If satan casts out satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand?
Practice is alleged to have originated at the Battle of Agincourt… after the English archers were threatened by the French with having their middle fingers removed… when the battle was won and the French beaten, the archers raised their middle fingers proving who “plucks yew” last, plucks best…
CSP Drops Case Against Man Who Flipped Off Trooper
Man Who Flipped Off State Trooper Questions Manpower Used
Alan Gathright, 7NEWS Content Producer
POSTED: 3:51 pm MDT May 26, 2011
UPDATED: 9:33 am MDT May 28, 2011
JEFFERSON COUNTY, Colo. — The Colorado State Patrol says it is dropping the case against a 35-year-old man who was ticketed after flipping off a state trooper with a finger gesture.
The surprise announcement was made in a news release issued late Friday afternoon.
“After reviewing the facts of the case, this incident does not support probable cause to sustain the charge of harassment as such actions under these circumstances are protected free speech,” a release stated. “The Colorado State Patrol has requested the dismissal of the charge with the First Judicial District. The District Attorney’s Office has filed a motion to have the case dismissed.”
The dramatic move came just hours after the driver questioned the use of manpower to locate and ticket him.
Earlier, the American Civil Liberties Union said it was going to defend him because giving “the bird” is protected speech and not a crime.
In an exclusive interview with 7NEWS on Friday, Shane Boor also questioned the resources used to track him down.
Boor was cited on April 19 for misdemeanor harassment involving an obscene gesture after another trooper tracked him down at his workplace.
“It’s rude to flip off a cop, but it’s not a crime,” Mark Silverstein, ACLU legal director, said in a Thursday statement.
“The protection of the Constitution is not limited to speech that is acceptable in polite society. The First Amendment also protects expression that may be disrespectful, coarse or even vulgar,” he said. The ACLU is providing Boor free criminal defense services.
Boor was driving to work near West Bowles Avenue and C-470 in Jefferson County at about 10:05 a.m., when he saw a state trooper on the roadside, writing a ticket for another driver, the ACLU said.
“As he passed by, Mr. Boor extended his middle finger in the trooper’s direction, a gesture that quietly expressed Mr. Boor’s disapproval of what he regarded as unjustified harassment by members of the trooper’s profession,” the ACLU statement said.
Soon after Boor arrived at his work, another trooper showed up and questioned Boor about the hand gesture. Boor was issued a criminal summons charging him with harassment, which carries a possible penalty of six months in jail.
The summons stated: “Mr. Boor with intent to harass, annoy, alarm Trooper White did unlawfully, in a public place, make an obscene gesture to or at said victim.”
The ACLU had urged the District Attorney’s Office to dismiss the case.
“The police obviously need better training concerning our country’s time-honored constitutional right to free expression,” said Dan Recht, a private attorney working with the ACLU. “Their training must teach them to shrug off insults and disrespectful comments from the public. In essence, they need to develop a thicker skin so that our constitutional rights prevail.”
Colorado State Patrol spokeswoman Trooper Heather Cobler said that patrol officers were already in the area working on speed enforcement with a patrol plane so the officer who tracked down and cited Boor was not dispatched from outside the area.
Driver Questions Uses Of 2 Patrol Cars, CSP Plane To Track Him Down
Boor said the first thing the trooper who found him said was, “Did you see the plane? That’s how we found you.”
On Friday, Boor told 7NEWS he was surprised by the manpower used to track him down.
“When he wrote me the ticket … I asked him if he thought that using two squad cars and an airplane to track down somebody that had insulted him was a good use of taxpayer dollars.”
Asked what Boor thought the CSP should do in cases like this, he offered this suggestion:
“Train their officers a little bit better to respect the First Amendment and to treat the citizens and taxpayers with a little bit more respect.”
The head of the Colorado State Patrol said he supports his troopers.
“Although we find the gesture towards our trooper offensive and demeaning towards the heroic nature of law enforcement officers throughout the country, this act alone does not constitute a crime,” said Col. James M. Wolfinbarger, Chief of the Colorado State Patrol.
The world is figuring this out…
It is not immoral to curse an enemy of God… but to do so without a cocked and locked .45 at the ready, might be ill advised… —Editor
Ephesians 6:13 (NLT)
… Therefore, put on every piece of God’s armor so you will be able to resist the enemy in the time of evil. Then after the battle you will still be standing firm… (as opposed to lying on the ground in a bloody mess)
Proverbs 8:35-36 (NIV) The context is wisdom… That is if you do something stupid, you might just get killed…
… For whoever finds me finds life and receives favor from the Lord. But whoever fails to find me harms himself; all who hate me love death.”
Posted in Uncategorized on May 29, 2011 |
Quotes from various vipers…
Andy Jackson knew about them…
“The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin. Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money and control credit, and with the flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. Take this great power away from the bankers and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this would be a better and happier world to live in. But if you want to continue the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create money and to control credit.”
Sir Josiah Stamp, Director and President of the Bank of England during the 1920’s
“We are not going to achieve a new world order without paying for it in blood as well as in words and money.”
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., in Foreign Affairs (July/August 1995)
“Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order [referring to the 1991 LA Riot]. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond [i.e., an "extraterrestrial" invasion], whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government.”
Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991
“The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the worlds’ central banks which were themselves private corporations. The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and the indirect injury of all other economic groups.”
Tragedy and Hope: A History of The World in Our Time (Macmillan Company, 1966,) Professor Carroll Quigley of Georgetown University, highly esteemed by his former student, William Jefferson Blythe Clinton.
“The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining supercapitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control…. Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent.”
Congressman Larry P. McDonald, 1976, killed in the Korean Airlines 747 that was shot down by the Soviets
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. In their totality and in their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat with demands the solidarity of all peoples. But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap about which we have already warned namely mistaking systems for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”
“The First Global Revolution”, A Report by the Council of the Club of Rome by Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider 1991.
“We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries.”
David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, in an address to a meeting of The Trilateral Commission, in June, 1991.
“In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.”
Prince Phillip of England, Reported by Deutsche Press Agentur (DPA), August, 1988.
“The idea was that those who direct the overall conspiracy could use the differences in those two so-called ideologies [marxism/fascism/socialism v. democracy/capitalism] to enable them [the Illuminati] to divide larger and larger portions of the human race into opposing camps so that they could be armed and then brainwashed into fighting and destroying each other.”
“Speaking of a future at most only decades away, an experimenter in intelligence control asserted, ‘I foresee a time when we shall have the means and therefore, inevitably, the temptation to manipulate the behavior and intellectual functioning of all the people through environmental and biochemical manipulation of the brain.'”
Zbigniew Brezinski, Between Two Ages, America’s Role in the Technotronic Era 1970
“The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.”
Zbigniew Brezinski, Between Two Ages, America’s Role in the Technotronic Era 1970
“In March, 1915, the J.P. Morgan interests, the steel, shipbuilding, and powder interest, and their subsidiary organizations, got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select the most influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient number of them to control generally the policy of the daily press….They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers.
“An agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial policies, and other things of national and international nature considered vital to the interests of the purchasers.”
U.S. Congressman Oscar Callaway, 1917
“I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology. … It’s importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda … Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class (Elite). The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated.”
Bertrand Russell, philosopher, educator and atheist
“Gradually, by selective breeding, the congenital differences between rulers and ruled will increase until they become almost different species. A revolt of the plebs would become as unthinkable as an organized insurrection of sheep against the practice of eating mutton.”
Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society (1953) pgs. 49-50
“Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible.”
Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society (1953) p. 50
“A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
Audubon magazine, interview with Ted Turner, 1996
“”This is a terrible thing to say. In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it’s just as bad not to say it.””
Jacques Cousteau in an interview with the UNESCO Courier for November 1991
“The world can therefore seize the opportunity [Persian Gulf crisis] to fulfill the long-held promise of a New World Order where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind.”
George Herbert Walker Bush, September 11, 1990 and September 11, 1991
“In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all.”
Strobe Talbot, President Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in Time, July 20th, 1992.
“Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most conspicuous and sacred responsibility, all talks of the sovereignty of Parliament and of democracy is idle and futile… Once a nation parts with the control of its credit, it matters not who makes the laws….Usury once in control will wreck the nation.”
William Lyon MacKenzie King, former Prime Minister of Canada
“”It was a carefully contrived occurrence. International bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair, so that they might emerge the rulers of us all.””
Louis McFadden on 1929 Stock Market Crash. Louis McFadden died of poisoning shortly thereafter.
“We shall have world government whether or not you like it, by conquest or consent.”
Statement by Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member James Warburg to The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 17th, 1950
“The governments of the present day have to deal not merely with other governments, with emperors, kings and ministers, but also with the secret societies which have everywhere their unscrupulous agents, and can at the last moment upset all the governments’ plans. “
British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, 1876
“Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men’s views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the Field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.”
Woodrow Wilson,The New Freedom (1913)
“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.”
President Woodrow Wilson (who introduced the Federal Reserve act which allowed the privately owned Federal Reserve to begin in 1913)
“What is important is to dwell upon the increasing evidence of the existence of a secret conspiracy, throughout the world, for the destruction of organized government and the letting loose of evil.”
Christian Science Monitor editorial, June 19th, 1920
“The real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, state and nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of a self created screen….At the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both political parties.”
New York City Mayor John F. Hylan, 1922
“From the days of Sparticus, Wieskhopf, Karl Marx, Trotsky, Rosa Luxemberg, and Emma Goldman, this world conspiracy has been steadily growing. This conspiracy played a definite recognizable role in the tragedy of the French revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the 19th century. And now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their head and have become the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.”
Winston Churchill, stated to the London Press, in 1922.
“We are at present working discreetly with all our might to wrest this mysterious force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local nation states of the world. All the time we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands.”
Professor Arnold Toynbee, in a June 1931 speech before the Institute for the Study of International Affairs in Copenhagen.
“The New World Order under the UN will reduce everything to one common denominator. The system will be made up of a single currency, single centrally financed government, single tax system, single language, single political system, single world court of justice, single state religion…Each person will have a registered number, without which he will not be allowed to buy or sell; and there will be one universal world church. Anyone who refuses to take part in the universal system will have no right to exist.”
Assessment of the New World by Dr. Kurk E. Koch
“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”
“Propaganda” by Edward L. Bernays (the father of modern advertising), 1928.
“The government of the Western nations, whether monarchical or republican, had passed into the invisible hands of a plutocracy, international in power and grasp. It was, I venture to suggest, this semioccult power which….pushed the mass of the American people into the cauldron of World War I.”
British military historian Major General J.F.C. Fuller, 1941
“The question was how should we maneuver them [Japan] into firing the first shot… it was desirable to make sure the Japanese be the ones to do this so that there should remain no doubt as to who were the aggressors.”
Henry Stimson, US Secretary of War prior to WWII, Nov. 25, 1941
“For a long time I felt that FDR had developed many thoughts and ideas that were his own to benefit this country, the United States. But, he didn’t. Most of his thoughts, his political ammunition, as it were, were carefully manufactured for him in advanced by the Council on Foreign Relations – One World Money group. Brilliantly, with great gusto, like a fine piece of artillery, he exploded that prepared “ammunition” in the middle of an unsuspecting target, the American people, and thus paid off and returned his internationalist political support.
“The UN is but a long-range, international banking apparatus clearly set up for financial and economic profit by a small group of powerful One-World revolutionaries, hungry for profit and power.
“The depression was the calculated ‘shearing’ of the public by the World Money powers, triggered by the planned sudden shortage of supply of call money in the New York money market….The One World Government leaders and their ever close bankers have now acquired full control of the money and credit machinery of the U.S. via the creation of the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank.”
Curtis Dall, FDR’s son-in-law as quoted in his book, My Exploited Father-in-Law
“Very soon, every American will be required to register their biological property (that’s you and your children) in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a charge back for our fiat paper currency.
Every American will be forced to register or suffer being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattels (property) and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading (Birth Certificate) to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, secured by their pledges.
They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debts to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges.
This will inevitably reap us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud, which we will call “Social Insurance”. Without realizing it, every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and we will employ the high office (presidency) of our dummy corporation (USA) to foment this plan against America.”
Colonel Edward Mandell House is attributed (but unverified) with giving a very detailed outline of the plans to be implemented to enslave the American people. He stated, in a private meeting with Woodrow Wilson (President 1913 – 1921)
“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.”
A letter written by FDR to Colonel House, November 21st, 1933
“The real rulers in Washington are invisible, and exercise power from behind the scenes.”
Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, 1952
“…at that time the economy of the United States will be going down and the next boat people will be Americans leaving America looking for work abroad.”
Jacques Attali in his 1990 book “Millennium: Winners and Losers in the Coming World Order”
“Fifty men have run America, and that’s a high figure.”
Joseph Kennedy, father of JFK, in the July 26th, 1936 issue of The New York Times.
“Today the path of total dictatorship in the United States can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by the Congress, the President, or the people. Outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government – a bureaucratic elite.”
Senator William Jenner, 1954
“The case for government by elites is irrefutable”
Senator William Fulbright, Former chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, stated at a 1963 symposium entitled: The Elite and the Electorate – Is Government by the People Possible?
“The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States. The Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power political, monetary, intellectual and ecclesiastical. What the Trilateral Commission intends is to create a worldwide economic power superior to the political governments of the nationstates involved. As managers and creators of the system, they will rule the future.”
U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater in his 1964 book: With No Apologies
“The Council on Foreign Relations is ‘the establishment’. Not only does it have influence and power in key decision-making positions at the highest levels of government to apply pressure from above, but it also announces and uses individuals and groups to bring pressure from below, to justify the high level decisions for converting the U.S. from a sovereign Constitutional Republic into a servile member state of a one-world dictatorship.”
Former Congressman John Rarick 1971
“The directors of the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) make up a sort of Presidium for that part of the Establishment that guides our destiny as a nation.”
The Christian Science Monitor, September 1, 1961
“The New World Order will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down…but in the end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old fashioned frontal assault.”
CFR member Richard Gardner, writing in the April 1974 issue of the CFR’s journal, Foreign Affairs.
“The planning of UN can be traced to the ‘secret steering committee’ established by Secretary [of State Cordell] Hull in January 1943. All of the members of this secret committee, with the exception of Hull, a Tennessee politician, were members of the Council on Foreign Relations. They saw Hull regularly to plan, select, and guide the labors of the [State] Department’s Advisory Committee. It was, in effect, the coordinating agency for all the State Department’s postwar planning.”
Professors Laurence H. Shoup and William Minter, writing in their study of the CFR, “Imperial Brain Trust: The CFR and United States Foreign Policy.” (Monthly Review Press, 1977).
“The most powerful clique in these (CFR) groups have one objective in common: they want to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and the national independence of the U.S. They want to end national boundaries and racial and ethnic loyalties supposedly to increase business and ensure world peace. What they strive for would inevitably lead to dictatorship and loss of freedoms by the people. The CFR was founded for “the purpose of promoting disarmament and submergence of U.S. sovereignty and national independence into an all-powerful one-world government.”
Harpers, July 1958
“The old world order changed when this war-storm broke. The old international order passed away as suddenly, as unexpectedly, and as completely as if it had been wiped out by a gigantic flood, by a great tempest, or by a volcanic eruption. The old world order died with the setting of that day’s sun and a new world order is being born while I speak, with birth-pangs so terrible that it seems almost incredible that life could come out of such fearful suffering and such overwhelming sorrow.”
Nicholas Murray Butler, in an address delivered before the Union League of Philadelphia, Nov. 27, 1915
“The peace conference has assembled. It will make the most momentous decisions in history, and upon these decisions will rest the stability of the new world order and the future peace of the world.”
M. C. Alexander, Executive Secretary of the American Association for International Conciliation, in a subscription letter for the periodical International Conciliation (1919)
“… when the struggle seems to be drifting definitely towards a world social democracy, there may still be very great delays and disappointments before it becomes an efficient and beneficent world system. Countless people … will hate the new world order … and will die protesting against it. When we attempt to evaluate its promise, we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents, many of them quite gallant and graceful-looking people.”
H. G. Wells, in his book entitled The New World Order (1939)
“The term Internationalism has been popularized in recent years to cover an interlocking financial, political, and economic world force for the purpose of establishing a World Government. Today Internationalism is heralded from pulpit and platform as a ‘League of Nations’ or a ‘Federated Union’ to which the United States must surrender a definite part of its National Sovereignty. The World Government plan is being advocated under such alluring names as the ‘New International Order,’ ‘The New World Order,’ ‘World Union Now,’ ‘World Commonwealth of Nations,’ ‘World Community,’ etc. All the terms have the same objective; however, the line of approach may be religious or political according to the taste or training of the individual.”
Excerpt from A Memorial to be Addressed to the House of Bishops and the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in General Convention (October 1940)
“He [John Foster Dulles] stated directly to me that he had every reason to believe that the Governor [Thomas E. Dewey of New York] accepts his point of view and that he is personally convinced that this is the policy that he would promote with great vigor if elected. So it is fair to say that on the first round the Sphinx of Albany has established himself as a prima facie champion of a strong and definite new world order.”
Excerpt from article by Ralph W. Page in The Philadelphia Bulletin (May 1944)
“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happened, you can bet it was planned that way.”
U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt
“The developing coherence of Asian regional thinking is reflected in a disposition to consider problems and loyalties in regional terms, and to evolve regional approaches to development needs and to the evolution of a new world order.”
Richard Nixon, in Foreign Affairs (October 1967)
“He [President Nixon] spoke of the talks as a beginning, saying nothing more about the prospects for future contacts and merely reiterating the belief he brought to China that both nations share an interest in peace and building ‘a new world order.'”
Excerpt from an article in The New York Times (February 1972)
“How fortunate for Leaders’ that men do not think.”
“The existing order is breaking down at a very rapid rate, and the main uncertainty is whether mankind can exert a positive role in shaping a new world order or is doomed to await collapse in a passive posture. We believe a new order will be born no later than early in the next century and that the death throes of the old and the birth pangs of the new will be a testing time for the human species.”
Richard A. Falk, in an article entitled “Toward a New World Order: Modest Methods and Drastic Visions,” in the book On the Creation of a Just World Order (1975)
“My country’s history, Mr. President, tells us that it is possible to fashion unity while cherishing diversity, that common action is possible despite the variety of races, interests, and beliefs we see here in this chamber. Progress and peace and justice are attainable. So we say to all peoples and governments: Let us fashion together a new world order.”
Henry Kissinger, in address before the General Assembly of the United Nations, October 1975)
“At the old Inter-American Office in the Commerce Building here in Roosevelt’s time, as Assistant Secretary of State for Latin American Affairs under President Truman, as chief whip with Adlai Stevenson and Tom Finletter at the founding of the United Nations in San Francisco, Nelson Rockefeller was in the forefront of the struggle to establish not only an American system of political and economic security but a new world order.”
Part of article in The New York Times (November 1975)
“Further global progress is now possible only through a quest for universal consensus in the movement towards a new world order.”
Mikhail Gorbachev, in an address at the United Nations (December 1988)
“We believe we are creating the beginning of a new world order coming out of the collapse of the U.S.-Soviet antagonisms.”
Brent Scowcroft (August 1990), quoted in The Washington Post (May 1991)
“We can see beyond the present shadows of war in the Middle East to a new world order where the strong work together to deter and stop aggression. This was precisely Franklin Roosevelt’s and Winston Churchill’s vision for peace for the post-war period.”
Richard Gephardt, in The Wall Street Journal (September 1990)
“If we do not follow the dictates of our inner moral compass and stand up for human life, then his lawlessness will threaten the peace and democracy of the emerging new world order we now see, this long dreamed-of vision we’ve all worked toward for so long.”
President George Bush (January 1991)
“But it became clear as time went on that in Mr. Bush’s mind the New World Order was founded on a convergence of goals and interests between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, so strong and permanent that they would work as a team through the U.N. Security Council.”
Excerpt from A. M. Rosenthal, in The New York Times (January 1991)
“I would support a Presidential candidate who pledged to take the following steps: … At the end of the war in the Persian Gulf, press for a comprehensive Middle East settlement and for a ‘new world order’ based not on Pax Americana but on peace through law with a stronger U.N. and World Court.”
George McGovern, in The New York Times (February 1991)
“… it’s Bush’s baby, even if he shares its popularization with Gorbachev. Forget the Hitler ‘new order’ root; F.D.R. used the phrase earlier.”
William Safire, in The New York Times (February 1991)
“How I Learned to Love the New World Order”
Article by Sen. Joseph R. Biden, Jr. in The Wall Street Journal (April 1992)
“How to Achieve The New World Order”
Title of book excerpt by Henry Kissinger, in Time magazine (March 1994)
“The Final Act of the Uruguay Round, marking the conclusion of the most ambitious trade negotiation of our century, will give birth – in Morocco – to the World Trade Organization, the third pillar of the New World Order, along with the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund.”
Part of full-page advertisement by the government of Morocco in The New York Times (April 1994)
“New World Order: The Rise of the Region-State”
Title of article by Kenichi Ohmae, political reform leader in Japan, in The Wall Street Journal (August 1994)
“The new world order that is in the making must focus on the creation of a world of democracy, peace and prosperity for all.”
Nelson Mandela, in The Philadelphia Inquirer (October 1994)
The renewal of the nonproliferation treaty was described as important “for the welfare of the whole world and the new world order.”
President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, in The New York Times (April 1995)
Posted in Uncategorized on May 29, 2011 |
After these things I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority, and the earth was illumined with his glory. And he cried out with a mighty voice, saying, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great!
(another technology about to shelved???)
Dependency on oil will end by 2012
Posted by PC Latest news, Special Report, World news Saturday, May 7th, 2011
Zero emission fuel being collected. Cost per barrel $0.00
The technology to rid the World of oil dependency is here. By 2012 all-electric and water fueled vehicles will begin flooding the market and evaporate the need for oil. Beginning in 2012 all you will need to power your vehicle is a liter of water – any kind of water to be exact, whether its river, rain, sea water, or even Japanese tea.
Japan clean energy technology company Genepax was perhaps the first to demonstrate how it is possible to fuel a car using nothing but water. “The main characteristic of this car is that no external input is needed. The car will continue to run as long as you have a bottle of water inside for you to add from time to time.”
According to Japanese broadcaster TV Tokyo, once the water is poured into a water tank at the back of the car, the newly invented energy generator takes out the hydrogen from the water, releases electrons and finally generates electrical power.
The key to the Genepax system is its membrane electrode assembly (or MEA), which contains a material that’s capable of breaking down water into hydrogen and oxygen.
Such a vehicle poses a threat to the United States oil companies. This system will make the US wars of aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya meaningless. The US has spent $trillions towards using military force against oil rich nations. The US is now using mercenaries to create rebellions in the countries that surround Iran. The US is now imposing sanctions against Syria not because Syria is killing civilians but because Syria is killing CIA mercenaries who are paid by the US government to create a rebellion so that the US can invade. Just 9 days after 9/11 the US government had already decided to use military forces against Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and lastly Iran.
In an interview with Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman in March 2007, retired US General Wesley Clark, former Commanding General of US European Command, and former Presidential candidate, revealed what he had learned from top military commanders about the US government’s plans to attack Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran. Why attack those countries? Oil and natural gas. The US goal is to take from the Middle East its oil and natural gas reserves. They intend to use military force to control the oil supply to the World.
All of the US government’s plans and its wars of aggression that have cost $trillions, caused the slaughter of over 1 million civilians (in Iraq alone) and the senseless deaths of thousands of US soldiers would be for nothing if another source of fuel suddenly becomes available. Another source of fuel is available today. That fuel is water. Water covers 70.9% of the Earth’s surface. Oceans hold 97% of surface water. Out of all the water on Earth, only 2.75 percent is fresh water, including 2.05 percent frozen in glaciers, 0.68 percent as groundwater and 0.011 percent of it as surface water in lakes and rivers. That means as much as 97% of the water on Earth is available to us to use as a fuel source.
If just one major auto maker began to produce and sell a water fueled vehicle what would happen? The price of oil would collapse. Global Warming would no longer be a problem (no more CO2 emissions from vehicles). Disease, cancer and illnesses that are caused by exposure to oil pollution would disappear. People would have more money in their pockets. The US Oil Wars of Terror would end.
The alien who is among you shall rise above you higher and higher, but you will go down lower and lower…
BRITAIN PROPOSES RETURN TO PRE-1845 BORDERS AS SOLUTION TO U.S. MEXICO BORDER ISSUE
John G. Winder, The Cypress Times
Published 05/21/2011 – 9:11 a.m. CST
LONDON, ENGLAND – The U.S. must return to the pre-1845 borders with Mexico said British Prime Minister David Cameron today. Cameron offered up the solution in order to resolve the issue of massive illegal migration from Mexico into the U.S. and to quell the rising tide of drug cartel violence close to the shared border between the two nations.
Cameron said the proposed return to the pre-1845 borders is the only viable solution that would solve a deadlock “that has grinded on and on and on.”
“There must be no doubt that Great Britain welcomes change that advances self-determination and opportunity,” Cameron said. “Yes, there will be perils that accompany this moment of promise. But after decades of accepting the world as it is in North America, we have a chance to pursue the world as it should be.”
The Prime Minister’s comments were made just one day before President Obama was scheduled to arrive in Ireland as part of a desperate attempt to woo Irish-American voters.
White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters that Cameron’s actions are inexcusable.
“To propose something this radical just a day prior to President Obama’s visit to Great Britain is unconscionable. I can’t recall a scenario where one head of state has ever so purposefully embarrassed another head of state, particularly a staunch ally.”
The White House is now scrambling to change President Obama’s travel schedule in Ireland feeling that their previous plans to hang out in pubs and have the president talk up his Irish ancestry might now somehow seem contrived.
An Obama administration insider who spoke on the condition of anonymity indicated that President Obama might actually consider embracing some parts of Cameron’s proposal, however.
“This would actually be an acceptable solution to the President in the sense that we would finally be able to get rid of Texas and Arizona. However, the loss of critical voters in California would really suck.”
When asked about how the proposed return to 1845 borders would affect New Mexico and Nevada the spokesperson said, “I guess Harry Reid would be on his own to negotiate with Los Zetas and ‘New Mexico?’ come on is that even a real place?”
Cameron’s proposal would basically mean that California, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and all of what is now the western United States would revert to Mexican rule. However, prior to 1845 Texas was an independent republic.
“Cameron obviously didn’t think this thing out fully in terms of the Texas issue,” a White House spokesperson said. “We really don’t want to imagine a scenario where Texas would become an independent nation again. The idea of a President Rick Perry along a new U.S. border would be unacceptable. We would prefer a return to pre-1836 borders. Let Mexico have Texas.”
What would a California under Mexican rule look like? A wide-eyed and seemingly confused House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Dem – CA) said, “I don’t speak Spanish. It’s already a problem for me in my state. I guess now it would be worse. However, drug cartels do need universal health care, too. Treating gunshot wounds can be terribly expensive and place a burden on the entire gang.”
A spokesperson for the Los Zetas Drug Cartel said, “This would certainly expedite our ability to get our drugs to our customers. Sure a few ranchers and home owners in the area formerly known as the United States will have to die. But hey you have to break some eggs to make huevos rancheros.”
He added that overall Los Zetas thought Cameron’s proposal was “Mui Bueno.”
Nancy Pelosi responded, “Seriously. I don’t speak Spanish.”
The above scenario is of course, absurd.
Yet this is basically what U.S. President Barack Obama did to Israel and to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu earlier this week just a day before Netanyahu arrived in the United States.
President Obama proposed trading away the future and security of our staunchest ally, the Jewish race and the only democracy in the Middle East in order to solve “a deadlock that has grinded on and on and on.”
As a people we must be genuinely and deeply concerned when our President proposes policy that is so absurd as to be simultaneously both comical and horrifying.
Oh well, Sláinte!
Now in that day the remnant of Israel, and those of the house of Jacob who have escaped, will never again rely on the one who struck them, but will truly rely on the LORD, the Holy One of Israel…
Posted in Uncategorized on May 27, 2011 |
Cancer cure discovered – in 1934
Posted by PC Health, Latest news, World news Tuesday, May 24th, 2011
Over 75 years ago, in the summer of 1934 in California USA, under the auspices of the University of Southern California, a group of leading American bacteriologists and doctors conducted the first successful cancer clinic. At this clinic they discovered the cure for cancer. Their clinical research found that:
a) cancer was caused by a micro-organism;
b) the micro-organism could be painlessly destroyed in terminally ill cancer patients; and
c) the effects of the disease could be reversed.
The technical discovery leading to the cancer cure had been published in Science magazine in 1931. In the decade following the 1934 clinical success, the technology and the subsequent, successful treatment of cancer patients was discussed at medical conferences, disseminated in a medical journal, cautiously but professionally reported in a major newspaper, and technically explained in an annual report published by the Smithsonian Institution.
However, the newly found cancer cure threatened a number of scientists, physicians, and financial interests. A cover-up was initiated. Physicians using the new technology were threatened into abandoning it. The author of the Smithsonian Institution article was forced through intimidation to never write about the subject again. All reports describing the cure were censored by the head of the AMA (American Medical Association) from the major medical journals. Objective scientific evaluation by government laboratories was prevented. And renowned researchers who supported the technology and its new scientific principles in bacteriology were scorned, ridiculed, and called liars to their face. Eventually, a long, dark silence lasting over 7 decades fell over the cancer cure. Eventually, the cure was labeled a ‘myth’—it never happened. However, documents now available prove that the cure did exist, was tested successfully in clinical trials, and in fact was used secretly for years afterwards—continuing to cure cancer as well as other diseases.
In 1913, a man with a love for machines and a scientific curiosity, arrived in San Diego after driving across the country from New York. He was about to start a new life and open the way to a science of health which will be honored far into the future. His name was Royal Raymond Rife.
Royal R. Rife was fascinated by bacteriology, microscopes and electronics. For the next seven years he thought about and experimented in a variety of fields as well as mastered the mechanical skills necessary to build instruments such as the world had never imagined.
By the late 1920s, the first phase of his work was completed. He had built his first microscope, one that broke the existing principles, and he had constructed instruments which enabled him to electronically destroy specific pathological micro-organisms.
Over the course of a decade of research and development, Rife had been seeking a way to identify and then destroy the micro-organism which caused cancer. His cancer research began in 1922. It would take him until 1932 to identify the responsible micro-organism that caused cancer. With the aid of the microscopes he himself developed Rife was able to isolate the cancer virus which he later named simply the “BX virus”.
Rife’s laboratory notes for November 20,1932, contain the first written description of the cancer virus characteristics. Unique to his method of classification using the Rife microscope the cancer virus was described as: angle of refraction—12-3/10 degrees; colour by chemical refraction—purple-red. rife went on to note the size of the cancer virus. The length was just 1/15 of a micron. The breadth was just 1/20 of a micron. No ordinary light microscope, even in the 1980s, would be able to make the cancer virus visible.
In time, Rife proved that cancer was caused by a specific and identifiable micro-organism. After isolating the cancer virus, his next step was to destroy it. He did this with frequency instruments he designed and developed. Using his frequency instruments Rife successfully demonstrated and emphatically proved that the cancer micro-organism could be painlessly destroyed in terminally ill cancer patients using specific frequencies; and the effects of the disease could be reversed.
In 1934, Dr. Rife opened a clinic, where he successfully cured 16 of 16 cancer cases within 120 days. Working with some of the most respected researchers in the United States along with leading doctors from Southern California, he electronically destroyed the cancer virus in patients, allowing their own immune systems to restore health. A Special Research Committee of the University of Southern California oversaw the laboratory research and the experimental treatments until the end of the 1930s. Follow-up clinics conducted in 1935, 1936 and 1937 by the head of the U.S.C. Medical Committee verified the results of the 1934 clinic.
On December 1,1953 Rife wrote”
“With the frequency instrument treatment, no tissue is destroyed, no pain is felt, no noise is audible, and no sensation is noticed. A tube lights up and 3 minutes later the treatment is completed. The virus or bacteria is destroyed and the body then recovers itself naturally from the toxic effect of the virus or bacteria. Several diseases may be treated simultaneously.
“The first clinical work on cancer was completed under the supervision of Milbank Johnson, MD, which was set up under a Special Medial Research Committee of the University of Southern California. 16 cases were treated at the clinic for many types of malignancy. After 3 months, 14 of these so called hopeless cases were signed off as clinically cured by the start of five medical doctors and Dr Alvin G. Foord, MD, pathologist for the group. The treatments consisted of 3 minutes duration using the frequency instrument which was set on the mortal oscillatory rate for “BX” or cancer (at 3-day intervals). It was found that the elapsed time between treatments attains better results than the cases treated daily. This gives the lymphatic system an opportunity to absorb and cast off the toxic condition which is produced by the devitalised dead particles of the “BX” virus. No rise of body temperature was perceptible in any of these cases above normal during or after the frequency instrument treatment. No special diets were used in any of this clinical work, but we sincerely believe that a proper diet compiled for the individual would be of benefit“
Why haven’t you heard about this cancer cure discovery? THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
The American Medical Association was formed in 1846 but it wasn’t until 1901 that a reorganization enabled it to gain power over how medicine was practiced throughout the United States. By becoming a confederation of state medical associations and forcing doctors who wanted to belong to their county medical society to join the state association, the AMA soon increased its membership to include a majority of physicians. Then, by accrediting medical schools, it began determining the standards and practices of doctors. Those who refused to conform to AMA standards and practices lost their license to practice medicine.
A few years after the California cancer clinic discovered the cure for cancer in 1934, a Dr R. T. Hamer, who did not participate in the clinic, began to use the procedure in Southern California. A physician and editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Morris Fishbein found out and tried to “buy in”. When he was turned down, Fishbein went to the AMA to destroy the cancer cure. Fishbein and the AMA hauled Dr. Hamer and his cancer cure clinical trial partners into court—charged by the AMA for operating without a license. In 1939, under pressure from the AMA, Dr R. T. Hamer abandoned the cure.
In just 5 short years, from 1934 to 1939, the cure for cancer was clinically demonstrated and expanded into curing other diseases on a daily basis by a number of doctors, and then abruptly terminated when Morris Fishbein of the AMAJ was not allowed to “buy in”.
Washington (CNN) — The U.S. House followed the Senate on Thursday in voting to extend three key provisions of the Patriot Act scheduled to expire at midnight, sending the measure to President Barack Obama to be signed into law.
By a 250-153 vote, the Republican-led House agreed to extend the expiring provisions of the law passed after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. They deal with roving wiretaps, the tracking of alleged “lone wolf” terrorists and the ability of law enforcement officials to obtain any records they deem relevant to an investigation after securing an order from a federal court.
White House spokesman Nick Shapiro said Obama, attending the G8 summit in France, directed the use of an autopen — a signature reproduction device — to sign the measure once Congress approved it. The legislation was to be hand-delivered to the White House after the final vote and certification n Congress.
The House had been scheduled to begin its Memorial Day recess Thursday afternoon. However, a protracted dispute over the legislation in the Senate, fueled by conservative newcomer Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, muddied voting schedules and required the House to stay longer than planned.
Paul reached a deal with Senate leaders to allow votes on whether to table two of his amendments. Both amendments failed, and the subsequent Senate vote on the measure to extend the Patriot Act provisions for four years passed easily on a 72-23 vote.
The House vote was tighter, with lawmakers on the right and left opposing an extension for various reasons. For example, some members of Congress are concerned about the law’s impact on civil liberties, while others support the law but think it should be made permanent.
One of the three provisions, Section 206 of the Patriot Act, provides for roving wiretap surveillance of targets who try to thwart Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) surveillance. Without such roving wiretap authority, investigators would be forced to seek a new court order each time they need to change the location, phone or computer that needs to be monitored.
Another provision, Section 215 of the Patriot Act, allows the FBI to apply to the FISA court to issue orders granting the government access to any tangible items in foreign intelligence, international terrorism and clandestine intelligence cases.
The third provision, Section 6001 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorist Prevention Act of 2004, closes a loophole that could allow individual terrorists not affiliated with specific organizations to slip through the cracks of FISA surveillance. Law enforcement officials refer to it as the “lone wolf” provision.
Legislators opposed to the extensions claim that the provisions — particularly related to wiretapping — are intrusive and unconstitutional. Supporters argue that they are a critical component of U.S. anti-terror operations.
Paul, a favorite of the Tea Party movement, engaged in a bitter showdown Wednesday with Senate Majority Harry Reid, D-Nevada, who sought to limit the number of amendments that Paul could offer.
Then on Thursday, Paul complained that it was Senate Republican leaders now holding up consideration of his amendments.
In a rare public rebuke of his own party’s leadership, Paul said he was “disappointed” by their actions and urged people to contact GOP leadership offices in protest.
“I’ve been working for two long days filibustering the Patriot Act in hopes that we can have a constitutional debate over certain provisions of it and we can try to reform it to take away some of the encroachments on our freedoms,” Paul said. “Unfortunately, what we’re finding now is that the Democrats have agreed to allow me to have amendments, but my own party is refusing to allow me to debate or present my amendments.”
In particular, Paul sought to propose an amendment preventing warrantless access to some gun records. Republican leaders don’t want a vote on his amendment because they are conflicted by it, Paul said.
They don’t want to vote to weaken the Patriot Act by making it more difficult for law enforcement to obtain any information — including gun records — related to a terrorism investigation, he said, but they also don’t want to take a vote that could be viewed negatively by gun rights groups.
One Senate Republican leader, Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, rejected Paul’s analysis but refused to explain why or even if GOP leaders were blocking Paul’s amendment.
After reaching the deal to debate two of his amendments, Paul said on the Senate floor that his motivation was to protect personal liberties rather than to harm the Patriot Act or undermine security in any way.
“It’s very important that we are always vigilant, that we are eternally vigilant about the powers of government,” Paul said in arguing for tighter restrictions on the ability of federal investigators to access some gun ownership records.
He went on to complain in general about what he characterized as a federal overreaction to the 9/11 attacks that reduced individual liberty in the name of security. For example, he said, airline travelers are all considered possible terrorists and screened for security reasons; he described such a strategy as a “shotgun” approach.
“Are we so afraid that we’re giving up all of our liberty for security?” Paul asked, calling for tighter restrictions on what the government can investigate without a search warrant.
However, fellow conservative Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Georgia, said Paul’s amendment to end warrantless access to gun records would hinder the government’s ability to prevent terrorist attacks within the United States.
“I don’t understand why we would take this tool away from national security investigators,” Chambliss said, adding that there were “no reports that the government has ever used these provisions to violate anyone’s Second Amendment rights.”
CNN’s Deirdre Walsh, Ted Barrett and Dana Bash contributed to this story.
“Then I will restore your judges as at the first, and your counselors as at the beginning; after that you will be called the city of righteousness, a faithful city.”
Dozens of U.S. Citizens May Be on Obama Assassination List
Written by Thomas R. Eddlem
Monday, 28 June 2010 08:40
The Washington Times reported June 24 that dozens of U.S. citizen may be targets for assassination by the Obama administration. “There are, in my mind, dozens of U.S. persons who are in different parts of the world, and they are very concerning to us,” John O. Brennan, Deputy White House National Security Adviser for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, told the Washington Times June 24.
“If a person is a U.S. citizen, and he is on the battlefield in Afghanistan or Iraq trying to attack our troops, he will face the full brunt of the U.S. military response,” Brennan said, adding: “If an American person or citizen is in a Yemen or in a Pakistan or in Somalia or another place, and they are trying to carry out attacks against U.S. interests, they also will face the full brunt of a U.S. response. And it can take many forms.”
Salon’s magazine’s Glenn Greenwald explained what Brennan’s statement meant:
“Nobody — or at least not me — disputes the right of the U.S. or any other country to kill someone on an actual battlefield during war without due process. That’s just obvious, but that’s not remotely what Brennan is talking about, and it’s not remotely what this assassination program is about. Indeed, Brennan explicitly identified two indistinguishable groups of American citizens who “will face the full brunt of a U.S. response”: (1) those “on the battlefield in Afghanistan or Iraq”; and (2) those “in a Yemen or in a Pakistan or in Somalia or another place.” In other words, the entire world is a “battlefield” — countries where there is a war and countries where there isn’t — and the President’s “battlefield” powers, which are unlimited, extend everywhere. That theory — the whole world is a battlefield, even the U.S. — was the core premise that spawned 8 years of Bush/Cheney radicalism, and it has been adopted in full by the Obama administration (indeed, it was that “whole-world-is-a-battlefield” theory which Elena Kagan explicitly endorsed during her confirmation hearing for Solicitor General).”
The Obama assassination list was first reported by the Washington Post’s Dan Priest back on January 27, though at the time it was believed only three American citizens were on the list. Brennan’s statement changes that math.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration and its spokesmen are still denying that having the U.S. military kill American citizens without trial far from the Afghan and Iraqi war zones constitutes an assassination list. CIA Director Leon Panetta did precisely that on ABC’s This Week program June 27:
ABC’s Jake Tapper: An American cleric who is now supposedly in Yemen, Anwar al-Awlaki. He has said to be on an assassination list by President Obama. Is that true and does being an American afford him any protection that any other terrorist might not enjoy?
CIA Director Pannetta: Awlaki is a terrorist who has declared war on the United States. Everything he’s doing now is to try to encourage others to attack this country, there’s a whole stream of intelligence that goes back to Awlaki and his continuous urging of others to attack this country in some way. You can track Awlaki to the Detroit bomber. We can track him to other attacks in this country that have been urged by Awlaki or that have been influenced by Awlaki. Awlaki is a terrorist and yes, he’s a U.S. citizen, but he is first and foremost a terrorist and we’re going to treat him like a terrorist. We don’t have an assassination list, but I can tell you this. We have a terrorist list and he’s on it.
The essence of Pannetta’s statement means that if the President labels you a terrorist — whether you are guilty or not (and many Guantanamo terror suspects deemed the “worst of the worst” were later released in mistaken identity cases) — you are fair game for being killed without trial. President Obama and his officials may dispute the term “assassination list,” but they have without a doubt completely adopted the Bush administration policy of the world being a battlefield. And because there are no civilian rights on a battlefield, the “global war on terror” is by definition a war on the rights of Americans that are supposed to have protected by the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. Obama may have run on a platform of change, but he clearly hasn’t changed course from the Bush administration attack on the U.S. Constitution.
For the LORD is our judge, The LORD is our lawgiver, The LORD is our king; He will save us—