(connections… freemasonry, vatican, occult, humanist state government, idolatry)
Know Your Enemy (Pt. 53 – The Capitol)
II Corinthians 11:14 (NLT)
But I am not surprised! Even satan disguises himself as an angel of light…
(catholic inquisition resumes)
Ephesians 5:13 (NLT)
But their evil intentions will be exposed when the light shines on them…
Pope calls in Opus Dei troubleshooter to uncover source of Vatican leaks
Cardinal given ‘pontifical mandate’ to hunt Holy See staffers releasing documents on corruption claims in ‘Vatileaks’ scandal
Tom Kington in Rome guardian.co.uk, Thursday 26 April 2012 12.20 EDT
Vatican staffers who have been leaking embarrassing letters about corruption and nepotism inside the tiny city state are to be hunted down by a crack squad of cardinals led by a senior member of the religious group Opus Dei.
Irritated by the anonymous release of documents to the press this year, Pope Benedict has named Cardinal Julian Herranz, 82, to lead a three-man team which will haul in staffers for questioning and rifle through files until they catch the perpetrators of what has been dubbed “Vatileaks”.
A short statement printed on Thursday on the front page of the Vatican’s daily newspaper warned the team had a full “pontifical mandate” to “shed complete light” on the whistle blowers, who have lifted the lid on alleged theft and false accounting.
Herranz was a long-time personal secretary to Josemaría Escrivá , the now canonised founder of Opus Dei, which has been accused of excessive secrecy, strict control over members and undue influence within the Vatican – a reputation pushed by Dan Brown’s thriller The Da Vinci Code.
One of two cardinals who are members of the group, Herranz has insisted that Opus Dei has “no hidden agenda” and is only interested in the “the message of Christ”, but he does appear to be cut out to be a Vatican troubleshooter, once stating that “men need to act decisively, like Jesus Christ – who was a real man”.
Herranz’s squad, which met for the first time this week, is just one of three inquiries now under way at the Holy See into the leak of letters in January and February that discuss the mysterious kidnapping of Emanuela Orlandi – the daughter of a Vatican employee in 1983 – the likely date of Benedict’s death and an internal row over just how transparent the Vatican bank should be as it tries to shrug off allegations of money laundering.
The most shocking revelations are in a letter addressed to the Vatican’s secretary of state by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, the deputy governor of Vatican City, denouncing the signing by employees of inflated contracts with friendly companies. As proof, Viganò said he had discovered the price of the Christmas nativity scene in St Peter’s Square was €250,000 (£204,000) more than it should have been.
One priest, who Viganò describes as “vulgar” and “arrogant” had been responsible for nepotism, fake invoicing and €70,000 going missing, he claimed.
After telling all, Viganò was reassigned to the US as papal nunzio, an appointment he describes as punishment for his honesty in a plaintive letter to Benedict in which he begs for a commission to look into his claims.
Since then, the Vatican has instead focused on finding out who leaked the letters, which it describes as “biased and trivial”.
“I hope the Vatican employs the same tenacity in improving transparency at its bank and in reopening the Orlandi kidnapping case as it has with this inquiry,” said Gianluigi Nuzzi, the Italian journalist who first broadcast the contents of the Viganò letters.
Herranz has been called in by the pope before to snuff out trouble at the Vatican. In 2007, he oversaw the suspension of a senior Vatican cleric who was secretly filmed telling a young man he was “hot” and that homosexual sex was not sinful.
Any employees now nabbed by Herranz and his team in the Vatileaks probe could be fired or face canonical punishment if they are clerics. But to track them down, the three “detectives” – as they were dubbed by Italian newspapers on Thursday – must penetrate the secretive world of the Vatican’s bureaucracy, a task that Il Messaggero warned could turn out to be a “Mission Impossible”.
Hebrews 4:12 (ESV)
For the Word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
(9000 marines leaving okinawa)
Deuteronomy 28:25 (ASV)
Jehovah will cause thee to be smitten before thine enemies; thou shalt go out one way against them, and shalt flee seven ways before them: and thou shalt be tossed to and from among all the kingdoms of the earth…
“Japan is not just a close ally, but also a close friend.” (yeah right…)
U.S., Japan unveil revised plan for Okinawa
By Paul Eckert | Reuters 27 April 2012
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States and Japan announced on Thursday a revised agreement on streamlining the U.S. military presence on Okinawa that will shift 9,000 Marines from the southern Japanese island to Guam and other Asia-Pacific sites.
The new plan, unveiled days before Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda meets President Barack Obama in Washington, helps the allies work around the central but still-unresolved dispute over moving the Futenma air base from a crowded part of Okinawa to a new site that has vexed relations for years.
“I am very pleased that, after many years, we have reached this important agreement and plan of action. I applaud the hard work and effort that went into crafting it,” U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said in a statement.
“Japan is not just a close ally, but also a close friend.”
Under the agreement, 9,000 U.S. Marines will be relocated. Five thousand will go to Guam and the rest to other sites such as Hawaii and Australia, a joint U.S.-Japanese statement said.
The updated version of a long-delayed 2006 plan was needed to achieve “a U.S. force posture in the Asia-Pacific region that is more geographically distributed, operationally resilient and politically sustainable,” the statement said.
Snags over Okinawa had raised questions about the viability of the Obama administration’s strategy of shifting U.S. forces from other regions to the Asia-Pacific to deal with nuclear saber-rattling by North Korea, the rapid military buildup of China and territorial disputes in the South China Sea.
Friction over U.S. bases intensified after the 1995 gang rape of a Japanese schoolgirl by U.S. servicemen. The case sparked widespread protests by Okinawans, who had long resented the American presence due to crime, noise and deadly accidents.
There are about 47,000 U.S. troops in Japan under a 1960 bilateral security treaty.
Okinawa, occupied by the United States from 1945-72, accounts for less than 1 percent of Japan’s total land but hosts three-quarters of the U.S. military facilities in the country in terms of land area.
“This has been … bogged down for years, but now we have been able to come up with a new approach de-linking the Futenma relocation from other elements, like moving out Marine forces to Guam and returning some parts of Okinawa,” said Ichiro Fujisaki, Japan’s ambassador to the United States.
“Things are going to start moving,” he told a gathering at a think tank in Washington.
Kurt Campbell, assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, said the deal was discussed widely with U.S. lawmakers, who had refused to fund the overhaul on Okinawa until the Futenma deadlock was resolved and the administration fully explained how the move would fit overall U.S. strategy.
“We think it breaks a very long stalemate … that has plagued our politics, that has clogged both of our systems,” said Campbell.
“REBALANCING” TOWARD ASIA-PACIFIC
A senior State Department official said: “This is really a key component of our strategic rebalancing toward the Asia-Pacific region.”
The new policy has also entailed closer U.S. military ties with the Philippines, Australia and Singapore.
The agreement includes a $3.1 billion cash commitment from Japan for the move to Guam as well as for developing joint training ranges on Guam and on Tinian and Pagan in the U.S.-controlled Northern Mariana Islands.
The previous agreement on the move to Guam had Japan providing $6.1 billion in support, with $2.8 billion in cash and the rest in financing arrangements. The two sides agreed to limit that to $3.1 billion from Japan because of the smaller footprint the Marines will have in Guam
Campbell acknowledged that more work needed to be done, including finding a replacement for Futenma.
Proposed replacement sites for Futenma on the subtropical island that lies between Japan’s main islands and Taiwan have met strong local opposition. At the same time Tokyo was in political disarray, with six prime ministers in six years.
“Does this agreement answer every question? It does not. Is there more programmatic and technical work that is necessary? Yes,” said Campbell.
“But at a fundamental level, we think this agreement moves the ball very substantially down the field in a way that no one would have anticipated a few months ago,” he said.
Separating the move to Guam from the Futenma issue frees up the allies to work more on cybersecurity, space, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance operations and ballistic missile defense, a senior U.S. Defense Department official said.
Senators Carl Levin, John McCain and Jim Webb – top members of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee who had frozen Okinawa funding until their budgetary and strategic questions were answered – said some of their concerns had been addressed.
“We still have many questions about the specific details of this statement and its implications for our force posture in the Asia-Pacific region,” they said in a statement, which also vowed to keep working on “a mutually beneficial, militarily effective, and fiscally sustainable agreement” on Okinawa and Guam.
(Additional reporting by David Alexander; Editing by Peter Cooney, Todd Eastham and Paul Tait)
(opening for a machinist)
Your editor has no background as a machinist…
This is posted as a service to whom it may concern…
Looking for veteran with the following skills. Please call me if you quality for this position.
We are looking for a Machinist.
This was the ad we posted:
General Machinist — HIRING IMMEDIATELY
• 3-4 years of experience in machinist
• Knowledge of machinist and precision measuring instruments
• Basic knowledge of all trades as it relates to machinist position
• Ability to read, write and follow written and oral instructions
• Ability to read and interpret blue prints and schematics
• Ability to meet on time performance for department to ensure customer satisfaction
• Operates all types of general machine shop machinery and tools.
• Maintains all supplies/materials.
• Provides consistent quality workmanship.
• Complies with all safety procedures and work instructions.
1. Assists all other trades in their various unique needs as it relates to machinists position.
2. Performs related work as required. (Note: The omission of specific statements of duties does not exclude them for position if the work is similar, related or logical assignment to the position.)
1. Position requires exerting 100 lbs. or more of force occasionally and /or up to 50 lbs., or more force frequently and /or 10 lbs. or more consistently to move objects,
2. Lift, climb, bend and kneel in order to complete assigned tasks.
Thanks and I will definitely let you know when we have other openings.
Susan Dickson, Veteran Employment Representative
TEXAS VETERANS COMMISSION
Stationed: Workforce Solutions-Workforce Solutions of NE TX
5210 NE Loop 286, Paris, TX 75460
Phone: Work (903) 784-4356, ext. 103 / Fax (903) 784-0655
Thank you for allowing me to serve your employment needs.
Posted in Uncategorized on April 27, 2012|
(arizona gov jan brewer)
Ariz. migrant case could lead to sweeping changes
By JACQUES BILLEAUD Apr 26, 4:30 AM (ET)
PHOENIX (AP) – The United States could see an official about-face in the coming months in how it confronts illegal immigration if the Supreme Court follows through on its suggestion that it would let local police enforce the most controversial part of Arizona’s immigration law.
Over the last several years, states frustrated with America’s porous borders, have rejected the long held notion that Washington is responsible for confronting illegal immigration and have passed a flurry of laws to let local police confront illegal immigration. The Supreme Court is poised in the coming months to let the states know whether they haven’t crossed the line.
The justices strongly suggested Wednesday that they are ready to let Arizona enforce the most controversial part of its law, a requirement that police officers check the immigration status of people they suspect are in the country illegally. Such a ruling could codify the type of local enforcement that some local authorities in Arizona have carried out over the last six years and open the door to such enforcement in states with similar laws, such as Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah.
“I think you’ll see more involvement by local police in immigration enforcement, an involvement that hadn’t previously been seen,” Kevin Johnson, law school dean at the University of California-Davis and an expert in immigration law, said of the possibility of Arizona’s law being upheld.
The most controversial parts of the Arizona law were put on hold by a federal judge shortly before they were to take effect in late July 2010, but the statute has encouraged other states to take up similar legislation and – combined with other state immigration laws and an ailing economy – played a part in 170,000 illegal immigrants leaving Arizona since 2007.
“If you want to turn around this invasion, then (you should) do attrition through enforcement,” said former state Sen. Russell Pearce, architect of the 2010 law and the driving force behind other Arizona immigration laws, echoing the stated purpose of the 2010 state law.
Arizona has argued it pays a disproportionate price for illegal immigration because of its 370-mile border with Mexico and its role as the busiest illegal entry point into the country.
The Obama administration, which challenged the law, said the law conflicts with a more nuanced federal immigration policy that seeks to balance national security, law enforcement, foreign policy, human rights and the rights of law-abiding citizens and immigrants. Civil rights groups that back the administration say Arizona’s and the other states’ measures encourage racial profiling and ethnic stereotyping.
A decision in the case is expected in late June.
Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne, whose office has helped defend the law, predicted the Supreme Court will uphold the law because many of its provision mirror existing federal laws and that a year from now the state will see even less illegal immigration. “You won’t see anything that noticeable as far as law enforcement goes,” Horne said. “But you will see less people sneaking across the border.”
The Supreme Court’s comments on the most controversial requirement in Arizona’s law surprised state officials who had supported the law and had thus far lost all major court battles over the law. “I think we’ll win. It’s just how big we win,” Pearce said.
Immigrant rights advocates, who believed the courts would reject attempts by states to grab more law enforcement power, also were surprised and said a validation of the law by the Supreme Court would frighten immigrants further and cause Latinos who are here legally to be asked about their immigration status.
“The crisis here in Arizona would only multiply,” said Carlos Garcia, organizer of an immigration march that drew several hundred people in downtown Phoenix on Wednesday. Authorities said at least nine people were arrested for blocking a street and refusing to move. “It would mean that anyone, as they are leaving their home – whether they are going to work, to church, where ever they are going – could be asked for their documents.”
During arguments Wednesday over the Arizona law, liberal and conservative justices reacted skeptically to the Obama administration’s argument that the state exceeded its authority when it made the records check, and another provision allowing suspected illegal immigrants to be arrested without a warrant, part of the Arizona law aimed at driving illegal immigrants elsewhere.
It was unclear what the court would do with other aspects of the law that have been put on hold by lower federal courts. The other blocked provisions make it a state crime for immigrants not to have immigration registration papers and for illegal immigrants to seek work or hold a job.
Peter Spiro, a Tempe University law professor who specializes in immigration law, predicted the court would uphold the police check of immigration status in Arizona’s law, but said he wouldn’t be surprised if the court threw out a provision making it a crime to be without immigration documents.
Such a ruling would let police question people about their immigration status if they have good reason to do so, but police would have to call federal authorities to see if they would want to pick up anyone found to be in the country illegally. If federal agents decline, officers would have to release the people, unless they were suspected of committing crimes, Spiro said.
If that happened, the law would be mostly symbolic, but would still carry some significance for immigrants, Spiro said.
“It would make it clear that Arizona is unfriendly to undocumented aliens,” Spiro said.
Deuteronomy 32:39 (AKJV)
See now that I, even I, am He, and there is no god with Me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of My hand.
Posted in Uncategorized on April 27, 2012|