare is $24. And, the General Services Administration permits a maximum per diem for lodging in Washington D.C. of $183. Fortunately, the Department of Commerce refused the above 'donations'. Brand USA is less than two years old and has a spending record that rivals any government agency, including:
Chief Communications Officer, Anne Madison, insists that 85% of the organization’s funding is spent on marketing and programs to meet its goals. Madison claims an increase of 12% for Canadians' “intent to visit” the U.S., 14% for Japanese, and 14% in the United Kingdom since Brand USA's launch. However, actual numbers to prove such increases are not accessible. What value does 'intent' have? Brand USA was established to increase tourism and create jobs: a proposal which would have meager economic impact, at best. It seems the only jobs it has created is for those who are involved with the partnership. I submit - once again - responsibility and accountability are non-existent at the federal level these days. President Barack Obama’s Chairman of the Council on Jobs and Competitiveness (jobs czar) continues his position at General Electric. Jeff Imelt, endorsed China's socialist state in a December 10th interview, saying, “state-run communism may not be your cup of tea, but their government works.” China’s government is presently updating the country’s infrastructure; especially, coal-fired and nuclear power plants, electricity transmission lines, and railway lines. General Electric builds and exports all of these items; and, therefore, has not been impacted as greatly by the deep, four-year-long recession. Meanwhile, back in the U.S.(S.R.), Obama’s economic management has consisted of enormous increases in spending: welfare (not including Obamacare), aid to immigrants, homosexuals, and unmarried people, and tens of billions on green energy companies (at least two have claimed bankruptcy and also received tax relief in addition to free taxpayer funds). Unlike China, U.S. citizens and companies have been doubly encumbered by environmental regulations, including the forced purchase of 'new generation' energy saving products. Guess who manufactures those products? General Electric (and other companies). Obama's efforts cannot spur economic growth; and, can only drain the already suffering economy and overwhelm the taxpayer with decades of maintaining the cost of the debt, with no ability to pay it off. Yet, Obama wa Very telling of the state of the U.S. economy is Imelt's statement that in the next three years: “we will sell more [energy producing gas-turbines] in Algeria than the United States.” Is there any wonder why we are in the predicament we are in? It all began with Margaret Sanger (1879 – 1966), a nurse who popularized the term ‘birth control’, opened the first birth control clinic, established the organization that eventually became the Planned Parenthood Foundation of America (PPFA), and contributed to a Supreme Court case legalizing contraception in the United States. Influenced by her mother’s 18 pregnancies resulting in 11 children in 22 years, her father's atheism, and the suffering she saw in her nursing career from self-induced abortions, Sanger believed birth control would enable women to lead healthier lives and obtain greater equality in society. If one takes only these facts into account Sanger did some good for women in society. Margaret Sanger claimed to be Episcopalian; however, she admitted that traveling the world influenced her belief of developing the "divine within us" by works we perform. This is from Theosophy: teachings which are ancient Babylonian in origin. (See Video @ 1:57-@ 2:34) I will go into these beliefs in a later article under the Biblical History tab. Mandatory Sterilization Sanger advocated mandatory sterilization of ‘insane and feebleminded’ people: "Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying . . . demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism." Margaret Sanger, from "The Pivot of Civilization.” "The most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective." "The undeniably feebleminded should indeed, not only be discouraged but prevented from propagating their kind.” Both quotes from Margaret Sanger, article in the Birth Control Review, 1921. Margaret Sanger believed sterilizing the "unfit," "irresponsible and reckless," and those "whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers" would be the "salvation of American civilization”; also stating, "there is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped." Purposes Revealed In 1921, Sanger founded the American Birth Control League (ABCL) that later merged with other groups to become Planned Parenthood. The historical record reveals the underlying motives and resulting actions of those involved in the organizations. In March, 1925, ABCL member, Dr. S. Adolphus Knopf, warned of the menace posed by the "black" and "yellow" peril. Harvard graduate, Lothrop Stoddard, was another racist colleague of Sanger. Stoddard wrote, The Rising Tide of Color against White Supremacy and described the eugenic practices of the Third Reich as "scientific" and "humanitarian." Colleague, Dr. Harry Laughlin, promoted cleansing America's human "breeding stock" to rid it of "bad strains". In 1916, Sanger asserted the use of birth control was "mandated" in situations, such as, "when parents, though normal, had subnormal children", "when husband and wife were adolescent", and "when the earning capacity of the father was inadequate"; because "… anyone, no matter how ignorant, how diseased mentally or physically, how lacking in all knowledge of children, seemed to consider he or she had the right to become a parent.” Here are some sample titles of articles in Birth Control Review, founded by Sanger in 1917:
The ‘Negro Project’ Dr. Gamble's November, 1939, memorandum, "Suggestion for Negro Project," proposed methods for major birth-rate reductions in the black population: eugenics. According to the project proposal, “The mass of Negroes, particularly in the South, still breed carelessly and disastrously, with the result that the [population] increase among Negroes…is from that portion…least intelligent and fit, and least able to rear children properly.” The proposal suggested hiring three or four “colored Ministers, preferably with social service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities” to give the organization's reasons for birth control. The proposal also suggested the organization place black leaders in positions where they would appear to be in charge as a way to offset the extermination plot perception. Sanger responded, "We do not want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten that idea out if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." The ABCL presented birth control as both a vehicle to economic improvement and a positive health measure for mother and living children. The Chicago Defender (a periodical for the African American community) of January 10, 1942, contained an article avowing birth control as a remedy for economic woes , since ". . . it raises the standard of living by enabling parents to adjust the family size to the family income," and reassurance that birth control " . . . is no operation. It is no abortion. Abortion kills life after it has begun. Birth Control is neither harmful nor immoral." [Note: Abortion was considered murder.] In 1942, Planned Parenthood Negro Division board member, Bishop David H. Sims, offered his assistance to begin the "softening process"; and, by 1949, the ‘Negro Project’ had a foothold with acceptance by most black leaders. But, the African American community was not as quick to accept the propaganda. Donald B. Strauss, chairman of Planned Parenthood-World Population, continued efforts toward acceptance of Planned Parenthood by appealing to the Democratic party to amend their stated policies on birth control in 1964. By 1970, Planned Parenthood president, Alan Guttmacher, noted successes in the tax-subsidized birth control programs stating, "Birth control services are proliferating in areas adjacent to concentrations of black population." Guttmacher suggested other organizations and not Planned Parenthood promote the doctrine that ‘normal’ American families contain 2.1 children; maintaining that family size would decrease if abortion and contraception were easily accessible and government funded. However, Guttmacher admitted that controlling the world population could eventually require enforcement which is what the UN and global government is working toward. Societal Mayhem Despite its internally-stated intentions, Planned Parenthood’s publicized image continued to be tolerance and minority participation. The birth control movement, Sager claimed, freed the mind from "sexual prejudice and taboo, by demanding the frankest and most unflinching re-examination of sex in its relation to human nature and the basis of human society.” Maybe so, but the movement also created a myriad of issues with which society has since struggled: promiscuity, rampant teenage pregnancy, single-parenthood, and erosion of the family (the bedrock of society), etc. However, it must be noted that the societal issues Planned Parenthood created reinforce the perceived need for its continued existence, and even its expansion. Eugenics, Not Choice Let us not forget Sanger’s declaration that the disabled and the African American should not reproduce, the basis of eugenics. Eugenics, envisioned by Francis Galton (Charles Darwin's cousin), seeks to create improvement of the human population through planned 'breeding'; and, eliminates those who Galton thought were inferior: African Americans and the disabled. It was popular until Adolph Hitler. Through its continued pandering to the youth and minorities while utilizing monetary support from the taxpayer, Planned Parenthood has grown to include 129 affiliates, operating around 800 ‘health centers’ that assist about 5 million women per year. Its website puts it this way: “Millions of women face unplanned pregnancies every year. If you are deciding what to do about an unplanned pregnancy, you have a lot to think about. You have three options — abortion, adoption, and parenting.” Am I being sensitive that abortion is first on their list? “If you're trying to decide if parenting is the right option for you, you may find it helpful to list the advantages and disadvantages of having a child. Think about what advantages or disadvantages are most important to you. Consider your feelings and values about raising a child, and what you want for your life and for your family or future family.” Won’t Junior just be thrilled that his mother made a ‘Pros’ and ‘Cons’ list like he was a car! But, there’s more … “What are Some of the Advantages and Disadvantages of Parenting? “Though parenting is hard work, it brings many rewards. Being a parent can be exciting and deeply rewarding. It can help you grow, understand yourself better, and enhance your life. “But parents often give up a lot for their children. Meeting a child's needs can be very challenging. “Many people find that having a child can test even the strongest relationship. And if you are single parenting, you may find it more difficult to find and keep a relationship.” I'm not surprised: It’s all about ‘me’! What will having a child do to enhance my life, what will I have to give up, and – gasp – I may never find a husband! Is Planned Parenthood reflecting societal views or influencing them? In fact, Planned Parenthood claims to promote choice, but their website is slanted toward abortion, making it appear widespread and not a big deal: “Abortions are very common. In fact, 1 out of 3 women in the U.S. have an abortion by the time they are 45 years old.” How many adoptions do they assist with among this same group of women? Family Destruction The actions of Planned Parenthood have been and continue to be destructive to the family; and, therefore, to the nation. Admittedly, American women have reaped rewards from birth control. But, for every gain there is also loss. Smaller families resulted in the appearance of an increased standard of living, but that was actually in response to the two-person, wage-earning, married couples that became the norm in 1980s when home prices began skyrocketing (due to Congressional mandates of the 1970s which made it mandatory for banking institutions to offer a percentage of loans to the underprivileged and increased demand). Families have since struggled with balancing 'needs' and 'desires' while living within their means. (This was part of the second step in erosion of the family: a major factor in the fall of every society in history.) Is the American family better financially or in the ‘happiness’ quotient today? Not by a long-shot. The 'benefits' Sanger utilized to promote her agenda have never been achieved despite billions of taxpayer dollars being given to and promises made by Planned Parenthood. Conclusion Sanger's intent was revealed via the articles published in Birth Control Review. Then, Sanger and those involved in her organizations formed a plan, secretly cultivated society to implement that plan, and continue to work secretly toward completing it. The foundational motivations of Planned Parenthood, and the destructive actions taken as a result, should be the deciding factors for eliminating the organization. Planned Parenthood refuses to concede that their founder was less interested in creating a better life for all women than creating a world befitting her theosophical, racist and eugenics beliefs, because it would be their undoing to admit it still works toward those goals. The devious methodology used to implement the secret mission statement behind this organization denies equality in the ‘reproductive rights’ it espouses to promote, is blatant coercion, and is just as deplorable as genocide. My final observation is this: If someone offers you something for nothing, the cost is usually greater than you imagined. In this case, the offer was freedom and equality for women; the cost was our collective souls and our nation. The media called us 'conspiracy theorists', as if we were crazy. I repeat, if Woodward and Bernstein weren't conspiracy theorists, Watergate would have simply been a local robbery story. (What was in the safe that was important enough for the Warren commission to disallow into testimony in their second review of the Kennedy assassination?) We will need a survival guide as ObamaCare hits the American public with at least 20 new taxes (as more people read the new law, they are recognizing more and more taxes it contains), requiring more government expansion and Internal Revenue Service employees to oversee the imposition of those taxes on U.S. citizens. While more and more Americans call for tax reform to a flat tax which would eliminate the need for the IRS, tax code and the indebtedness of Americans to pay for the unnecessary IRS policing arm of the federal government, Congress how revealed, once again, that it is not a servant to the people but a master over them. There were those who warned of increased costs and death panels and the media laughed. Why do you think that is? Because the media has been enlisted to advance the propaganda of the global regime for decades. Kennedy warned the media and us. Do you think I'm crazy? Keep reading. The National Review published its view of the Top Ten Worst Things in ObamaCare:
The effects of the new taxes are obvious. Here are some effects already taking place on healthcare: Example: Nursing care for patients under observation will not be paid under ObamaCare and reimbursement for the patient's room is limited to $400 per day. It has been widely reported that the need for nurses is still great; however, hiring of new nurses was frozen months ago as hospitals became aware of the limitations imposed by ObamaCare. Nurses will care for a greater number of patients. This fact alone will an effect on the ability to provide patient care. Hospitals will be graded and paid based upon patient satisfaction surveys. With the drain on hospital services due to the cuts in payments from ObamaCare, how many patients do you think will give the hospital a good rating? Hospitals foresee receipts from the federal government reduced further as their ability to provide hotel-like services patients demand diminishes through budget cuts. Doctors who came to the United States to study and practice are presently seeking to leave the U.S. A greater number of surgeries will be performed outpatient due to the cuts in payments from ObamaCare; and, as the need to cut costs increases, the availability for surgical intervention will become increasingly scarce. We are already seeing the effects of nationalized healthcare upon the medical system in this country - and it is just as the Canadians and Britons warned. The young and healthy will do reasonably well; but, those with infirmities and health concerns will find it increasingly more difficult to obtain the healthcare we have become accustomed to, and which people from around the globe have come to the United States to procure. I find it absurd that the American public was horrified when indifferent panels of the insurance companies denied patients medical care in the past, but are willingly giving that power to another indifferent panel in the federal government. With insurance costs already skyrocketing and predicted to keep rising, do you really believe these government panels will put patient needs above cost? (This link will allow you to listen to a neurologist who learned what is in store for the elderly 'units' - care based upon age.) This is why I have linked government healthcare with population reduction. It is simply another portion of the 'globalist' Illuminati plan. It is Satanic in origin. (Those who don't believe in the Adversary of God will be quite surprised when it is revealed!) And, it has a two-fold result, to bankrupt the United States and reduce the global population. It is reminiscent of the Third Reich. Only the young, healthy and most perfect specimens who can perform the work required by the regime will be allowed to live. They envision a world with two classes. The elite who hold all wealth and power and the serf who performs the work necessary. There were many practice events, including the French Revolution, Soviet Union, and Hitler's Germany. You have been prepared with propaganda and age-old occult practices for the New Age and New World Order and they are moving purposefully toward its implementation. Yet, few speak out against it and the media promotes the propaganda. The cattle are now in the pen, being readied for the chute into the processing plant. When will you finally wake up?!? When see your loved ones dying and the responsible parties are in your own government? It will be far too late! I received an e-mail again today about continuing the fight against the United Nations gun ban Treaty. The following is from the Washington Times. Please note that where ** appears, emphasis has been added to the original text. EDITORIAL: Gun ban back on Obama’s agenda More flexible administration revives U.N. arms treaty That didn’t take long. Less than a day after President Obama's re-election, the administration breathed new life into the United Nations' previously comatose treaty regulating guns. Last July, the U.N. General Assembly began formal discussion of the Arms Trade Treaty, which seeks to establish “common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms.” Talks on the controversial agreement were put on indefinite hiatus after the United States requested an extension to the time allotted to negotiate the agreement (**). Gun rights supporters blasted the treaty as it inched toward approval, and many suspected U.S. procedural maneuvers were intended to delay the treaty so it wouldn’t become a topic of discussion during the election. It appears these suspicions were correct since “indefinite” turned out to mean until hours after Mr. Obama was re-elected.(**) The administration line is that the treaty applies only to firearms exports and poses no threat to domestic gun owners.(**) “We seek a treaty that contributes to international security by fighting illicit arms trafficking and proliferation, protects the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade, and meets the concerns that we have been articulating throughout,” an administration official said. “We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms.” It is hard to take the White House response seriously. The treaty instructs countries to “take the necessary legislative and administrative measures, to adapt, as necessary, national laws and regulations to implement the obligations of this treaty.” The agreement’s language is so broad, vague and poorly defined it could be stretched in a variety of ways that would pose a threat to the Second Amendment.(**) Treaty backers also want to insert provisions forcing ratifying states to promote a variety of fashionable left-wing causes including “sustainable development,” even though they have nothing to do with the arms trade. Though the treaty is supposed to be about “gun exports,” its provisions can still be applied domestically. (**) Activist judges adjudicating cases arising under the treaty and enabling legislation could see to that. The definition of international commerce could follow the same expansive logic liberal courts have used to redefine “interstate commerce.” Anything that indirectly or incidentally affects the trade in arms would fall under its control. A ratified treaty, with constitutional authority, could be interpreted in a way that applies to any imported weapon or round of ammunition, those made with foreign components, those containing imported materials, those that might some day be exported, and those capable of being exported.(**) If it affects the overall arms market, it could be said to be part of “international” trade, even if the item never leaves our shores. In practice this logic would give the government free rein to regulate all weapons, foreign and domestic. With the election out of the way, the White House can move swiftly to get the treaty through the U.N. General Assembly and up to the Senate by the summer of 2013. Elections have consequences.(**) [End of Times article] Executive Order #13609, 'Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation', signed by Barack Obama on May 1, 2012, paved the way for implementation of a UN gun mandate, by committing the United States to standardizing or conforming its laws to international law in violation of the U.S. Constitution. However, Constitutional limitations have not prevented this administration nor the Clinton or Bush administrations guilty of Constitutional violations. Executive Order # 13609 can be used to institute gun confiscation regulations without Congressional approval as required for Treaties. Section 2, Coordination of International Regulatory Cooperation, builds upon Executive Order #12866 of September 30, 1993, with 'international regulatory cooperation': designed to investigate differences between U.S. and international regulatory laws and institute changes in the United States to enable greater cooperation (i.e., enact the same laws here in the United States). If other countries have regulations banning gun ownership (which most do), bringing U.S. law in 'regulatory cooperation' would be a way to remove another Constitutional privilege. Since Executive Orders bypass Congressional approval, the President can sign a UN Gun Ban Treaty without ratification by Congress. In the past, the President signed Treaties, but they were sent to Congress for ratification. Will that continue? Infringement on citizens' rights began soon after the United States was formed, but gained ground with the institution of Social Security, imposing servitude upon the citizenry to the federal government. I won't go into that at this time; just suffice it to say that the requirement to obtain a birth certificate and social security number began at that time. The newest members of U.S. society are collateral against the debts of the government. Ingenious!
Why did the framers of our Bill of Rights put the Second Amendment in place? To protect us from our government. "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Every dictator in society removed guns from society before taking control. The international powers behind United Nations want to take control of the United States, because this nation has been the only nation preventing a global government. As the people freely relinquish their rights, one by one, they enable this evil cabal to realize its |
Please Post a Comment or Contact Us BelowArchives
May 2018
Categories
All
|
Proudly powered by Weebly