But sin is a disgrace to any people.
Proverbs 14:34
THE TRUE TEMPLE OF SOLOMON – THE
ETERNAL ARK OF THE COVENANT AWAITS OUR
CONVERSION – LET US RUN TO HER SON THE
GOD-MAN
************************
Message of His Holiness BENEDICT XVI
For Lent 2008
“Christ made Himself poor for you” (2 Cor 8,9)
Dear Brothers and Sisters!
1. Each year, Lent offers us a providential opportunity to deepen the meaning and value of our Christian lives, and it stimulates us to rediscover the mercy of God so that we, in turn, become more merciful toward our brothers and sisters. In the Lenten period, the Church makes it her duty to propose some specific tasks that accompany the faithful concretely in this process of interior renewal: these are prayer, fasting and almsgiving. For this year’s Lenten Message, I wish to spend some time reflecting on the practice of almsgiving, which represents a specific way to assist those in need and, at the same time, an exercise in self-denial to free us from attachment to worldly goods. The force of attraction to material riches and just how categorical our decision must be not to make of them an idol, Jesus confirms in a resolute way: “You cannot serve God and mammon” (Lk 16,13). Almsgiving helps us to overcome this constant temptation, teaching us to respond to our neighbor’s needs and to share with others whatever we possess through divine goodness. This is the aim of the special collections in favor of the poor, which are promoted during Lent in many parts of the world. In this way, inward cleansing is accompanied by a gesture of ecclesial communion, mirroring what already took place in the early Church. In his Letters, Saint Paul speaks of this in regard to the collection for the Jerusalem community (cf. 2 Cor 8-9; Rm 15, 25-27).
2. According to the teaching of the Gospel, we are not owners but rather administrators of the goods we possess: these, then, are not to be considered as our exclusive possession, but means through which the Lord calls each one of us to act as a steward of His providence for our neighbor. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church reminds us, material goods bear a social value, according to the principle of their universal destination (cf. n. 2404)
In the Gospel, Jesus explicitly admonishes the one who possesses and uses earthly riches only for self. In the face of the multitudes, who, lacking everything, suffer hunger, the words of Saint John acquire the tone of a ringing rebuke: “How does God’s love abide in anyone who has the world’s goods and sees a brother or sister in need and yet refuses to help?” (1 Jn 3,17). In those countries whose population is majority Christian, the call to share is even more urgent, since their responsibility toward the many who suffer poverty and abandonment is even greater. To come to their aid is a duty of justice even prior to being an act of charity.
3. The Gospel highlights a typical feature of Christian almsgiving: it must be hidden: “Do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing,” Jesus asserts, “so that your alms may be done in secret” (Mt 6,3-4). Just a short while before, He said not to boast of one’s own good works so as not to risk being deprived of the heavenly reward (cf. Mt 6,1-2). The disciple is to be concerned with God’s greater glory. Jesus warns: “In this way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father in heaven” (Mt 5,16). Everything, then, must be done for God’s glory and not our own. This understanding, dear brothers and sisters, must accompany every gesture of help to our neighbor, avoiding that it becomes a means to make ourselves the center of attention. If, in accomplishing a good deed, we do not have as our goal God’s glory and the real well being of our brothers and sisters, looking rather for a return of personal interest or simply of applause, we place ourselves outside of the Gospel vision. In today’s world of images, attentive vigilance is required, since this temptation is great. Almsgiving, according to the Gospel, is not mere philanthropy: rather it is a concrete expression of charity, a theological virtue that demands interior conversion to love of God and neighbor, in imitation of Jesus Christ, who, dying on the cross, gave His entire self for us. How could we not thank God for the many people who silently, far from the gaze of the media world, fulfill, with this spirit, generous actions in support of one’s neighbor in difficulty? There is little use in giving one’s personal goods to others if it leads to a heart puffed up in vainglory: for this reason, the one, who knows that God “sees in secret” and in secret will reward, does not seek human recognition for works of mercy.
4. In inviting us to consider almsgiving with a more profound gaze that transcends the purely material dimension, Scripture teaches us that there is more joy in giving than in receiving (cf. Acts 20,35). When we do things out of love, we express the truth of our being; indeed, we have been created not for ourselves but for God and our brothers and sisters (cf. 2 Cor 5,15). Every time when, for love of God, we share our goods with our neighbor in need, we discover that the fullness of life comes from love and all is returned to us as a blessing in the form of peace, inner satisfaction and joy. Our Father in heaven rewards our almsgiving with His joy. What is more: Saint Peter includes among the spiritual fruits of almsgiving the forgiveness of sins: “Charity,” he writes, “covers a multitude of sins” (1 Pt 4,8). As the Lenten liturgy frequently repeats, God offers to us sinners the possibility of being forgiven. The fact of sharing with the poor what we possess disposes us to receive such a gift. In this moment, my thought turns to those who realize the weight of the evil they have committed and, precisely for this reason, feel far from God, fearful and almost incapable of turning to Him. By drawing close to others through almsgiving, we draw close to God; it can become an instrument for authentic conversion and reconciliation with Him and our brothers.
5. Almsgiving teaches us the generosity of love. Saint Joseph Benedict Cottolengo forthrightly recommends: “Never keep an account of the coins you give, since this is what I always say: if, in giving alms, the left hand is not to know what the right hand is doing, then the right hand, too, should not know what it does itself” (Detti e pensieri, Edilibri, n. 201). In this regard, all the more significant is the Gospel story of the widow who, out of her poverty, cast into the Temple treasury “all she had to live on” (Mk 12,44). Her tiny and insignificant coin becomes an eloquent symbol: this widow gives to God not out of her abundance, not so much what she has, but what she is. Her entire self.
We find this moving passage inserted in the description of the days that immediately precede Jesus’ passion and death, who, as Saint Paul writes, made Himself poor to enrich us out of His poverty (cf. 2 Cor 8,9); He gave His entire self for us. Lent, also through the practice of almsgiving, inspires us to follow His example. In His school, we can learn to make of our lives a total gift; imitating Him, we are able to make ourselves available, not so much in giving a part of what we possess, but our very selves. Cannot the entire Gospel be summarized perhaps in the one commandment of love? The Lenten practice of almsgiving thus becomes a means to deepen our Christian vocation. In gratuitously offering himself, the Christian bears witness that it is love and not material richness that determines the laws of his existence. Love, then, gives almsgiving its value; it inspires various forms of giving, according to the possibilities and conditions of each person.
6. Dear brothers and sisters, Lent invites us to “train ourselves” spiritually, also through the practice of almsgiving, in order to grow in charity and recognize in the poor Christ Himself. In the Acts of the Apostles, we read that the Apostle Peter said to the cripple who was begging alms at the Temple gate: “I have no silver or gold, but what I have I give you; in the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, walk” (Acts 3,6). In giving alms, we offer something material, a sign of the greater gift that we can impart to others through the announcement and witness of Christ, in whose name is found true life. Let this time, then, be marked by a personal and community effort of attachment to Christ in order that we may be witnesses of His love. May Mary, Mother and faithful Servant of the Lord, help believers to enter the “spiritual battle” of Lent, armed with prayer, fasting and the practice of almsgiving, so as to arrive at the celebration of the Easter Feasts, renewed in spirit. With these wishes, I willingly impart to all my Apostolic Blessing.
From the Vatican, 30 October 2007
BENEDICTUS PP. XVI
************************
2. On Kings - Two ‘Great’ leaders of the past
Kingship and Empires are evidently ‘old fashioned’ concepts. All baptised are called to share in God’s plan. As the baptised are the children of God then we all are princes, princesses, kings and queens. When the baptised ignore the power of their baptism they neglect their future inheritance. Lets look at certain ‘good’ Catholic royalty of the past who were ‘heads and shoulders’ above their contemporary royalty friends and relatives, lets study and imitate them as symbols of our spiritual inheritance.
The Danes, the Swedes and the Norwegians were collectively termed as the ‘Vikings’ or the ‘Nordic people.’ In the period 800-1100, they raided large areas of Eastern and Western Europe. Referred to as the ‘Heathens from the Sea,’ they initially were not considered to be as dangerous as land invaders. The Vikings believed in Odin, in Thor, in Balder and in the land of the Valhalla. Later, the Carlovingian (Carolingian) French, the Celtic and Saxon people seriously contended with these races. In England, the first Christian settlements to be raided were the monasteries, such as the monastery founded by the Irish Saint Aiden at Lindisfarne, the Holy Island, off the northeast coast of England. In the ensuing battles involving the English as they defended their land and their Christian identity against the pagan Vikings, two English royal monarchs, King Edmund and King Alfred (the founder of the British Navy), achieved sainthood. In 839, following an angelic message of dire warning for the English Kingdom, delivered to a priest, King Ethelwulf left on a penitential pilgrimage to Rome. The angel made known to Ethelwulf that the sins of the Christians of his land, “…were crying out in their iniquity and that the prayers of the saints could no longer stay the justice of heaven.”(1) If the people were not to turn swiftly to repentance, fasting and almsgiving and worship the true God, keeping His Holy Day, then hordes of heathen would descend upon their land with a multitude of ships and lay waste the lands and the English with fire and sword.
The invasions of the Vikings commenced in 840.
King Alfred the Great was born in 849. At age four, King Alfred, was taken on pilgrimage to Rome accompanied by a retinue of nobles and servants. In Rome Saint Leo IV adopted Alfred as his spiritual son, making him a Roman Consul, arming him with a sword and a white and purple cloak and favoring him with a spiritual kingship. Together with his father, Alfred revisited Rome in 855, where at the tomb of the Roman martyrs, King Ethelwulf prayed for the salvation of his land. During his childhood, Alfred learnt the daily services and hours and many psalms by heart. He kept all his spiritual readings in a book, which he used well into adulthood. Alfred was a great devotee of Saint Cuthbert and Our Lady. The Prince suffered from an illness and one day whilst hunting, he stopped to pray at Saint Gwinear Church in Cornwall. There he prayed to have his illness replaced by a less crippling one, which would not make him useless to the kingdom. His prayer was granted and at age nineteen, on his wedding day, whilst marrying Elswith a daughter of a nobleman from Mercia, he received a new illness. As Alfred reached adulthood, the Danes invaded with fleets of up to three hundred and fifty ships. Most parts of England, including Kent, Essex, East Anglia and Devon, where overrun by the pagans. The Vikings ransacked towns and cities and laid waste the monasteries and churches. King Ethelwulf was succeeded by his sons, a few ruled well and others less wisely. It was during the time of King Ethelred, in the year 867, that Alfred supported his brother in warfare.
Saint Edmund was born on Christmas day in 841 and succeeded to the throne of East Anglia in 856. He fought alongside King Alfred against the invading pagans. In 869, a large Viking Army landed in England and Edmund was captured and ordered to renounce his Faith and submit to the heathen Danes. His reply was that he had vowed to live under Christ alone and to reign under Christ alone and that living or dead, nothing would separate him from the love of Christ. In this manner he repeated Saint George’s affirmation, quoting Saint Paul’s Romans 8:35-37. Similarly to Saint Sebastian, he was bound to a tree and riddled with arrows and later beheaded. His martyrdom took place on November 20, 869, at Hoxne in Suffolk. In 902, King Edmund’s relics were found incorrupt and translated to a town, which to this day bears his name, ‘Bury Saint Edmunds’ or ‘Saint Edmundsbury.’ Certain relics of the Saint were taken to France and returned to the Roman Catholic authorities in England in 1901. Today King Edmund’s relics are kept locked away at a private Catholic Chapel in Arundel in Sussex. In 871, the Danes intended to pillage Berkshire in Wessex. The English Catholics were successful in a skirmish at Englefield but lost at Reading. At Ashdown on the Berkshire Hills, Alfred and Ethelred defeated the heathen Vikings. Previous to battle, Alfred prayed to the Lord and was granted victory. However, he subsequently lost battles at Basing and in Wiltshire. At this point when things were not well for the Catholic English, a fresh Viking Army arrived from Denmark to reinforce the present one. During Easter of 871, King Ethelred passed away leaving the defense and the kingdom in the hands of the newly crowned, twenty-three year old King Alfred. During the same year, the King conducted nine battles against the pagans. After sustaining great losses, Alfred paid the Vikings a ‘denegeld’ or ransom for them to leave. This payment allowed a period of calm to reign in the beleaguered Wessex, lasting from 872 to 875. Alfred was granted enough time to reorganize the army and navy. The pagan Danes would not quit and ravaged London and the south of Scotland. Wessex alone remained under English control. Invoking the Lord for assistance, Alfred fought a naval battle against the Danes and was victorious. The Vikings had a fleet of 120 ships, which were wrecked in a storm off Swanage; they invaded Wareham in Dorset, Exeter in Devon, Gloucester and the royal estate in Chippenham, destroying and pillaging churches and all opposition as they progressed. In 878, Alfred was taken by surprise by a large Viking Army and sought refuge. A third invasion of Wessex, forced Alfred and a band of his ablest men to rove among the woods and the marshes of Somerset. Their morale must have reached an all time low when they were obliged to forage from local peasants for food. The band retreated through the alder forests and reedy marshes, camping on the Island of Athelney, where they built a stronghold. From there the King planned and plotted against the heathen menace.
At Athelny, things began to improve, the King received a vision from a deceased priest and holy hermit named Neot assuring him victory. A pilgrim had inquired for food and out of his generosity, Alfred offered him half of his own. Before the King’s eyes the pilgrim vanished, the mysterious guest was Saint Cuthbert who appeared in vision, assuring the King and pledging victory with the words: “All Albion is given to you and your sons.”(2) As in previous situations, Alfred invoked the aid of the Blessed Virgin and her Son Our Lord, for a sure victory. The first battle won was against a fleet at Countisbury. The most famous victory took place at Edington and is remembered as ‘the Battle of Ethandune.’ Alfred fought an impressively huge army of Vikings and won by God’s will and Our Lady’s intervention. The Battle of Ethandune took place in 878 and was the turning point for Catholic England. Following Ethandune, Guthrum, similarly to the Viking convert in France (Rollo the Norman), made a pact of peace with the Christians. Finally, at Chippenham a peace-treaty (referred to as the Treaty of Wedmore) was made with the Vikings. Guthrum retained for himself Northumbria and was baptized together with many other Viking leaders at Aller in Somerset. Taking the noble English name ‘Athelstan,’ King Alfred stood as his godfather. Evidently this was only possible through the powerful intercession of Our Lady of Mercy, who manifests God’s Mercy in diverse ways. During the times of peace and conversion, the Vikings were accepted amongst the local population and were the founders of towns such as York in England and Dublin in Ireland. The Danes now retreated and others settled in peace and the Catholic spirit of England was gradually restored.
Queen Elswith was to survive her husband, King Alfred, and complete his work of building the convent or ‘Nunnaminster’ in Winchester, which was dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary. There she lived and died and after her passing away, was revered as a saint.
In Gilbert K. Chesterton’s ‘The Ballad of the White Horse,’(3) Chesterton describes the ‘Mother of God’ appearing to Alfred:
“Her face was like an open wordWhen brave men speak and choose,
The very colors of her coat
Were better than good news.”
She sends Alfred to raise an army to fight off the Danes.
“The King looked up, and what he saw
Was a great light like death,
For Our Lady stood on the standard’s rent,
As lovely and as innocent
As when beneath white walls she wentIn the lilies of Nazareth.”
Later:
“Over the iron forestHe saw Our Lady stand;
Her eyes were sad withouten art,
And seven swords were in her heart,
But one was in her hand.
The Mother of God goes over them (the Vikings)
On dreadful Cherubs borne;
And the psalm is roaring above the rune,
And the Cross goes over the sun and moon;
Endeth the Battle of Ethandune
With the blowing of the horn.”
”Blessed Virgin Mary: Enmity and War” (c) USA 2008 Jozef Sinpaal
************************
Karl I of Augsburg
Vatican: Pope expresses sympathy for Knights of Malta chief
After the conquest of Jerusalem in 1099 during the First Crusade, the order became a Catholic military one under its own charter and gained sovereignty over the Greek island of Rhodes. It later operated from Malta until it was removed by Napoleon.
The Order of Malta retains its claim of sovereignty under international law and has been granted permanent observer status at the United Nations.
It issues its own passports, stamps and coins and has formal diplomatic relations with 100 states.
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND STOWAWAYS175 Million people currently reside in a country other than where they were born, double the number since 1975.½ a million illegal immigrants who enter Europe each year, one-fourth come via Spain.The main entry point to Spain is the strait of Gibraltar, where the rough waters, claim the lives of many would-be asylum seekers.Last year Spain police intercepted some 14,000 illegal immigrants and 663 illegal vessels. 2.7 million foreigners in Europe about 1 million have no valid papers.Spain’s long coast and proximity to North Africa make it attractive to people smugglers.In average income is 12 times higher in Spain than Morocco. The income gulf is even larger between Spain and West Africa.
The entry points in Spain are Barbate, Algeciras, Gibraltar and Malaga. Smugglers are demanding US$ 1,000 for the short dangerous crossing of the strait of Gibraltar.
It hurts very much to say that, the smugglers tell people to wound themselves, to make sure they get to a hospital because the hospital will give them papers.
Another entry point to Europe is Lampedusa, a tiny Italian Island North of Tunisia and Libya and South of Sicily.
Lampedusa, is situated some 125 miles South East of Sicily and just over 60 miles North of Tunisia.
More than 5,000 people have died trying to cross the Mediterranean to Europe since 1996.
2 million people have moved towards the North African Coast in the hope of being able to reach Europe via Italy by Boat. Most come to Libya from West Africa, the Horn of Africa and East Africa through Chad, Niger and Sudan.
In the 1990s Libyan leader Col. Mummar Gadaffi opened his country’s boarders to thousands of Sub-Saharan Africans in the name African Unity, about 600,000 came.
Today Libya’s leadership has ratified laws to restrict immigrants and to expatriate immigrants who have no steady jobs.
Some Africans come to Libya as their first step to reach Europe by crossing the Mediterranean Sea and entering Italy.
They use rickety boats to me the trip. 200 would be illegal immigrants drowned last year when their Fishing boats capsized.
Immigration in Europe is worth more than US$ 3 Billion per year. The trip across the Mediterranean alone cost as much as 2,000 Euros (USD$ 2,400.00) per person. They are 1.5million illegal immigrants living in Germany, 300,000 in Italy while France has 400,000 inside its borders.
The total number of undocumented aliens currently residing in South Africa is 12million. This includes both people from neighbouring Southern Africa countries, East Africa, West Africa, the horn of Africa, Central Africa and more distant countries such as Mexico, Brazil, China, Pakistan, India and Eastern European countries.
STOWAWAYS
Many Stowaways immigrate to other countries before boarding Ocean-going vessels to Europe.
Sources of Stowaways are; Tanzania, Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, Guinea and Ghana.
Areas affected by migrants Stowaways are; Mozambique, Algeria, Ivory Coast and South Africa.
Tanzanians and Kenyans travel to South Africa through Mozambique and Zimbabwe.
Nigeria and Ghanian Stowaways often travel away from their homelands before boarding ocean-going vessels.
Morocco and Algeria are used as paths for Stowaways travelling towards the Mediterranean and Europe and people smuggling is rife in the area. Turkey acts as a magnet to immigrants and Stowaways trying to illegally enter Europe.
Large number of African and East European Stowaways successfully transit Europe before boarding vessels at East European Ports.
As at September 30th, 2004 total number of Stowaways incidents reported is 2,384. A large influx of stowaways from China into North America is on the rise. A significant increase can be expected in Stowaways crossing the Pacific Ocean in specially adapted containers.
In one recent case 32 Chinese were hidden in two boxes. They were well-equipped with food, water, a latrine, winter clothing, fans and rope ladders.
Trap doors had been cut into the sides and bottoms and made to look like simple repairs. These, however, could be broken open with a hammer – also provided when the ship reached next port of call.
Several countries are getting tougher on the disembarkation and repatriation of Stowaways.
In the Netherlands, for instance, the authorities and the master of a Dutch Chemical Tanker have been engaged in a stand-off for the several months over the fate of three African Stowaways.
The Netherlands authorities are insisting the Ship to take the Stowaways back to where they came from in North Africa, while the Master of the vessel is refusing to take them back on board.
Migrants workers and their families, totalling 120 million globally, are amongst the most exploited and least protected in the world.
Women represent an increasing proportion of the migrant population, as much as 70% of the migrant labour force in some countries. Yet they are subject to discrimination on two fronts – as migrants and as woman.
Europe attracts more migrants workers than any other region – some 30 million including families. These workers, who mainly come from developing countries and are now being joined by increasing numbers of migrants from Eastern Europe, are often employed in low skill low pay jobs, particularly in Labour intensive industries such as cleaning or the restaurant trade.
In the agricultural sector, where local labour is in short supply, the demand for migrant labourers is particularly high. Most of these labourers come from Africa, Central and Eastern Europe. They work long hours for poverty wages, are in unstable employment and are subject to appalling health and safety conditions.
Majority of the migrant workers is recruited informally or even by Mafia-type organisations.
It hurts very much to note that, many host countries have failed to ratify the new international convention on the protection of migrant workers and members of their families, which came into effect in July, 2003.
Despite, the fact that majority of the illegal migrants and Stowaways come from Africa, it is a disgrace to note that the African states are doing nothing unto this matter.
Many African illegal migrants have lost their lives at high seas and many African Stowaways have been discovered – dead or in a poor state in rudder housings or chain lockers.
East Africa and West Africa has the highest number of Stowaways in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Few of the Stowaways reach their destinations, mainly in Europe as many are cast adrift in Coastal waters or tossed into the high seas and left for dead. In extreme cases Stowaways are thrown into the seas to drown, as happened in 1985 when a Greek ship MV Garifalia threw 11 African Stowaways into shark infested waters off the Somali Coast.
Africa has more youths running away from biting economic hardships as Stowaways than any other continent.
It is disheartening to say that Xenophobia is rising alarmingly. Unpunished attacks on foreigners are disturbingly common; and foreigners are regularly victimized by the police, coast guards and by guards at detention facilities.
Andrew Mwangura
Programs Co-ordinator
Seafarers Assistance Program
Franco Frattini
http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/frattini/welcome/default_en.htm
I am Vice-President of the European Commission. I am responsible for Justice, Freedom and Security.
These web pages tell you about my key priorities which include:
- Fundamental rights and citizenship
- The fight against terrorism and organised crime
- Immigration and asylum, visa and border issues
- Closer co-operation between police, judicial and customs authorities
- Ensuring all EU citizens have the same access to justice
- The Rights of the Child
What we decide in the European Union on these issues will have a direct impact on your daily life.
It is important to bring these matters closer to EU citizens and explain their relevance. I therefore meet with many people, including local people working at the forefront in Member States. See the Agenda for more details.
Please also visit the website of the Directorate-General “Justice, Freedom and Security” Here you will find more information on the portfolio.
I hope you will continue visiting this website regularly. If you have any comments please contact us.
Franco Frattini
Responsible for Justice, Freedom and Security
“It is as impossible to do this…….(an accomplishment)
as it is (impossible) to pray to Allah in Malta!!!”
- 400-500 year old Egyptian proverb on Malta.
However Franco Frattini is allowing for a new situation on the tiny Island….
Franco Frattini (born 14 March 1957 in Rome) is an Italian politician, currently serving as European Commissioner for Justice, Freedom and Security. He is also one of five vice-presidents of the 27-member Barroso Commission.
[edit] Career
Initially a member of the Italian Socialist Party, Frattini was a member of Silvio Berlusconi’s government since 2001, and Foreign Minister of Italy since November 14, 2002; he is also a member of Berlusconi’s Forza Italia.
On November 4, 2004, he was nominated to take up the Justice portfolio in the Commission, in place of the controversial Rocco Buttiglione (who outed him as a Freemason).[1] His resignation from the Italian government took effect on November 18. Deputy Prime Minister Gianfranco Fini succeeded him as Foreign Minister.
Reports on Gamespot showed he was seeking a Europe-wide ban on violent videogames. On 6 February 2007 – Safer Internet Day 2007 – Frattini recalled the need to protect children’s rights, saying: “I am deeply concerned at this potential harm by the internet to children. This could involve people preying on them or children accessing racist, cruel or violent material.”[2][3]
Interviewed by Reuters he declared his intention to promote online communications monitoring and censorship of “dangerous words” like “bomb, kill, genocide or terrorism” and is expected make a proposal to member states in November 2007.[4]
Rocco Buttiglione was originally proposed by Italy as Commissioner for Justice, Freedom, & Security. However during his interview with the European Parliament he expressed conservative views regarding women and homosexuality which the Parliament thought incompatible with the portfolio. Buttiglione was eventually withdrawn and Franco Frattini proposed in his place who was approved by the Parliament. Frattini has outlined his key priorities as: fundamental Rights and citizenship; the fight against terrorism and organised crime; immigration and asylum, visa and border issues; closer co-operation between police, judicial and customs authorities; ensuring all EU citizens have the same access to justice; and the Rights of the Child.
In February 2006 during the Danish cartoons row he defended the media’s freedom of speech, though did express disagreement with subject of the cartoons [1]. November saw the commissioner’s concern for child welfare extended to video games, calling for tougher controls; anything relating to stricter self-regulation to an outright ban [2] During that year, the staff of his DG grew to 465, accounting for 16% of the Commission’s workload (75% more than any other area).[3]
At the start of 2007, Frattini backed an Italian push for EU support of a world wide ban on the death penalty. The Commissioner has been pushing for greater cooperation along Europe’s borders, in March proposing backing Frontex with what Frattini describes as an “embryo of what the European coastguard” would be.[4] A number of boats and aircraft were promised to Frontex, by July 2007 few have yet arrived. Despite planning to introduce permanent patrols, Frattini was criticised for contributing to the migration situation in Malta; due to the islands position, Malta receives a lot of illegal immigrants attempting to cross to Europe. Although they do not intend to live in Malta, migrants entering the EU need to be processed in the country they enter and Malta does not have the facilities to cope with such large numbers.[5] In April he has called for more powers to be given to Eurojust, with the power to initiate prosecutions with a European Public Prosecutor [6]. He relaxed visas on the western Balkan countries signifying closer cooperation with the region [7], proposed an EU “blue card”, based on the US “green card” scheme[3] and has begun a push for common asylum policies[8]. Following the 2007 Glasgow International Airport attack he criticised the handling of Islam by member-states and called for a “European Islam”.[9]
CALLED FOR A EUROPEAN ISLAM ?? WHAT IS A EUROPEAN ISLAM ??
IS HE CALLING FOR A MALTESE ISLAM ?? THEN HE HAS SUCCEEDED – THE ISLAMISATION OF MALTA IS UNDERWAY !!
Patriotism is not xenophobia!
Patriotism is not fascism!
Patriotism is the love of one’s Nation (alluded to as a ’state’ by the destroyers of sovereignty)
Patriotism includes the love of the Nation’s identity (including its religion)
Patriorism is not fundamentalism!
Catholicism is not fundamentalism!
Franco Frattini
http://www.maltamedia.com/artman2/publish/eu/article_2154.shtml
| AFM chief defends Malta; attacks Frattini By Maltamedia News Jun 5, 2007 – 2:09:27 PM |
|
The chief of the Armed Forces of Malta, Brigadier Carmel Vassallo defended Malta ’s position on the issue of illegal immigration saying that Malta is doing much more than Italy, France or Spain to rescue these persons especially as Libya irresponsibly continues to be reluctant to provide assistance, The Times of Malta reported.
This reaction was spearheaded by an international chorus of dissent in the last fortnight, with Mr Frattini and Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights Thomas Hammarberg urging Malta to stop hiding behind legal bureaucratic arguments while letting people die.
Brigadier Vassallo came out strongly in his army’s defence following what he termed “surprising” comments by EU Justice Commissioner Franco Frattini who accused Malta of shirking its responsibilities.
Brigadier Vassallo believes that Mr Frattini’s comments to the Italian newspaper La Repubblica were made prematurely. The Times reported Brigadier Vassallo commenting: “In my personal opinion, I believe the EU is still not convinced of the extent of the problem of illegal immigration around our seas. Is Mr Frattini expecting Malta to see to a boat in distress just 40 miles north of Libya, because Libya is refusing to do so?” “Does Mr Frattini know that Lampedusa is located geographically closer to Libya than Malta ? So why doesn’t he expect the Italians to assist, when they have a coast guard, the Guardia di Finanza and the navy?”
On the other hand, events over the last 16 days show that the AFM has been stretched to the limit as it struggles to meet its responsibilities.
Brigadier Vassallo asked why is Europe attacking Malta and says nothing about Libya. He recalled that a memorandum of understanding for search and rescue cooperation drafted out with Libya last February has remained unsigned, despite pledges to finalise the agreement by April. Malta is arguing that it should not intervene in cases which take place in Libyan waters.
While Malta represents only a tiny landmass in comparison to other nations, the Maltese search and rescue region covers in excess of 250,000 square km. “We are capable of coordinating any search and rescue mission but it doesn’t necessarily mean we are capable of carrying out the rescue” Brigadier Vassallo said, adding that “if we have a search and rescue case at the extreme eastern side of the rescue region we would be in difficulty. That’s why Malta has drafted an agreement with Greece, the way we want to do with Libya .”
Still, despite its limitations, the AFM is doing its utmost, he insisted. Ultimately, the commander claimed, Malta has never failed to take action when there were potentially fatal situations. Yet, the international media persisted in putting the spotlight on Malta .
Source: The Times of Malta
Read more about this issue in MaltaMedia’s Special Feature Lanċa Ġejja u Ohra Sejra
© Copyright 2007 by MaltaMedia.com
Franco Frattini
Frontex
Frattini wants Malta branch
European Justice Commissioner Franco Frattini said yesterday that Malta will be the ideal location to host a Frontex branch responsible for the agency’s operations in the Mediterranean.
Unveiling proposals aimed at strengthening the EU border management system, Mr Frattini told The Times during a press conference in Brussels that he wants this new specialised branch to be based on the island.
“In view of the developments towards more permanent operations by Frontex and the evolution of the task for the agency as a whole, consideration should now be given to the setting up of specialised branches in member states through which the agency may operate for a practical organisation of joint operations and pilot projects.
“Priority should be given to a branch for the southern maritime borders,” he said.
Asked where this branch could be located, Mr Frattini said he would support the proposal for an agency in Malta.
Malta’s name to host Frontex or one of its branches surfaced some years ago when the EU was deciding which member state should host the agency. Malta had expressed an interest and submitted a formal request to host the agency’s headquarters.
In the end, however, the EU had agreed to establish the agency in Warsaw, Poland – the biggest of the new member states.
Commission sources said yesterday that Mr Frattini’s insistence that a new branch for the Mediterranean should be allocated to Malta “will do justice with the island”.
Frontex has been active in Malta, particularly in its seas, since its inception and has so far conducted annual border patrols in the Sicily-Malta-Libya strait against illegal migration. This year’s patrols are expected to become longer, spanning the whole illegal migration season.
Malta was instrumental in doubling the agency’s budget for this year.
On the initiative of Nationalist MEP Simon Busuttil, the European Parliament agreed to increase the agency’s budget from €40 million last year to €70 million this year.
Apart from strengthening the role Frontex plays, the Commission’s new proposals include other measures aimed at developing the management of its frontiers. These include facilitating border surveillance by improving cooperation between member states and using new technology, intensifying joint operations between member states and the launching of an entry-exit system to facilitate better oversight of persons entering or exiting the Schengen area.
The proposals also include the creation of a registered traveller programme for quick and easy travel for frequent travellers from non-EU countries who satisfy a pre-screening assessment.
Proposals at a glance
• Frontex will establish specialised regional branches. First priority should be given to a branch for the southern Mediterranean region.
• Frontex should have its own equipment to be able to intervene against illegal migration.
• EU will create a European border surveillance system to prevent unauthorised border crossings, reducing the number of illegal immigrants perishing at sea and increasing the internal security of the EU.
• Member states will interlink and streamline existing surveillance systems and mechanisms.
• EU and member states will improve surveillance tools and sensors (like satellites, unmanned aerial vehicles).
• EU will start talks on the introduction of an entry/exit system for third country nationals and on changing visas to electronic authorisation requirement.
FRONTEX IS A GOOD MOVE WHICH WILL SAVE THE LIVES OF SO MANY FOOLISH AND DESPERATE IMMIGRANTS – FRONTEX WILL SAVE THEIR LIVES HOWEVER MORE IS NEEDED, MORE EXPERTISE MORE FUNDS TO SEPARATE THE ASYLUM SEEKER FROM THE ECONOMIC ILLEGAL. AND ALSO TO SEPARATE THESE TWO GROUPS FROM THE SNEEKY TERRORIST BELONGING TO THE NORTH AFRICAN AL-QAEDA – HOW ARE THE MALTESE, SPANISH, FRENCH, ITALIAN COAST GUARDS TO IDENTIFY THE FOLLOWING GROUPS ?
-
ECONOMIC ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT
-
ASYLUM SEEKER
-
TERRORIST FUNDAMENTALIST AL QAEDA CELL
-
CIVIL CRIMINAL, RAPIST OR MURDERER
-
RELIGIOUS - (AN AFRICAN PRIEST WAS ACTUALLY HELD IN A DETENTION CENTRE FOR 18 MONTHS BEFORE BEING RELEASED)
FRONTEX WILL ENABLE THE SAFE PASSAGE OF ILLEGAL ECONOMIC IMMIGRANTS INTO MALTA AND THE EUROPEAN UNION.
A MORE EFFECIENT FRONTEX (WITHOUT THE OTHER NEW CIVIL STRUCTURES TO DIFFERENTIATE AND SEPARATE THE ABOVE MENTIONED ILLEGALS) WILL ENSURE THAT THE PRESENT CRISIS IS COMPOUNDED.
WHEN AN ILLEGAL ECONOMIC IMMIGRANT IS QUESTIONED HOW IS HE/SHE TO PROVE THAT HE/SHE IS AN ILLEGAL ECONOMIC IMMIGRANT NOT AN ASYLUM SEEKER ? – BASICALLY THE ILLEGAL ECONOMIC IMMIGRANT’S WORDS ARE BELIEVED.
THIS MANNER OF TACKLING ILLEGAL ECONOMIC IMMIGRANTS IS NOT PRACTISED BY AMERICAN COASTAL PATROL GUARDS WHO ARREST AND PROSECUTE CATHOLIC ‘LATINO’ ILLEGAL ECONOMIC IMMIGRANTS.
Latino – the Mexicans are descendents of the Aztec, Inca and Mayan civilisations, they are not latins however are Catholic – thankfully due to the work of Our Lady who appeared to Juan Diego at Guadalupe.
With the EU funds
- after being given a Maltese passport –
all Illegal Economic Immigrants
- who Franco Frattini acknowledges Malta should repatriate -
should either be repatriated or sent to Franco Frattini’s home town.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_the_United_States
Causes of illegal immigration
See also causes for illegal immigration.
[edit] Supply
The Pew Hispanic Center has estimated that 56% of illegal immigrants come from Mexico.[16] Therefore, it may be worthwhile to focus on causes specific to illegal immigration from Mexico.
Mexico has a free market economy in the trillion dollar class[17] and the highest income per capita in Latin America[18], but it ranks last among Latin American countries in spending for health and is in 17th place out of 25 countries in spending on education[19]. The Mexican government’s failure to follow through on its assurances to the Clinton administration that the Mexican government would invest billions of dollars in roads, schooling, sanitation, housing, and other needs to accommodate new factories, resulted in only a limited number of new factories (“maquiladoras“) following NAFTA, the majority of which were produced in a zone near the U.S. border. Fewer factories meant fewer factory jobs. This failure to invest in its infrastructure also meant that China was able to out compete Mexico in the production of inexpensive manufactured goods, thus displacing Mexican workers. The number of manufacturing workers dropped from 4.1 million in 2000 to 3.5 million in 2004.[20] Also, the U.S. was able to out compete Mexico in the production of inexpensive corn (maize). Consequently, the price of maize in Mexico fell 70% between 1994 and 2001, and the number of farm jobs dropped from 8.1 million in 1993 to 6.8 million in 2002[21].
While Mexico is a wealthy country, it also has a high income disparity[22]. Ugo Pipitone, an economist with the Center for Economic Research and Teaching in Mexico City states that in Mexico the top 10 percent of wage earners earn some 36 times what the lowest 10 percent earn. According to a study on income distribution by political analyst Miguel Basanez, the wealthiest 20 percent of the population in Mexico controls 65.5 percent of the capital while the bottom 20 percent share 2.4 percent. While Mexico is a wealthy country, that wealth is centralized in the hands of a minority. 17.6% of Mexico’s population lives in extreme poverty, while 21% live in moderated poverty, making a total of 38.6% of the Mexican population living in conditions of poverty.[23]
Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, a survey of international businessmen that ranks countries from least to most corrupt ranks Mexico at 72nd place out of 179 countries. This is even lower than such notoriously corrupt countries as drug-ridden Colombia. According to Global Integrity’s 2006 Mexico Country Report, corruption costs the Mexican economy as much as $60 billion a year[24]. A survey by the Center for the Study of Private Sector Economics (Centro de Estudios Economicos del Sector Privado), a Mexican research firm, estimates that 79 percent of companies in Mexico believe “illegal transactions” are a serious obstacle to business development. The 1994 economic crisis in Mexico associated with rampant government corruption[25] resulted in a greatly decreased U.S. dollar value of Mexican wages relative to U.S. production workers[26][27][28][20].
The Mexican government has worked to make illegal immigration to the U.S. easier.
-
It plans to produce 70,000 maps marking main roads and water tanks for people wanting to cross illegally into the US. [29]
-
The Mexican government distributes a comic book which instructs illegal immigrants on how to sneak across the border and how to remain undetected once they’ve crossed the border[30]
In 2005, the remittances from Mexican nationals worldwide was $18.1 billion. [32] In 2003, former President of Mexico, Vicente Fox stated that remittances of Mexican nationals in the United States, both legal and illegal, totaled $12 billion, and were the largest source of foreign income for Mexico. [33].
[edit] Demand
The U.S.’ failure to enforce immigration policy assisted a “network effect” – further migration as Mexicans moved to join relatives already in the U.S.[20]
The continuing practice of hiring unauthorized workers has been referred to as “the magnet for illegal immigration.” [34] Illegal hiring has not been prosecuted aggressively in recent years: between 1999 and 2003, according to the Washington Post, “work-site enforcement operations were scaled back 95 percent by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which subsequently was merged into the Homeland Security Department.[35] Major Illegal employers have included:
-
Wal-Mart, which in 2005 agreed to pay $11 million to settle a federal investigation that found hundreds of illegal immigrants were hired to clean its stores. Wal-Mart used sub-contractors and claimed that it was unaware that the sub-contractors were employing illegal immigrants as janitors.[36] In August 2006 Wal-Mart instituted a policy to require any contractors working for them to have in place a system of verifying worker eligibility and auditing their worksites to assure their projects stay in compliance, handing out their own fines to contractors for not staying in compliance with this policy. Contractors wanting to bid on Wal-Mart projects are now required to have a system in place to accomplish this outlined in their bid. [37]
-
Swift & Co.: in December 2006, in the largest such crackdown in American history, U.S. federal immigration authorities raided Swift & Co. meat-processing plants in six U.S. states, arresting about 1,300 illegal immigrant employees. Because Swift uses a government Basic Pilot program to confirm whether Social Security numbers are valid, no charges were filed against Swift. Company officials have questioned the program’s ability to detect when two people are using the same number.[38]
-
Tyson Foods, has also been accused of actively importing illegal labor for its chicken packing plants; However, the jury acquitted the company after evidence was presented that Tyson went beyond mandated government requirements in demanding documentation for its employees. Tyson also used its enrollment in the Basic Pilot and EVP Programs (voluntary employment eligibility screening programs) as part of its defense.[39]
For decades, immigration authorities have alerted (“no-match-letters”)[40] employers of mismatches between reported employees’ Social Security cards and the actual names of the card holders. On September 1, a federal judge halted this practice of alerting employers of card mismatches.[41]
Tamar Jacoby, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, argues that “[illegal immigrants] are going to get here as long as they have economic incentives to come.” Jacoby further asserts that politicians and others use construction of a massive fence as a proxy to avoid addressing real issues.[42]
[edit] Policy issues
The Rockridge Institute asks, “What role have international trade agreements had in creating or exacerbating people’s urge to flee their homelands? If capital is going to freely cross borders, should people and labor be able to do so as well, going where globalization takes the jobs?… Such a framing of the problem would lead to a solution involving the Secretary of State, conversations with Mexico and other Central American countries, and a close examination of the promises of North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), the World Trade Organization (WTO), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank to raise standards of living around the globe.[43]
Proponents of this wider strategy are generally critical of the current administration’s approach to the issue:
-
“Bush’s ‘comprehensive solution’ entirely concerns the immigrants, citizenship laws, and the border patrol. And, from the narrow problem identified by framing it as an ‘immigration problem,’ Bush’s solution is comprehensive. He has at least addressed everything that counts as a problem in the immigration frame…. But the real problem with the current situation runs broader and deeper.”[44]
[edit] Impacts
[edit] Economic
The impact of Illegal immigrants on some state and local governments can be a net loss, depending on the level of services provided by the state and local government, according to a December 2007 report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.[45] This same report highlighted the difficulties in summarizing the aggregate data since little if anything is known about the amount of state and local taxes that are currently paid versus the amount of services received by illegal immigrants. Also, federal government aid to state and local government does offset to some degree the amount of services provided, however, the level of federal support to state and local governments was not incorporated into many of the summaries on services provided for this particular CBO report.
Research by George Borjas, Jeffrey Grogger, and Gordon H. Hanson found that a 10-percent immigrant-induced increase in the supply of a particular skill group reduced the black wage by 4.0 percent, lowered the employment rate of black men by 3.5 percentage points, and increased the incarceration rate of blacks by almost a full percentage point. [46]
Paul Samuelson, Nobel prize-winning economist from MIT, concurs asserting that there is no unitary, singular effect, good or bad, that arises from illegal immigration, but instead a variety of effects on Americans depending on their economic class. Samuelson posits that wealthier Americans tend to benefit from the illegal influx, while poorer Americans tend to suffer.[47][48]
Research by George Borjas, Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at Harvard University, shows that the average American’s wealth is increased by less than 1% by illegal immigration. The effect on wages for middle class individuals was an overall wealth increase. However, illegal immigrants had a long-term reduction of wages among American poor citizens during the 1980s and 1990s by 4.8%[49].
Paul Rubin, Professor of Economics and Law at Emory University , has written for the Washington Post, “Economists have… long argued that the economics of immigration—immigrants coming here to exchange their labor for money that they then exchange for the products of other people’s labor—is positive sum. Yet our evolutionary intuition is that, because foreign workers gain from trade and immigrant workers gain from joining the U.S. economy, native-born workers must lose. This zero-sum thinking leads us to see trade and immigration as conflict (“trade wars,” “immigrant invaders”) when trade and immigration actually produce cooperation and mutual benefit, the exact opposite of conflict.[50]
One of the most important factors regarding public opinion about immigration is the level of unemployment; anti-immigrant sentiment is highest where unemployment is highest and vice-versa.[51]
Editorialist Robert Samuelson points out that poor immigrants strains public services such as local schools and health care. He points out that “from 2000 to 2006, 41 percent of the increase in people without health insurance occurred among Hispanics”[52], although he makes clear that these facts are true of legal as well as illegal immigrants. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, 25.8% of Mexican immigrants lived in poverty — more than double the rate for natives in 1999.[53] In another report, The Heritage Foundation notes that from 1990 to 2006, the number of poor Hispanics increased 3.2 million, from 6 million to 9.2 million.[54]
Most Americans would not see any wage increases if illegal immigrants disappeared. However, high school drop outs would expect to see an average of 25 dollar a week raise if illegal immigrants disappeared. On the other hand, they would also see an increase in the costs of some goods and services[7]. Illegal immigrants are thought to have disproportionately affected certain groups of American citizens such as black and Hispanic poor.
Professor of Law Francine Lipman writes that the belief that undocumented migrants are exploiting the US economy and that they cost more in services than they contribute to the economy is “undeniably false”. Lipman asserts that “undocumented immigrants actually contribute more to public coffers in taxes than they cost in social services” and “contribute to the U.S. economy through their investments and consumption of goods and services; filling of millions of essential worker positions resulting in subsidiary job creation, increased productivity and lower costs of goods and services; and unrequited contributions to Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance programs.”[55]
Ernesto Zedillo, former President of Mexico and current Director of the Yale Center for the Study of Globalization, asserts that illegal immigrants are only a drain on government services when they are incapable of paying taxes; and that this incapacity is the result of restrictive federal policies that require proof of citizenship. He further argues that the US economy has “crucial” need for migrant workers, and that the current debate must acknowledge this rather than just focus on enforcement.[56]
In 2003, then-President of Mexico Vicente Fox stated that remittances of Mexican nationals in the United States, both legal and illegal, totaled $12 billion, and were the largest source of foreign income for Mexico. [8]. In 2005, the remittances from Mexican nationals worldwide was $18.1 billion[9]. Undocumented workers are estimated to pay in about $7 billion per year into Social Security.[57].
Free market advocates claim that we are not in a free market due to government interference (e.g., taxes, subsidies, etc.), but that if we were, restrictions on free migration would also limit the free market.[58][59]
[edit] Education
Spending for public education of undocumented children and U.S. -born children of undocumented parents in K-12 public education in Minnesota for 2003-2004 was a total of $118.14 million to $157.53 million [60] For the same time period, total spending in New Mexico at the state and local levels for schoolchildren was about $67 million [61]
[edit] Racial tension
“We’re being overrun,” says Ted Hayes of Choose Black America, which has led anti-illegal immigration marches in south-central Los Angeles, California. “The compañeros have taken all the housing. If you don’t speak Spanish they turn you down for jobs. Our children are jumped upon in the schools. They are trying to drive us out.”[62] He also touts illegal immigration as the biggest threat to blacks in America since slavery.[63] Hayesâ Crispus Attucks Brigade and the American Black Citizens Opposed to Illegal Immigration Invasion have organized protests against illegal immigration.[64]
[edit] Crime
Immigrants, both legal and illegal do not raise the rate of crime in the United States and native born Americans are five times more likely to be incarcerated than immigrants.[65]
In 1999, law enforcement activities involving unauthorized immigrants in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas cost a combined total of more than $108 million. This cost did not include activities related to border enforcement. In San Diego County, the expense (over $50 million) was nine percent of the total county’s budget for law enforcement that year.[66]
A confidential report by the California Department of Justice indicated that in 1995 60% of the 20,000 members of the 18th Street Gang in Los Angeles was composed of illegal immigrants. Also, about 60 percent of the membership of the Columbia Lil’ Cycos gang was illegal, according to a 2002 statement by former U.S. attorney Luis Li.[67]
A study published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas has discovered that while property-related crime rates have not been affected by increased immigration (both legal and illegal), in border counties there is a significant positive correlation between illegal immigration and violent crime.[68] However, crime rates from 1994 to 2005 have declined slightly, despite the fact that both legal and illegal immigration have increased.[69] Robert Sampson, Professor in Social Sciences at Harvard University, writes in Harvard Magazine in 2006 that being in the country illegally might give illegal aliens an “extra incentive to keep a clean record and not commit crimes, in order to avoid deportation”.[70]
Persons apprehended while attempting to enter the United States illegally after committing previous crimes in the United States are indictable for the attempt to illegally re-enter the country.[71]
One large scale multi-million dollar criminal operation connected to illegal immigration is identity theft.[72]
According to a 1997 report by the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims, “Through other violations of our immigration laws, Mexican drug cartels are able to extend their command and control into the United States. Drug smuggling fosters, subsidizes, and is dependent upon continued illegal immigration and alien smuggling.”[73] Operation Community Shield has detained over fourteen hundred illegal immigrant gang members.[74] “The Salvadoran gang, known to law enforcement authorities as MS-13 because many members identify themselves with tattoos of the number 13, is thought to have established a major smuggling center in Matamoros, Mexico, just south of Brownsville, Texas, from where it has arranged to bring illegal aliens from countries other than Mexico into the United States.” MS13 publicly declared that it targets the Minutemen, civilians who take it upon themselves to control the border, to “teach them a lesson”, possibly due to their smuggling of various Central/South Americans (mostly other gang members), drugs, and weapons across the border. A confidential California Department of Justice study reported in 1995 that 60 percent of the twenty thousand member 18th Street Gang in California is illegal.[75]. “Mexican alien smugglers plan to pay violent gang members and smuggle them into the United States to murder Border Patrol agents, according to a confidential Department of Homeland Security memo obtained by the Daily Bulletin.”[76]
“A top al Qaeda lieutenant has met with leaders of a violent Salvadoran criminal gang with roots in Mexico and the United States — including a stronghold in the Washington area — in an effort by the terrorist network to seek help infiltrating the U.S.-Mexico border, law enforcement authorities said.”[citation needed]
[edit] Terrorism
Mohamed Atta al-Sayed and two of his co-conspirators had expired visas when they executed the September 11, 2001 attacks. All of the attackers had U.S. government issued documents and two of them were erroneously granted visa extensions after their deaths. The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States found that the government inadequately tracked those with expired tourist or student visas.
Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, a think-tank that promotes immigration reduction, testified in a hearing before the House of Representatives that
“out of the 48 al-Qaeda operatives who committed crimes here between 1993 and 2001, 12 of them were illegal aliens when they committed their crimes, seven of them were visa overstayers, including two of the conspirators in the first World Trade Center attack, one of the figures from the New York subway bomb plot, and four of the 9/11 terrorists. In fact, even a couple other terrorists who were not illegal when they committed their crimes had been visa overstayers earlier and had either applied for asylum or finagled a fake marriage to launder their status.”[77]
Vice Chair Lee Hamilton and Commissioner Slade Gorton of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States has stated that of the nineteen hijackers of the September 11, 2001 attacks, “Two hijackers could have been denied admission at the port on entry based on violations of immigration rules governing terms of admission. Three hijackers violated the immigration laws after entry, one by failing to enroll in school as declared, and two by overstays of their terms of admission.”[78] Six months after the attack, their flight schools received posthumous visa approval letters from the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) for two of the hijackers, which made it clear that actual approval of the visas took place before the September 11 attacks[79].
[edit] Health
A California study, “California’s Undocumented Latino Immigrants: A Report on Access to Health Care Services”, page 38,[80] found about 90% of illegal immigrants in California do not have medical insurance.
Almost $190 million or about 25 percent of the uncompensated costs southwest border county hospitals incurred resulted from emergency medical treatment provided to undocumented immigrants[81] However, illegal immigrants are no more likely to visit the emergency room than native born Americans [82].
The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) continues to bring injured and ill undocumented immigrants to hospital emergency rooms without taking financial responsibility for their medical care.[83]
In 2006, the Oklahoma Health Care Authority estimated that it would spend about $9.7 million on emergency Medicaid services for unauthorized immigrants and that 80 percent of those costs would be for services associated with childbirth.[84]
Madeleine Cosman writes in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons that the burden of illegal immigrants on the health care system in the US has forced many hospitals to close due to unpaid bills and the unfunded mandate of Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). Between 1993 and 2003, 60 hospitals in California alone were forced to close, and many others had to reduce staff or implement other procedures which reduced the level of service they could provide. The article attributes these closings mainly to illegal immigration. [10]
To reduce the risk of diseases in low-incidence areas, the main countermeasure has been the screening of immigrants on arrival. Prior to being awarded a green card, legal immigrants over the age of 15 must have a chest x-ray or skin test to check for tuberculosis.[85][86] Illegal immigrants are not screened in this manner.
However, according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)], tuberculosis (TB) cases among foreign-born individuals remain disproportionately high, at nearly nine times the rate of U.S.-born persons. Immigration from areas of high incidence is thought to have fueled the resurgence of tuberculosis (TB), chagas, hepatitis, and leprosy in areas of low incidence. In 2003, nearly 26 percent of foreign-born TB patients in the United States were from Mexico. Another third of the foreign-born cases were among those from the Philippines, Vietnam, India and China, the CDC report said.[87][88][89]
According to Dr. Lee Reichman, “Unless Americans are willing to adopt suffocatingly draconian immigration policies, the likelihood is that with globalization TB will again become epidemic here, in the same way that HIV moved from Africa to take root throughout the world. Suffering does not localize. When we engage with the world, we engage, inescapably and absolutely, with the world’s infections. And the most devastating infection in the world is not Ebola or Lyme disease, West Nile virus or even HIV, but tuberculosis.”[90]
[edit] Environmental
Illegal immigrants trying to get to the United States via the Mexican border with southern Arizona are suspected of having caused eight major wildfires this year, this report says. The fires destroyed 68,413 acres (276.86 km²) and cost taxpayers $5.1 million to fight.[91]
Waves of illegal immigrants are taking a heavy toll on U.S. public lands along the Mexican border, federal officials say.[92] Mike Coffeen, a biologist with the Fish and Wildlife Service in Tucson, Arizona, is quoted as saying, while surveying the area by airplane: “the level of impact is just shocking.”[93] “Environmental degradation has become among the migration trend’s most visible consequences, a few years ago, there were 45 abandoned cars on the Buenos Aires refuge near Sasabe, and enough trash that a volunteer couple filled 723 large bags with 18,000 pounds of garbage over two months in 2002.” [94]
“It has been estimated that the average desert-walking immigrant leaves behind 8 pounds of trash during a journey that lasts one to three days if no major glitches occur, Assuming half a million people cross the border illegally into Arizona annually, that translates to 2,000 tons of trash that migrants dump each year.” [95] Fred Patton, chief ranger at Organ Pipe, is quoted as saying: “We’ve now got 300 miles of illegal roads these people have cut through the desert, and thousands of miles of illegal trails they’ve created. We collect over 30 vehicles a year, and we measure the trash they leave behind, everything from cans and bottles to clothes, by the ton. And they’ve fouled the few water sources to the point they are too filthy now even for the animals to drink.”[96]
Each year, an estimated 200,000 to 400,000 illegal immigrants try to make the 15 to 30-mile (48 km) hike through the wilderness to reach cities in the United States. “That works out to a city the size of Baton Rouge, La., living in the park without a sewage system, without garbage collection, without a grid of dedicated roads or sidewalks. They move where they want in four-wheel-drive cars, ATVs, motorcycles, bicycles and their own feet.”[97]
[edit] Apprehension & Deportation Expenses
Border control uses the latest technological advances to help capture these immigrants, sometimes detain/prosecute, and send back over the border. According to the US Department of Homeland Security and the Border Patrol Enforcement Integrated Database, apprehensions have increased from 955,310 in 2002 to 1,159,802 in the year of 2004. “But fewer than 4 per cent of apprehended migrants were actually detained and prosecuted for illegal entry, partly because it costs $90 a day to keep them in detention facilities and bed space is very limited. For the remainder of the apprehended migrants, if they are willing to sign a form attesting that they are voluntarily repatriating themselves, they are simply bused to a gate on the border, where they re-enter Mexico.” [98]
After many are sent back to Mexico, many attempt to cross again the next day. In 2003 the United States adopted “Long-distance repatriation” as an option to help discourage immediate re-entry. This more costly option required that immigrants be flown to central and southern Mexico. “During the summer of 2004, the U.S. government pressured the Mexican government into accepting ‘deep repatriation’ of as many as 300 apprehended migrants per day to six cities in central and southern Mexico. Each of these 151 chartered flights cost U.S. taxpayers $50,000.” [99] Although this may seem to be working, nine out of ten of the immigrants interviewed by journalists after they landed stated that they “planned to re-enter the United States very soon”.[citation needed]
[edit] Immigration enforcement
Please see main article, United States–Mexico barrier.
Activity on the United States-Mexico border is concentrated around big border cities such as San Diego and El Paso, which have extensive border fencing and enhanced border patrols. Stricter enforcement of the border in cities has failed to significantly curb illegal immigration, instead pushing the flow into more remote regions and increasing the cost to taxpayers of each arrest from $300 in 1992 to $1700 in 2002.[citation needed] The cost to illegal immigrants has also increased: they now routinely hire coyotes, or smugglers, to help them get across.[100]
In December 2005, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to build a separation barrier along parts of the border not already protected by a separation barriers. A later vote in the United States Senate on May 17, 2006, included a plan to blockade 860 miles (1,380 km) of the border with vehicle barriers and triple-layer fencing along with granting an “earned path to citizenship” to the 12 million illegal aliens in the U.S. and roughly doubling legal immigration (from their 1970s levels). In 2007 Congress approved a plan calling for more fencing along the Mexican border, with funds for approximately 700 miles (1,100 km) of new fencing. However, there is no assurance that if built, this new fence will reduce the flow of illegal immigrants from Mexico.
[edit] Police and military involvement
There have been extensive efforts on the part of local law enforcement to increase police presence at the border.[101][102][103] However, federal judges have ruled that control of illegal immigration is the exclusive domain of the federal government and have prohibited local communities and states from attempting to enforce ordinances intended to control illegal immigration[104].
In 1995, the United States Congress considered an exemption from the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits direct participation of Department of Defense personnel in civilian law enforcement activities, such as search, seizure, and arrests.[105] This exemption would have authorized the United States Secretary of Defense to detail members of the Armed Forces to enforce the immigration and customs laws in border areas. U.S. Army personnel were stationed along the U.S.-Mexico border to help stem the flow of illegal aliens and drug smugglers. These military units brought their specialized equipment such as FLIR infrared devices, and helicopters. In conjunction with the U.S. Border Patrol, they would deploy along the border and, for a brief time, there would be no traffic across that border which was actively watched by “coyotes” paid to assist border crossers. The smugglers and the alien traffickers ceased operations over the one hundred mile sections of the border sealed at a time.
In 1997, Marines shot and killed 18 year old U.S. citizen Esequiel Hernandez Jr[106] while on a mission to interdict smuggling and illegal immigration in the remote Southwest. The soldiers observed the goat herder from concealment for 20 minutes maintaining radio contact with their unit. But at one point, this young man (who the Pentagon says previously had fired shots in the vicinity of Border Patrol agents) raised his rifle and fired shots in the direction of the concealed soldiers. After firing two shots, this young man was, in turn, shot and killed. In reference to the incident, military lawyer Craig T. Trebilock argues that “the fact that armed military troops were placed in a position with the mere possibility that they would have to use force to subdue civilian criminal activity reflects a significant policy shift by the executive branch away from the posse comitatus doctrine.”[107] The killing of Hernandez led to a congressional review[108] and an end to a nine-year old policy of the military aiding the Border Patrol[109].
After the September 11, 2001 attacks the United States again considered placing soldiers along the U.S.-Mexico border as a security measure. [110] In May 2006, President George W. Bush announced plans to use the National Guard to strengthen enforcement of the US-Mexico Border from illegal immigrants[111], emphasizing that Guard units “will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities.”[112] Mexican Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez said in an interview with a Mexico City radio station, “If we see the National Guard starting to directly participate in detaining people … we would immediately start filing lawsuits through our consulates,”[113] American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) called on the President not to deploy military troops to deter aliens, and stated that a “deployment of National Guard troops violates the spirit of the Posse Comitatus Act”[114]. According to the State of the Union Address in January 2007[115], more than 6000 National Guard members have been sent to the US-Mexico border to supplement the Border Patrol[116], costing in excess of $750 million[117]. The Cato Institute is among the critics who argue that increasing border security is counterproductive. The institute argues that increasing border security reduces the proportion of illegal immigrants caught at the border and increases the length of time illegal immigrants remain in the country. Cato claims that the only significant change on illegal immigrants has been in length of stay due to the cost of returning. The probability of returning within twelve months has gone from around 45% in 1980 to between 25 and 30% from 1998-2002. Also, the average trip duration has gone from 1.7 years to 3.5 years. According to the Cato Institute, the only important change in security has been one of cost. The Border Patrol’s budget has gone from $151 million in 1986 to $1.6 billion in 2002. This has caused the cost of apprehending an illegal immigrant to go from around $100 per arrest before 1986 to around $1700 in 2002.
[edit] Public Reaction
[edit] Locally mandated immigration policy
State and local governments have responded by passing local laws and ordinances to control illegal immigration within their own jurisdictions[118]. These laws are primarily aimed at (a) limiting an illegal immigrants’ ability to obtain jobs, housing, or a legally acceptable form of identification. (b) To empower local law enforcement agencies to inquire into an immigrant’s legal status. However, the 1986 law pre-empted most existing state immigration policies and forbids states from enacting tougher criminal or civil penalties for illegal immigration than those set by Congress. Further, the US Supreme Court in De Canas v. Bica, stated “[The] power to regulate immigration is unquestionably exclusively a federal power.” The supremacy clause (Article VI, Clause 2) of the United States Constitution makes laws passed by Congress “the supreme law of the land”, thus placing the constitutionality of locally passed laws and ordinances in question.
Several lawsuits have been filed challenging the constitutionality of locally imposed measures, on the grounds that it is not the place of local government to assume the responsibilities of the Federal government. Two of the most closely watched cases involve ordinances passed in Hazleton, Pennsylvania and Farmers Branch, Texas that include fining landlords that rent to illegal immigrants, and allowing local authorities to screen illegal immigrants in police custody. On July 26, 2007, a federal court struck down the Hazleton ordinance as unconstitutional. The ruling is regarded by many to set a legal precedent that can be used to strike down local immigration ordinances nationwide. Hazleton’s mayor has promised to appeal the decision. The Farmer’s Branch ordinance remains under temporary restraining order enjoining enforcement of the ordinance pending a final ruling.
Several US cities have taken the opposite approach and have instructed their own law enforcement personnel and other city employees not to notify or cooperate with the federal government when they become aware of illegal immigrants living within their jurisdiction. These cities are often referred to as “sanctuary cities” and include Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago and other mostly large urban cities. Most of these cities claim that the benefit illegal immigrants bring to their city outweigh the costs. Opponents say the measures violate federal law as the cities are in effect creating their own immigration policy, an area of law which only Congress has authority to alter[119].
Many cities, including Washington, D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Aurora, Colorado, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have become “sanctuary cities“, having adopted ordinances banning police from asking people about their immigration status.[120]
[edit] Public reaction to current immigration issues
The May 2006 New York Times/CBS News Poll, shows that 53 percent of American responded that “illegal immigrants mostly take the jobs Americans don’t want”[121]. In another 2006 poll, the NBC/Wall Street Journal held in April, 61 percent of the U.S. population concluded that they would like illegal immigrants to stay within the United States if they “could pass a security check and pay taxes”[122]. Showing that the actual majority of the population would rather have Mexican immigrants in the country as long as they abide by the taxation laws, and provide service that American citizens do not provide. However, in a third opinion poll by Zogby International in 2005, voters were also asked, “Do you support or oppose the Bush administration’s proposal to give millions of illegal aliens guest worker status and the opportunity to become citizens?” Only 35% gave their support, and 56 percent said no. The same pole noted a huge majority, 81%, believes local and state police should help federal authorities enforce laws against illegal immigration.[123]
The Minuteman Project has been lobbying Congress for stronger enforcement of the border laws and is reported to be organizing private property owners along the U.S.-Mexican border for the purpose of building a fence to discourage illegal border crossings.Test3[124]
The No More Deaths organization offers food, water, and medical aid to illegal aliens crossing the desert regions of the American Southwest in an effort to reduce the increasing number of deaths along the border.[125]
According to a 2006 report by the Anti-Defamation League, white supremacists and other extremists are engaging in a growing number of assaults against legal and illegal immigrants and those perceived to be immigrants.[126]
[edit] Legal issues
[edit] Birthright citizenship
The Fourteenth Amendment has been interpreted by the United States Supreme Court, in precedent set by United States v. Wong Kim Ark, to grant citizenship to every child born in the U.S. regardless of the citizenship of the parents, with the exception of the children of diplomats and children born to enemy forces in hostile occupation of the United States.
The Court in Wong Kim Ark did not explicitly decide whether U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants are “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States” (because Wong Kim Ark’s parents were legally present in the United States at the time of his birth). However, the Supreme Court’s later ruling in Plyler v. Doe[127] stated that illegal immigrants are “within the jurisdiction” of the states in which they reside, and added in a footnote that “no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment “jurisdiction” can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful.”
[edit] Deportation complications
Complications in deportation efforts ensue when parents are illegal immigrants and children are birthright citizens. Such was the case of Elvira Arellano, who was a refugee in a church. This is also the case in the instance of Sadia Umanzor, an illegal immigrant from Honduras, a central feature of a November 17, 2007 New York Times story. Umanzor is a fugitive from a 2006 deportation order. She was recently arrested, in anticipation of deportation. However, a judge postponed that deportation proceeding. The judge placed her in house arrest, citing the factor of a six-month old U.S.-born baby of Umanzor. [128]
[edit] Equal protection under US law
Plyler v. Doe, , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States struck down a state statute denying funding for education to children who were illegal immigrants. It established that regardless of legal status, illegal immigrants are still “persons” and thus protected as such under some provisions the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the US Constitution, notably the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
“Whatever his status under the immigration laws, an alien is surely a “person” in any ordinary sense of that term. Aliens, even aliens whose presence in this country is unlawful, have long been recognized as “persons” guaranteed due process of law by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments…The Equal Protection Clause was intended to work nothing less than the abolition of all caste-based and invidious class-based legislation. That objective is fundamentally at odds with the power the State asserts …to classify persons subject to its laws as nonetheless excepted from its protection.”[129]
[edit] Immigration Reform and Control Act
The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) made the hiring of an individual without documents an offense for the first time. The act is somewhat redundant since the forging of government documents (fake immigration documents or providing falsified social security numbers) is already a felony, and for most companies such documents must be provided to the government in its tax filings. However, the government does not notify those whose identities have been stolen for the falsified social security numbers, thus making it difficult to estimate the extent of the problem.[130]
[edit] Immigration with and without quotas
The immigration quota system was first expanded with the Emergency Quota Act of 1921 which was used to reduce the influx of East and Southern European immigrants who were coming to the country in large numbers from the turn of the century. This immigration was further reduced by the Immigration Act of 1924 which was structured to maintain the cultural and ethnic traditions of the United States.
The Franklin D. Roosevelt administration had nearly shut down immigration during the decade of the Great Depression of 1929. In 1929 there were 279,678 immigrants recorded and in 1933 there were only 23,068[131]. By 1939 recorded immigrants had crept back up to 82,998 but then the emergence of World War II drove it back down to 23,725 in 1943 increasing slowly to 38,119 by 1945[132]. After 1946 about 600,000 of Europe’s Displaced Person (DP’s) refugees were admitted under special laws outside the country quotas, and in the 1960s and 1970s large numbers of Cuban and Vietnamese refugees[133] were admitted under special laws outside all quotas.
Congress passed the Immigration and Nationality Services Act of 1965 which essentially removed all nation-specific quotas, while retaining an overall quota, and included immigrants from Mexico and the Western Hemisphere for the first time with their own quotas. It also put a large part of immigration, so-called family reunification, outside the quota system. This dramatically changed the number, type and composition of the new arrivals from mostly European, to predominantly poor Latino and Asian. It also dramatically increased the number of illegal aliens as many poorer people now had family or friends in the U.S. that attracted them there.[134] In 1986, the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) was passed, creating amnesty for about 3,000,000 illegal aliens already in the United States. Critics believe IRCA just intensified the illegal immigration flow as those granted amnesty illegally brought more of their friends and family into the U.S.[134]
Without quotas on large segments of the immigration flow, legal immigration to the U.S. surged and soon became largely family based “Chain immigration” where families brought in a chain of off quota new immigrant family members. The number of legal immigrants rose from about 2.5 million in the 1950s to 4.5 million in the 1970s to 7.3 million in the 1980s to about 10 million in the 1990s. In 2006 legal immigrants to the United States now number approximately 1,000,000 legal immigrants per year of which about 600,000 are Change of Status immigrants who already are in the U.S.[134]
[edit] Matrícula Consular identification cards
The Matrícula Consular (“Consular Registration”) is an identification card issued by the Government of Mexico through its consulate offices. The official purpose of the card is to demonstrate that the bearer is a Mexican national living outside of Mexico. Similar consulate identification cards are issued to citizens of Argentina, Colombia, El Salvador, and Honduras[135]. This document is accepted at financial institutions in many states and, with an IRS Taxpayer Identification Number, allows illegal immigrants to open checking and saving accounts.
[edit] REAL ID Act
The REAL ID Act of 2005 prohibits States from issuing identification or driver’s permit cards to anyone who cannot demonstrate that they are legally in the USA, taking full effect on December 31, 2009. Citizenship and/or immigration status is to be clearly denoted on these ID cards and they automatically expire on the expiration date of non-citizens’ visas or other authorizing documentation.
[edit] Terminology
The Immigration and Nationality Act is the primary body of federal immigration law in the United States. It defines the term “alien” as “any person not a citizen or national of the United States.” It defines the term “immigrant” to mean every alien not falling within a set of “classes of nonimmigrant aliens” spelled out in detail by the act, for example: diplomatic personnel, students residing within the US to attend school, athletes attending athletic events, ship and aircraft crew members; and others residing or staying within the United States on a temporary basis. The act classifies aliens remaining within the US on a permanent basis as immigrants without regards to an individual’s legal status.[136]
There are a variety of terms which can be found in government agency news releases, photo captions, and reports. These terms include undocumented immigrant, unauthorized immigrant, illegal immigrant, undocumented migrant, unauthorized migrant, migrant, unauthorized immigrant worker, illegal migrant, illegal alien, undocumented alien, unauthorized worker and unauthorized resident.
The Associated Press Stylebook, the primary style and usage guide for most newspapers and newsmagazines in the United States, recommends using “illegal immigrant” rather than “illegal alien” or “undocumented worker”[137]. According to Voice of America’s[138], a weekly analysis of American English from the official international radio and television broadcasting service of the United States federal government, “The most common term by far, though, at least as reflected in the news media, is illegal immigrants” in reference to people who are in the United States without following immigration laws.[139]
At the 1994 Unity convention, the four minority journalism groups – the National Association of Black Journalists, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists , the Asian American Journalists Association and the Native American Journalists Association – issued a joint statement on the term illegal aliens: “Except in direct quotations, do not use the phrase illegal alien or the word alien, in copy or in headlines, to refer to citizens of a foreign country who have come to the U.S. with no documents to show that they are legally entitled to visit, work or live here. Such terms are considered pejorative not only by those to whom they are applied but by many people of the same ethnic and national backgrounds who are in the U.S. legally.”[140][141] Press releases from these minority journalism groups in 2006 reaffirmed this position and recommended using “undocumented immigrant” and avoid the term “illegal” as a label[142][143][144].
The Lord is not Black nor White –
He is the Lord of all!!
“all Illegal Economic Immigrants – who Franco Frattini acknowledges ‘Malta should repatriate!’ - “
http://www.cuttingedge.org/articles/db070.htm
non-catholic posting on National
Sovereignty and pre-planned
illegal immigration.
“The implications for state sovereignty are also complex…. All states should establish coherent national migration policies that are … consistent with international treaty law.“[1] UN’s Global Commission on International Migration
“Why, oh why, is Bush so stubbornly rejecting the advice of his supporters even though that advice is consistent with the thunderous message from public opinion surveys?”[2] Phyllis Schlafly
A borderless world! Social solidarity! Economic equality! Housing and health for all! The feel-good togetherness of serving the greater whole…. The list of utopian promises stretches the imagination. How can this dream be fulfilled? What will it cost? Why is migration vital to this process? How free is our president to block this transformational plan?
This dream of a New World Order was born long before socialist visionaries (including Franklin Roosevelt and the leaders of the Federal Council of Churches) enthroned Communist Alger Hiss as the first head of the United Nations.[3] [See The Revolutionary Roots of the UN] Hiss was the primary author of The UN Charter, which summarized its vision in noble terms that few could criticize. “WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS,” it began,
“DETERMINED to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war… to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained… and for these ends to practice tolerance and… to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all…. Accordingly, our respective Governments, through representatives assembled in the city of San Francisco… do hereby establish an international organization to be known as the United Nations.”[4]
It took the Second World War to make the new system acceptable to the people. In the wake of that useful crisis, the masses willingly embraced the UN promise of “economic and social advancement of all” under the guiding hand of the new “international machinery.”
In the decades that followed, most people seemed to dismiss UN treaties and declarations as “soft laws” and policies with little affect on national sovereignty. They didn’t know the many ways UN declarations would permeate national laws and policies. [See Trading U.S. Rights for UN Rules] The mainstream media didn’t tell us. So when the “The Global Commission on International Migration was launched by the United Nations Secretary-General and a number of governments on December 9, 2003,” few saw the red lights.[5]
But America is awakening. An immigrant-friendly nation, it has welcomed grateful immigrants from around the world into its system. Now, it faces a new kind of migration — one that intentionally clashes with everything we have valued and shared. Thomas Sowell summarizes some of its more obvious problems:
“Under affirmative action, combined with amnesty, [illegals] would have preferences in jobs and other benefits. Those who set up their own businesses would be entitled to preferences in getting government contracts. Their children would be able to get into college ahead of the children of American citizens with better academic qualifications. … [I]f an illegal alien gets stopped for going through a red light… in many communities the cop is forbidden to arrest him…. Under a provision recently passed by the Senate, illegal aliens who forged Social Security cards not only get a pass, they get to collect Social Security benefits. … We have seen what havoc such notions and practices have created after mass immigration under ‘guest worker’ programs in Europe….”[6]
This legalized lawlessness fuels the “crisis” needed to persuade the masses to accept mass surveillance, universal data collection, and other intrusive strategies for worldwide control. And it gets worse:
“Based on a one-year in-depth study, a researcher estimates there are about 240,000 illegal immigrant sex offenders in the United States who have had an average of four victims each.”[7]“The immigration reform bill now under congressional consideration would grant amnesty to some 10 million illegal immigrants…. CIRA would transform the United States socially, economically and politically. Within two decades, the character of the nation would differ dramatically from what exists today.”[8]
“When Sept. 11 hijackers Hani Hanjour and Khalid Almihdhar needed help getting fraudulent government-issued photo IDs before embarking on their suicide mission, they hopped into a van and headed to the parking lot of a 7-Eleven store in Falls Church, Va. That’s where scores of illegal alien day laborers ply bogus identity documents to other illegal aliens from around the world…. Nearly five years later, illegal alien day laborers like the ones who unwittingly assisted the 9/11 hijackers have virtually no fear of being arrested.”[9]
A web of secrecy and a flood of misleading propaganda hides the truth from the people who pay the costs. For example, the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America undermines both security and prosperity for ordinary people. Wondering why their elected leaders ignore their pleas, many face rising lawlessness, unthinkable litter, lost jobs, and continual fear of violence.[10]
The reasons are actually simple. International regulations have already bound nations around the world to regional as well as global laws and policies. To understand their aims, let’s look at the United Nation’s Report of the Global Commission on International Migration [GCIM]. Chapter 6 warns us that “international migration is a complex phenomenon,” and most nations (states) recognize the importance of international migration and seek to address it in a way that enables them to respect their international obligations.”[1] What does that mean? Might the word “respect” actually imply “obedience” to international guidelines?
An illusion of national sovereignty
The subtle language in many UN documents hides the assault on national sovereignty. While sounding affirmative, it undermines any “sovereign” action that might oppose UN policies. The UN Declaration on Human Rights illustrates this manipulative language well. Its Article 18 upholds “the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion…” Article 19 affirms “the right to freedom of opinion and expression….”
But Article 29 states that “these rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.” In other words, its promise of “human rights” does not apply to those who would criticize the UN or its policies. Nor does it apply to Christians who cling to God’s “offensive” truths — or refuse to follow UNESCO’s Declaration on the Role of Religion.[11]
The migration issue shifts national sovereignty onto the same slippery ground. In the numbered items below, notice the GCIM’s promising assurance — followed by a clear denial of traditional sovereignty:
“8.First, state sovereignty is the very basis for international cooperation….
“9. Second, with sovereignty comes responsibility. As the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (2001) has
observed, recent years have witnessed a reorientation ‘from sovereignty as control to sovereignty as responsibility in both internal functions and external duties.’ Sovereignty as responsibility has become the minimum content of good international citizenship. Just as individuals have rights and responsibilities as citizens of states, so states have rights and responsibilities as members of the international community. [Note: That responsibility falls primarily on the "rich" developed nations considered capable of hosting, funding and managing the world's migrating human resources.]“10. …The European Union (EU) can be viewed as an example of a group of states that have retained their sovereignty [Have they?]…
“11. …States establish international bodies when certain issues – or ‘common goods’ – warrant a more formal and collective form of governance.”[1]
All nations must “establish coherent national migration policies… consistent with international treaty law.” The following points show some of the ways nations must cooperate with regional and global policies:
“15. If states are to address the issue of international migration in a coherent manner, they must have… criteria for the entry and residents of non-citizens that are consistent with international law. … [T]hey should at minimum address the following issues:
• family reunion, asylum, refugee protection and resettlement;
• the prevention of irregular migration and the promotion of regular migration [The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (CIRA) would add an extra 84 million legal immigrants to the nation's population];[8]
• integration, including the rights and obligations of migrants, citizens and the state…
• the protection of migrant rights.[12]
“17. All states should adopt a coherent approach to international migration that is consistent with international law and other relevant norms…. [
"21. ...This in turn requires effective data collection, policy analysis, research, monitoring and evaluation....
"23. ...• develop an infrastructure that provides social, educational and legal assistance to migrants, and that helps the host society adapt to the presence of migrants;
• ensure that resident foreign nationals are effectively represented by migrant associations... [A partnership between U.S. and Mexico provides such legal protection of "human rights" for illegal immigrants in the U.S. Small wonder it's hard for U.S. courts to deal with foreign criminals] [12]
• build up a capacity for data collection and analysis, research, monitoring and evaluation.”[1]
Regional integration
Regional integration, such as the European Union (EU), was planned long ago as a stepping stone toward global governance. Since the regulations for regionalism are established at the UN level, this initial merger of nations — such as Canada, United States and Mexico – redefines sovereignty and submits everyone to international controls. Ashley Mote, an independent member of the European Parliament, explains how this revolutionary system would swallow up any representative form of governments:
“Even the EU’s public face – the unelected commission – is part of the charade. Power does not lie with them. It lies with the senior staff running their departments, entrenched by some 3000 working groups and committees on which no elected MEP sits…. We do not know what their budgets are, how they are financed, or who approves their costs. Indeed, we do not even know what powers they have been given, nor by whom. And we cannot get rid of them….
“The EU would no longer be the servant of the member states. It would have become their master. Every previous treaty was a small step along that road…. The other 24 commissioners, each appointed by the other member states… are figure-heads. They take the flak in the public arena, and make announcements decided for them by their senior staff, with the guidance of the secret committees.
“…officially above the commission sits a Council of Ministers…. But the council is just more of the same elaborate illusion of accountable government. … The European Parliament sits below this vast superstructure… designed to create an illusion of accountable democracy. A condescending pat on the head for voters held in contempt.
“…the EU’s parliament… is the repository of an unspoken agreement between the left and the multinationals. … In effect, the left has said to the multinationals: you can have your markets stitched up for you, if we can indulge ourselves in endless social engineering. Big business has agreed. The result is a largely supportive parliament both from the left and right of the political divide.”[13]
Today’s euphemistic propaganda for regional governance continues to mislead the public. These statements by GCIM show only the positive side of the issue:
34. In the EU, for example, citizens of member states can move with relative ease from one country to another, enjoying the benefits of a common labour market….
35. Efforts have also been made to establish various types of economic integration and related freedom of movement agreements in other regions of the world, including the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)….
The Commission commends in particular the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), which aims to establish an integrated socio-economic development framework for Africa.”[1]
In Part 2, we will look more closely at how the values, poverty and lawlessness within the migration crisis creates a public mindset that welcomes other UN goals: universal surveillance and data tracking, total gun control, a new kind of “human settlement” and collective participation in the dialectic process. With the Canadian, anti-Christian UN leader, Maurice Strong, as one of the guiding lights behind this revolution, my biggest concern might be the UN “laws” that ban Biblical outreach to this new “mission field” in our midst.
Meanwhile, study this chart and remember God’s promise to His people:
“…in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us. For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Romans 8:37-39
Priest Penalized for Praying in Algeria
2006 Pro-Islam Law Begins to Have Effects
ROME, FEB. 13, 2008 (Zenit.org).- A Catholic priest was sentenced by the tribunal of Oran, a city in northwestern Algeria, to a year in prison for having “directed a religious ceremony in a place which has not been recognized by the government.”Father Pierre Wallez is the first victim of legislation approved in March 2006 regarding the exercise of the practices of non Muslim worship, in this North African country of 33 million residents, 99% of whom are Muslim.Speaking Saturday on Vatican Radio, Archbishop Henri Teissier of Alger, explained that “the most surprising thing is that the conviction was issued simply because the priest visited a group of Christians in Cameroon. He had not celebrated Mass, but was only joining them in a prayer. It was Dec. 29, a little after Christmas.”The prelate clarified that the sentence will not be carried out, because the tribunal decided to modify it to a sentence of parole.“Obviously we are all very shocked by the decision made against our brother,” the archbishop said.According to a report by the Italian daily Avvenire, along with Father Wallez, a young Muslim doctor was condemned to a harsher punishment (two years without parole) for using medicines “paid for by Caritas,” sources from the Algers archdiocesan office said.“They systematically reject entrance visas for our delegates,” stated the archbishop, “and in November they withdrew the residency permission for four young Brazilian priests who were working with the Portuguese-speaking African immigrants.”
In Algeria, Islam is the state religion, and freedom of worship is purportedly guaranteed by the constitution. The new law on worship sought above all to control clandestine evangelical proselytizing groups, which Archbishop Tessier said, “have made something of a racket because of the conversion of some of the faithful.”
The law, composed of 17 articles, prohibits the exercise of non-Islamic worship outside buildings approved by authorities.
An article allows for fines and prison for anyone “who changes the original function of places of worship” or “incites, coerces, or uses persuasive means to oblige a Muslim to embrace another religion.”
The same penalties are also applied to those who “produce, store, or distribute publications or audio or video material or other means oriented toward undermining faith in Islam.”
************************
Righteousness exalts a nation,
But sin is a disgrace to any people.
Proverbs 14:34
THE TRUE TEMPLE OF SOLOMON – THE
ETERNAL ARK OF THE COVENANT AWAITS
OUR CONVERSION – LET US RUN TO HER
SON THE GOD-MAN
************************
“The leader of the youth group that ministered to the teens (at the academy) said that Catholics were not Christians and that Muslims hated Christians, and that created a lot of tension,” the ex-chaplain added…… and I must add CONFUSION!!!
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_military_accused_of_harboring_fundamentalism_999.html
US military accused of harboring fundamentalism
by Staff Writers
Washington (AFP) Feb 14, 2008
Since his last combat deployment in Iraq, Jeremy Hall has had a rough time, getting shoved and threatened by his fellow soldiers. The trouble started there when he would not pray in the mess hall.
“A senior ranking staff sergeant told me to leave and sit somewhere else because I refused to pray,” Hall, a 23-year-old US army specialist, told AFP.
Later, Hall was confronted by a major for holding an authorized meeting of “atheists and freethinkers” on his base. The officer threatened to discipline him and block his re-enlistment.
“He said: ‘You guys are being a problem and problems can be removed,’” Hall said. “He was yelling at us and stuff and at the very end he says, ‘I really love you guys, I want you to see the light.’”
Now Hall is suing the major and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, accusing them of breaching his constitutional rights. A campaign group, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, is waiting for the Pentagon to respond to a lawsuit filed in a Kansas federal court on Hall’s behalf.
It alleges a “pernicious pattern and practice” of infringement of religious liberties in the military.
The group’s founder, former Air Force lawyer Mikey Weinstein, said he has documented 6,800 testimonies by military personnel — nearly all of them Christians — of sometimes punitive or humiliating attempts to make them accept a fundamentalist evangelical interpretation of Christianity.
“I am at war with those people who would create a fundamentalist Christian theocracy in the technologically most lethal organization ever created by our species, which is the United States armed forces,” he said.
He plans to add extra charges and possibly other lawsuits this month.
“It violates title seven of the US code for an employer to push their Biblical world view on an employee,” he said. “But it’s a trillion times worse when that is not just your shift manager at Starbucks but that is your military superior.”
He singles out one of the major Christian groups in the military, the Officers Christian Fellowship (OCF).
The group represents 15,000 US military personnel around the world, according to its director, retired Air Force general Bruce Fister.
“It is not the position of OCF to try and coerce people to believe what we believe,” Fister told AFP.
OCF’s aim, as stated on its website, is to achieve “a spiritually transformed military, with ambassadors for Christ in uniform, empowered by the Holy Spirit.”
It professes belief in “the eternal blessedness of the saved; and the everlasting, conscious punishment of the lost.”
Fister emphasized the group’s work to support families of soldiers deployed in the “global war on terror.”
“People make mistakes. There’s probably been some instances where people have wrongly spoken,” he added. “We’d like them not to, but that’s life.”
“Our checks within our equal opportunity channels identified fewer than 100 formal complaints over a two-year period,” said Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez.
Army spokesman Paul Boyce told AFP: “The Army places a high value on the rights of its soldiers to observe tenets of their respective religious faiths.”
The MRFF’s constitutional complaint “is a matter of the courts system to address and resolve,” he added.
“The joint standards of conduct for the Armed Forces and military equal opportunity policies address the freedom of religion, avoiding discrimination because of religion.”
But Weinstein argued that most personnel are “too terrified” to speak out.
“When you actually fight against them, they make your life hell,” said Hall, adding he has been passed over for promotion since launching his lawsuit. “I can’t get a leg up no matter what I do.”
A former military chaplain of a prestigious US military college reported being prevented from leading worship after disagreeing with the fundamentalist stance of other officials.
“I am not ready to say that if someone does not profess Christ as their savior that they are going to hell … That got a lot of people angered,” the minister told AFP, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation against a spouse who is a senior officer.
“The leader of the youth group that ministered to the teens (at the academy) said that Catholics were not Christians and that Muslims hated Christians, and that created a lot of tension,” the ex-chaplain added.
“As a soldier, many times you want to believe you’re fighting on the right side. It’s easy to kill someone if you believe that they’re going to hell and that they are religiously opposed to you.”
“The leader of the youth group that ministered to the teens (at the academy) said that Catholics were not Christians and that Muslims hated Christians, and that created a lot of tension,” the ex-chaplain added.
Purity of Heart as opposed to
Racial purity
http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2tb49.htm
|
Purity of Heart
|
|
Pope John Paul II
|
|
|
|
GENERAL AUDIENCE OF 10 DECEMBER During the General Audience on 10 December in the Paul VI Hall, the Holy Father gave the following address: 1. The analysis of purity is an indispensable completion of the words Christ spoke in the Sermon on the Mount, which our present reflections are centered on. When explaining the correct meaning of the commandment, “You shall not commit adultery,” Christ appealed to the interior man. At the same time he specified the fundamental dimension of purity that marks the relations between man and woman both in marriage and outside it. The words, “But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Mt 5:27-28), express what is opposed to purity. At the same time, these words demand the purity which, in the Sermon on the Mount, is included in the list of the beatitudes: “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God” (Mt 5:8). In this way Christ appealed to the human heart. He called upon it and did not accuse it, as we have already clarified. Ritual ablutions 2. Christ sees in the heart, in man’s inner self, the source of purity—but also of moral impurity—in the fundamental and most generic sense of the word. That is confirmed, for example, by the answer he gave to the Pharisees, who were scandalized by the fact that his disciples “transgress the tradition of the elders. For they do not wash their hands when they eat” (Mt 15:2). Jesus then said to those present: “Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man, but what comes out of the mouth defiles a man” (Mt 15:11). Answering Peter’s question, he explained these words to his disciples as follows: “What comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a man. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a man, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile a man” (cf. Mt 15:18-20; also Mk 7:20-23). When we say “purity” or “pure,” in the first meaning of these words, we indicate what contrasts with what is dirty. “To dirty” means “to make filthy,” “to pollute.” That referred to the various spheres of the physical world. For example, we talk of a dirty road or a dirty room; we also talk of polluted air. In the same way man can be filthy, when his body is not clean. The body must be washed to remove dirt. The Old Testament tradition attributed great importance to ritual ablutions, for example, to wash one’s hands before eating, which the above-mentioned text spoke of. Many detailed prescriptions concerned the ablutions of the body in relation to sexual impurity, understood in the exclusively physiological sense, to which we have referred previously (cf. Lv 15). According to the medical science of the time, the various ablutions may have corresponded to hygienic prescriptions. Since they were imposed in God’s name and contained in the sacred books of the Old Testament legislation, their observance indirectly acquired a religious meaning. They were ritual ablutions and, in the life of the people of the old covenant, they served ritual “purity.” Purity in the moral sense 3. In relation to the aforesaid juridico-religious tradition of the old covenant, an erroneous way of understanding moral purity developed.(1) It was often taken in the exclusively exterior and material sense. In any case, an explicit tendency to this interpretation spread. Christ opposed it radically. Nothing from outside makes one filthy, no “material” dirt makes one impure in the moral, that is, interior sense. No ablution, not even of a ritual nature, is capable in itself of producing moral purity. This has its exclusive source within man. It comes from the heart. Probably the respective prescriptions in the Old Testament (for example, those found in Leviticus 15:16-24; 18:lff., or 12:1-5) served, in addition to hygienic purposes, to attribute a certain dimension of interiority to what is corporeal and sexual in the human person. In any case, Christ took good care not to connect purity in the moral (ethical) sense with physiology and its organic processes. In the light of the words of Matthew 15:18-20, quoted above, none of the aspects of sexual “dirtiness,” in the strictly bodily, biophysiological sense, falls by itself into the definition of purity or impurity in the moral (ethical) sense. A general concept 4. The aforesaid assertion (Mt 15:18-20) is important above all for semantic reasons. Speaking of purity in the moral sense, that is, of the virtue of purity, we use an analogy, according to which moral evil is compared precisely to uncleanness. Certainly this analogy has been a part of the sphere of ethical concepts from the most remote times. Christ took it up again and confirmed it in all its extension: “What comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a man.” Here Christ spoke of all moral evil, of all sin, that is, of transgressions of the various commandments. He enumerates “evil thoughts, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander,” without confining himself to a specific kind of sin. It follows that the concept of purity and impurity in the moral sense is in the first place a general concept, not a specific one. All moral good is a manifestation of purity, and all moral evil is a manifestation of impurity. Matthew 15:18-20 does not limit purity to one area of morality, namely, to the one connected with the commandment, “You shall not commit adultery” and “Do not covet your neighbor’s wife,” that is, to the one that concerns the relations between man and woman, linked to the body and to the relative concupiscence. Similarly we can understand the beatitude of the Sermon on the Mount, addressed to “the pure in heart,” both in the general and in the more specific sense. Only the actual context will make it possible to delimit and clarify this meaning. The flesh and the spirit 5. The wider and more general meaning of purity is present also in St. Paul’s letters. In them we shall gradually pick out the contexts which explicitly limit the meaning of purity to the bodily and sexual sphere, that is, to that meaning which we can grasp from Christ’s words in the Sermon on the Mount on lust. This is already expressed in “looking at a woman,” and is regarded as equivalent to “committing adultery in one’s heart” (cf. Mt 5:27-28). St. Paul is not the author of the words about the three forms of lust. As we know, they occur in the First Letter of John. John spoke of the opposition within man between God and the world, between what comes “from the Father” and what comes “from the world” (cf. 1 Jn 2:16-17). This opposition is born in the heart and penetrates into man’s actions as “the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life.” Similarly, St. Paul points out another contradiction in the Christian. It is the opposition and at the same time the tension between the “flesh” and the “Spirit” (written with a capital letter, that is, the Holy Spirit). “But I say, walk by the Spirit, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh. For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh. For these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you would” (Gal 5:16-17). It follows that life “according to the flesh” is in opposition to life “according to the Spirit.” “For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit” (Rom 8:5). In subsequent analyses we shall seek to show that purity—the purity of heart which Christ spoke of in the Sermon on the Mount—is realized precisely in life according to the Spirit. NOTE 1) Alongside a complex system of prescriptions concerning ritual purity, on which legal casuistry was based, the concept of moral purity also existed in the Old Testament. It was handed down by means of two channels. |
|
Taken from:
L’Osservatore Romano Weekly Edition in English 15 December 1980, page 19 L’Osservatore Romano is the newspaper of the Holy See. The Cathedral Foundation |
Hell moves in mysterious ways…… seemingly opposing forces…..
1
The world lies prostrate before the
New god – Lucifer ‘G’
represented by the new Masonic Empire
which stretches from east to west
2
Far-Right political parties are also on the rise
they adore the Black or Golden Sun – Satan/Lucifer
Lucifer declares himself victor – mankind looses – and the Lord still thirsts to save our souls!!!
The same souls which are brought back to the Lord by Our Lady’s intervention
“Blessed Virgin Mary: Enmity and War” (c) USA 2008 Jozef Sinpaal
Plots of conspiracy, contradictions and betrayal thicken in the twentieth century. Herr Hitler was consecrated to Lucifer by the Germanenorden/Thule Society and was a follower of the Masonic/Aryan/Ariosophist/Theosophical teachings of the Russian Madame Blavatsky (member of the OTO, ‘Ordo Templi Orientalis,’ other members of OTO included L. Ron Hubbard founder of Scientology and declared Satanist Alister Crowley). Later, Hitler persecuted Freemasonry and moved against bolshevism/communism, whom he labeled as the Masonic/Jewish plot for world dominion. Freemason, founder of modern Satanism, Alister Crowley, was banished from Fascist Italy. Once England was captured, Hitler was planning to capture all influential British Freemasons. The German Fuhrer despised Masonry mostly due to its change in policy regarding racial tolerance, its political subversion (which was not under his control) and its Kabalistic-Jewish occult and banking connection.. Following the German-Russian pact for the fourth partition of Poland, Herr Hitler broke his alliance with Joseph Stalin. A ‘great evil’ was consuming another ‘great evil.’ It is hard to separate one from the other or understand where God’s hand of Justice and Mercy has acted. It is also hard to differentiate the sources for the financing of nazism and bolshevism/communism. According to Gary Allen in his book “None Dare Call It Conspiracy” (California, USA, 1971, pg. 69-71) International bankers and financiers financed both bolshevism and nazism.
Going back in time to the year 1833 in the USA, the sixth American President, John Quincy Adams, wrote in a letter addressed to WL Stone, where the President condemned a gruesome Masonic ritual murder. He wrote: “…freemasonry, corporate freemasonry, is chargeable with the stealing of a free citizen, and the murder of a father and husband.”(10a) He later stated that: “…freemasonry is deceptive and fraudulent … it’s promise is light, its performance is darkness.”(10b) When the English Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill expressed his opinion regarding Allied (mostly American) involvement in the First World War, he advocated that: “…peace would have been made with Germany; and there would have been no collapse in Russia leading to communism; no breakdown of government in Italy followed by fascism; and nazism never would have gained ascendancy in Germany.”(11) During the Second World War, Winston Churchill, known for having abandoned the ‘Craft’ early in his career, steered Britain successfully against Nazi Germany and emerged victorious, nonetheless he also needed the support of British masons against the Third Reich. Although he was not directly engaged with Freemasonry, this English Prime Minister was aware of their backing and support against Herr Hitler, who although was financed by certain banking high echelons of secret fraternal societies, (and himself the grandson of a chief European Illuminist – the same ones who financed the Russuan Revolution) was purging Europe of the many sects. Had he indeed conquered England, English Freemasonry feared what the German Fuhrer could do to the Craft. If he dealt with them in similar ways as he dealth with their continental brothers, he would have disbanded their lodges and enclosed them in his extermination camps. The contradictions abound, for if the higher echelons of Freemasonry desired to consecrate the world to Lucifer, and indeed Herr Hitler was himself consecrated by way of Herr Eckart’s Thule Society, what was Hitler’s unexplainable hatred in regard to at least the lower echelons of Freemasonry? The reason for this hatred was to be found with the Masonic change in opinion regarding racial integration and Judaic association, which the Fuhrer detested above all other matters. Purity of race was essential for the Nazi madman who followed the Black Sun’s rays or Satan and who was himself the grandson of a member of the Illuminti sect.
If Our Lady warned mankind in 1917 regarding a: “…more terrible war to occur during the next pontificate,” it could seem that this warning for the conversion of all sinners was referring to ‘all sinners’ for the common man in the street and the Saturday morning lodge attendee. If the conversion was not to occur, as we well know this conversion did not occur or at least not to the expected extent, the evil which the good Lord would have allowed to fall upon the world, would purge it, thus Herr Hitler. Anyway, these matters should not be examined in the hope of discovering what indeed makes sense, for even the struggles within the Russian Communist Party resulted in its members murdering each other, for example the murder on order of Joseph Stalin of the capitalist backed, Leon Trotsky, who together with Lenin was one of the artisans of the Russian October Revolution. The conclusion is that whosoever walks the path of sin and darkness, deceives and is deceived himself, evil will catch up with him sooner or later.
How to solve the mess
PRAY THE ROSARY
1) A return to proper Catholic living.
2) The repatriation of all the first generation European economic lillegal immigrants.
3) Catholic Evangelisation of the Islamic immigrant.
4) The arresting of the secret fraternal societies and sects.
5) Inter-religious dialogue – Christianity – Islam.
6) European Union political moves to ensure that the North African governments do not become Islamically radicalised.
7) The arresting of the EU – of the secret fraternal societies.
The conversion of the EU.
9) The restraint of the artificial creation of terrorist groups.
10) Changing the European and American legal frame-work as to suit Christian teaching – not Islam nor Masonic Judaism – let alone Illuminism and the anti-christian agenda.
Obviously – many points cannot be undertaken for their is not the will!!
************************
Righteousness exalts a nation,
But sin is a disgrace to any people.
Proverbs 14:34
THE TRUE TEMPLE OF SOLOMON – THE
ETERNAL ARK OF THE COVENANT AWAITS
OUR CONVERSION – LET US RUN TO HER
SON THE GOD-MAN
http://www.theinsider.org/reports/legal-symbols/
ANCIENT SYMBOLS IN MODERN LEGAL SYSTEM:
|
The icon of the female carrying the sword and scales is a universally recognised symbol of justice. But how many people appreciate that these are Masonic symbols? Law is a cornerstone of modern civilisation, and the modern legal system was founded and continues to be governed by Freemasons. The website of the University of Washington Library informs us that this famous icon of the woman with sword and balance represents Ma’at, the goddess of truth, balance, and order. Ma’at is a fundamental and fascinating Masonic concept, which originates in ancient Egypt.[1] |
|
|
|
The University of Washington School of Law website explains: “The origin of the Goddess of Justice goes back to antiquity. She was referred to as Maat by the ancient Egyptians and was often depicted carrying a sword with an ostrich feather in her hair to symbolize truth and justice. The term magistrate is derived from Maat because she assisted Osiris in the judgment of the dead by weighing their hearts.”[2] Judges in courts of law are renowned throughout the world for banging their hammers on the table to call for “order” during court proceedings. The official website of the “Supreme Council, 33 Degree, Scottish Rite of Freemasonry”, reminds us that the famous hammer and block of Judge’s regalia are Masonic. Their page about Masonic symbols explains that: “…the gavel is an interesting symbol itself. It came from Masonry.”[3] The new globalised form of justice which is gradually being introduced by United Nations, for instance through the International Court of Justice[4] or the International Criminal Court[5], continues the modern tradition of using ancient Masonic symbols in major international institutions. There is no doubt that the obvious Masonic symbolism adopted by the major institutions of human civilisation is a clear reflection of Masonic influence on the people in positions of power in the New World Order. For example, it common-knowledge that senior positions in our governments,[6] police,[7] legal,[8] financial,[9] and medical10 institutions, are held by Freemasons. |
||
Symbols often misidentified and not from cult, keepers say
Associated Press
Published on: 02/12/08
WASHINGTON — Conspiracy theorists take note: The myths surrounding one of America’s oldest and most enduring national symbols are about to be debunked … if you believe the government, that is.
The keepers of the Great Seal of the United States, the familiar emblem on the back of the $1 bill, want you to know what it is not. It is not a sign that Freemasons run the country, it has nothing to do with the occult, and it does not contain clues to a fabulous hidden treasure.
It is rather the nation’s stamp of authority, sovereignty and power, gracing our cash and embossing the most important of documents from its home at the State Department, which has held it since the days of Thomas Jefferson, the first secretary of state.
Not that the Seal’s symbols — the all-seeing eye, the unfinished pyramid, the Latin phrases, the bald eagle clutching an olive branch and arrows and the number 13 — aren’t powerful.
They are, historians say. Yet their meanings have been misidentified, misunderstood and misrepresented almost since the Continental Congress first commissioned the Seal in 1776.
It would be another six years before the original design was approved and another 128 before it evolved into its current form. Along the way, a movement to decipher the Seal’s meaning with ancient Egyptian, mystical and otherwise otherworldly explanations has gained currency.
The Internet age has seen an explosion in such conspiracy theories, many which have now been ingrained in public consciousness through the popular “National Treasure” movie franchise that serves up a combination of Masonic lore and historical myths in blockbuster Hollywood fashion.
Among them:
—That the Seal proves the domination of the United States by a powerful, quasi-religious cult. The Ancient Scottish Rite of Freemasonry is a perennial favorite of conspiracy theorists as some Founding Fathers were Masons and the Seal uses several Masonic symbols.
—That the Seal draws on Satanism or polytheistic ritual to promote a universal new world order under which Earth would be ruled by a single omnipotent government.
—That repeated references to 13 — the number of steps in the unfinished pyramid, stars in the constellation over the eagle’s head, arrows in the eagle’s claw, stripes on the eagle’s shield, letters in the phrase “Annuit Coeptis” — demonstrate the power of 13 American families.
—That there are two seals: one in which the eagle’s head faces the arrows for times of war and another in which the eagle’s head faces the olive branch for times of peace.
All rubbish, according to historians, who say the Seal’s symbolism is far less ominous or revelatory than many believe.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the Seal’s 66th and current custodian, on Tuesday inaugurated a new exhibition to commemorate its 225th birthday and trace the history and evolution of the symbolism.
“This exhibit honoring the Great Seal affirms our continued belief in the values of our founding,” she said. “The Great Seal symbolizes the unity, strength and independence of a new nation, the United States of America.”
The Seal will remain at the State Department but the interactive exhibit is designed to travel and curators hope it will dispel the rumors and educate Americans about the real meaning of the symbols.
Among the highlights:
—That known Masons like the first U.S. president, George Washington, and Benjamin Franklin had no role in designing the final seal, which uses elements of traditional heraldry, such as the unfinished pyramid to symbolize a work in progress, arrows for war and an olive branch for peace. Masons share some of those symbols, but they have never been exclusively the domain of the order.
—That the phrase “Novus Ordo Seculorum” below the Roman numerals for 1776 at the base of the pyramid translates as “A New Order of the Ages” that began with independence and does not imply the United States will be the lynchpin of a sinister “New World Order.”
—That the words “Annuit Coeptis” (“Providence favors”) and the eye of providence that hovers over the pyramid refer to unexpected interventions of fate that assisted the colonists in creating a new country.
—That the references to 13 refer to the number of colonies that formed the original United States.
“People are just not aware of the complexity and intent of the symbolism and what our Founding Fathers were trying to do with it,” said Priscilla Linn, senior curator at the U.S. Diplomacy Center. “The hidden treasure in the Seal is the courage and presence of mind of the people who created it and created these values for the whole country.”
Office of the Spokesman
Washington, DC
February 12, 2008
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice Marks New Great Seal ExhibitSecretary of State Condoleezza Rice and National Archivist Allen Weinstein commemorated the 225th anniversary of the Great Seal of the United States today.
Housed in the Exhibition Hall of the Department of State’s Harry S Truman building, the Great Seal of the United States is a unique symbol of our country’s sovereignty. It embodies the ideals of independence, unity and strength as our national identity. Sometimes called the Eagle and the Shield, our Seal links to a tradition that dates back thousands of years to guarantee and authenticate laws, treaties, ownership and rights.
To celebrate the Great Seal’s 225th anniversary, the United States Diplomacy Center, Bureau of Public Affairs, has created the exhibition, Celebrating the 225th Anniversary of the Great Seal: Past, Present and Future. This exhibit looks back to the ancestors of the modern seal, traces the origins and meanings of the Great Seal and celebrates its significance in the United States today. Included in the exhibit is artwork from Washington area students reinterpreting the Great Seal with an eye toward the future.
Following its stay in the Exhibition Hall, the Great Seal exhibit will travel to schools and other educational and cultural venues. The exhibition is dedicated to the late Department of State historian, Dr. Paul Claussen, whose work and insights contributed so much to our appreciation of diplomacy’s place in the world.
For more information on the exhibit, please contact William Armbruster, (202) 736-9042.
2008/093
|
The American dollar bill is probably the world’s best known banknote, but how many people appreciate why the Great Seal of the United States of America is printed on it, or understand what these ancient symbols mean? “On July 4, 1776, the Continental Congress passed a resolution authorizing a committee to devise a seal for the United States of America. This mission, designed to reflect the Founding Fathers’ beliefs…”[1]
|
||
|
The symbols of the Great Seal, which are featured on the dollar bill, are clearly intended to embody the beliefs of those who founded the United States of America. The current design of the Great Seal was approved by Congress on 20 June 1782, and the seal was introduced to the dollar bill in 1935. The continued official use of Masonic symbols today indicates that these beliefs remain at the heart of the U.S. establishment. What were the beliefs of the founders of America? Numerous sources [apparently] outside Freemasonry report that the vast majority of the American founders and signatories of the U.S. Constitution were Freemasons. Anti-Mason material[2] routinely claims that almost all of America’s founding fathers were members of a Masonic Order. Official sources within Freemasonry counter-claim that some but not all of America’s founders were Freemasons, and point out that the Masonic status of many of the alleged Masonic founding fathers cannot be proven conclusively. The aforementioned school of thought is corroborated by well-documented reports from some authoritative Masonic sources; thus, Manly Palmer Hall, a thirty-third degree Mason, wrote: “Of the fifty-five members of the Constitutional Convention, all but five were Masons.”[3] One side of the Great Seal shows an ancient Egyptian pyramid, beneath a triangle containing a glowing eye. The shining eye in the triangle is a certainly a famous and common Masonic symbol, although some Masonic sources prefer to deny this. The All Seeing Eye (e.g. 1, e.g. 2, e.g. 3, e.g. 4, e.g. 5, e.g. 6, e.g. 7, e.g. 8, e.g. 9, e.g. 10) is one of the most important and spiritual Masonic symbols, and the distinguished Freemason George Washington, first President of the United States of America, wore it emblazoned boldly on his Masonic apron. The front of the Great Seal displays an Eagle, which is also an important symbol in Masonic traditions. The use of the blazing eye in the triangle motif, surrounded by rays of light, in the official seal of the Ordo Templi Orientis, confirms the occult significance of this symbol. The sacred number 13 is encoded in the Seal, in the the bundle of thirteen arrows, the thirteen stripes on the shield, and the thirteen stars of the constellation that can be joined to form the Star of David shining above the Eagle’s head. The reverse, sometimes referred to as the spiritual side of the seal, contains the thirteen-step pyramid with the year 1776 in Roman numerals on the base, heralding the beginning of the new American era. Incidentally, every American state has its own official State Seal. For instance, the Great Seal of the State of Colorado bears the ubiquitous radiant eye inside the triangle, together with other relevant symbols. The motto inscribed beneath the pyramid in the Great Seal of America is “Novus Ordo Seclorum” which is Latin for “New Order of the Ages”, and synonymous with the “New World Order”. The momentous decision to print the Great Seal on the dollar bill was taken in the 1930s by the government minister Henry Agard Wallace (1888-1965), who later became Vice-President of the United States, second in command to President Roosevelt, from 1940 to 1944. Henry Wallace literally believed that America was chosen by God to lead the world in establishing the New World Order. In his biography of this prominent American politician, D. McDonald wrote that: “Just as Wallace thinks of America as the nation destined by God to lead the world, so Wallace thinks of himself as a Messiah, an instrument through whom God will guide America onward and upward.”[4] Wallace was a prominent Freemason, and he made no attempt to conceal the extent of his true beliefs when in 1934 he wrote, almost with prophetic religious fervour, about the profound esoteric significance of the Great Seal: “It will take a more definite recognition of the Grand Architect of the Universe before
the apex stone [capstone of the pyramid] is finally fitted into place and this nation in the full strength of its power is in position to assume leadership among the nations in inaugurating ‘the New Order of the Ages’.”[5] It is difficult to elucidate the full meaning of the symbols in the official Great Seal of the United States, because they are occult symbols which carry profound esoteric meaning from a truly ancient secret society which may be older and more far-reaching than the Masonic order. There are various interpretations in the public domain, but the truth is known only to initiated insiders. What is most important in the context of this article is that these are ancient religious symbols which hold special hidden significance, and their use by the American government reveals something about the secret beliefs of those in power.
|
||
| REFERENCES, NOTES & FURTHER READING | |
| 1. | Federal Consumer Information Center website, page about the Great Seal of the U.S. |
| 2.a. | Still, W. T., 1990. New World Order: The Ancient Plan of Secret Societies Louisiana, USA: Huntingdon House, p 61. |
| 2.b. | Picknett, L. & Prince, C., 2000. The Stargate Conspiracy: The Truth About Extraterrestrial Life and the Mysteries of Ancient Egypt. New York, USA: Berkley Publishing Group. |
| 3. | Hall, M. , 1951. America’s Assignment with Destiny. Los Angeles, USA: Philosophical Research Society, pp 96-97. |
| 4. | MacDonald, Dwight, 1948. Henry Wallace: The Man and the Myth.. New York, USA: Vanguard Press, p116. |
| 5. | Wallace, Henry A., 1934. Statesmanship and Religion. New York, USA: Round Table Press, Inc, pp 78-79. |
THE ‘OK’ SYMBOL
Over the past two years the Roman Catholic Church has suffered the brunt of legal litigations demanding compensation for Homosexual predation and this year the Roman Catholic Church and Catholic Associations are beginning to suffer the brunt of legal litigations demanding compensation for Hate Crimes caused due to Homophobic hatred and the incitation of Lesbian and Gay / Homophobic hatred !!
Cardinal: a “Gender Revolution” Is Under Way
ROME, FEB. 12, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Pope John Paul II’s 20-year-old letter on women is more relevant than ever, because the truth of the person is being undermined by a “gender revolution,” said the archbishop of Toledo, Spain.
Cardinal Antonio Cañizares affirmed this to ZENIT during the international conference on the theme “Woman and Man: The ‘Humanum’ in its Entirety.” The Vatican conference marked the 20th anniversary of John Paul II’s apostolic letter “Mulieris Dignitatem.” Benedict XVI addressed the conference participants Saturday, the day it ended.
Basing himself on the text of John Paul II, the cardinal offered the first address of the convention, outlining alarming perspectives regarding respect for the truth of the person as man or woman.
The cardinal told ZENIT that he believes “Mulieris Dignitatem” is more relevant than ever since in the letter, the Polish Pope expressed “the truth of man, that is man and woman, and establishes anthropological principles.”
“In these moments,” Cardinal Cañizares lamented, “a gender revolution is questioning deep down this truth of man, inseparable moreover from that of God.”
The cardinal said a key of the papal text is the explanation that “man is created by God, constituted with a truth: a unique humanity differentiated in man-woman.”
That “difference leads to unity, to communion,” he affirmed. “There cannot be dominion of one over the other, but rather respect for the dignity of both in their singularity and unrepeatableness.”
Well-organized
Cardinal Cañizares said that a well-organized cultural revolution, incarnated in lobbyists, legislative initiatives and the press, promote a “gender ideology” that rejects sexuality as a defining characteristic of the person.
“The human being becomes the result of the desire of choice,” the cardinal said. “Regardless of the physical sex,” the person — whether man or woman — “can choose his or her gender” and later on, modify the choice if so desired, taking on homosexual, heterosexual, transsexual or other lifestyles.
The 62-year-old cardinal warned that the “social and cultural change that this phenomenon implies has far reaching effects” given that for this ideology “nature doesn’t exist, the truth of man doesn’t exist, only unlimited freedom.”
In this revolution, he noted, “the nexus of individual-family-society is lost and the person is reduced to an individual,” and we observe, therefore, “the radical questioning of the family and its truth — a marriage between a man and a woman open to life — and of all of society.”
Rereading
Cardinal Cañizares said the panorama of modern culture manifests the need for a rereading of “Mulieris Dignitatem” in which John Paul II outlined the anthropological and theological roots of the truth of the human person — man and woman.
The cardinal recalled how the papal text uses the story of creation in Genesis as the foundation for the teaching on the human person. It notes that God is the creator of the person, and man and woman’s creation is “the culmination of the creation that God saw was good,” the cardinal stated.
“The human species, that has its origin in the calling into existence of the man and the woman, crowns the entire work of creation. Both are human beings in the same level,” he continued. The biblical description also “speaks of God’s institution of matrimony, in the beginning of the creation of man and woman, as an indispensable condition for the transmission of life. [...] It is about a reciprocal relationship, of man with the woman and of woman with the man.”
Because of all of this “man-being” and “woman-being” are realities “desired by God” “in their equality and in their differences, both the one and the other have a common dignity,” Cardinal Cañizares affirmed.
Called to communion
The archbishop of Toledo further reflected that the truth of man involves his call to communion.
John Paul II’s letter proclaimed the fact that man and woman “are created as persons in the image of God who is love, to live in communion” and from this flows their reciprocity and that the person is called to exist for others, becoming a gift, he said. “It is not that God has made them ‘incomplete’” but rather that he has created them “for a communion of persons, in which each one can be ‘help’ for the other because they are at the same time equal as persons and complementary as masculine and feminine.”
The cardinal contended that love, therefore, is what defines the truth of the person — man and woman — and is the essence and the duty of the family; “that’s why the family receives the mission of living, caring for, revealing and communicating love as a living reflection of God, who is love.”
“A family securely placed in this faithful attention for the other, in this communion of love of persons, exudes affection and creates the possibility of going out into the world with joy,” he said. The consequences are extremely important because in this way, in the family, “children grow within a solid reality and perceive that living is a joyful experience and a grace, not a misfortune or a risky destiny.”
Canada’s Human Rights Beef With Catholics
Magazine Investigated for Offending Homosexuals ZE08020510 – 2008-02-05
Permalink: http://www.zenit.org/article-21689?l=englishBy Pete VereTORONTO, FEB. 5, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Catholic Insight, a Canadian magazine known for its fidelity to Church teachings, has been targeted by the Canadian Human Rights Commission for publishing articles deemed offensive to homosexuals.The commission has been investigating the Toronto-based publication since homosexual activist Rob Wells, a member of the Gay, Lesbian and Transgendered Pride Center of Edmonton, filed a nine-point complaint last February with the government agency in which he accuses the magazine of promoting “extreme hatred and contempt” against homosexuals.Father Alphonse de Valk, the founder and editor of Catholic Insight, disagrees the accusations. “Wells took three pages of quotes out of context,” he told ZENIT.The Basilian priest added that Catholic Insight “bases itself on the Church’s teaching and applies it to various circumstances in our time.” He noted that some of the statements that allegedly promoted hatred and contempt against homosexuals were taken from recent Vatican pronouncements. Other types of statements published by Catholic Insight on the topic of homosexuality include political statements, medical studies, news reports and other studies. Many of the articles concerned addressed the campaign in Canada to legalize same-sex marriage, which Catholic Insight openly opposed.“The basic view of the Church is that homosexual acts are a sin, but we love the sinner,” said Father de Valk, adding that opposing same-sex marriage is not the same as rejecting homosexuals as persons.The priest said that homosexual activists are broadly defining opposition to homophobia as opposition to any homosexual act: “They maintain that the whole Catholic Church is homophobic.”
Allegations
The complaint against Father de Valk is just one of several complaints against Christians that Canada’s human rights commissions have investigated in recent years. Despite assurance from politicians that Canadian faith communities would not be affected when the government legalized same-sex marriage, the number of complaints against Christians have only increased since 2005, say several concerned Christians.
Canada’s human rights commissions are empowered by Canadian law to investigate allegations of offensive speech. There are 10 commissions in the country — the national commission, known as the Canadian Human Rights Commission, and a provincial commission for each of Canada’s 10 provinces, except British Columbia.
Once any one of the commissions has completed its investigation, it may then pass the case along to its respective human rights tribunal for adjudication. In British Columbia, individuals bring their complaints directly to the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal.
The process favors the complainant over the accused, claim Father de Valk and other Christian critics of the commissions and tribunals. There is no cost to the one who files a complaint, and the commission provides legal support to the complainant. In contrast, the accused must pay his legal costs.
Additionally, contrary to the English legal tradition, there is a reverse onus requiring the accused to prove his or her innocence. “There’s a presumption of guilt,” said Bishop Fred Henry of Calgary, who himself was subject to two complaints before the Alberta Human Rights Commission in 2005 after publishing a pastoral letter defending the traditional definition of marriage earlier that same year.
“I really feel that we are into a crisis situation here where we are experiencing a trumping of religious freedom,” said Bishop Henry.
The prelate describes Father de Valk as “an orthodox, very straight-forward individual.”
He said that Catholic Insight’s studies have been in-depth and in keeping with Catholic teaching, but given Canada’s current culture, the bishop anticipated Father de Valk would eventually be subject to a human rights complaint. “He’s a public target,” Bishop Henry said. “His magazine is rather public.”
Bishop Henry feels that Canada’s commissions and tribunals are targeting Catholics in the name of promoting human rights. “Catholicism seems to be under attack for a variety of different reasons,” he said. “I think one of the things is that we’re not trendy; we don’t easily kind of compromise on anything we consider to be essential.
“So when you have very clear definitive teaching with respect to marriage and what marriage is all about, and with homosexuality as intrinsically disordered and contrary to natural law, closing sexual relations to the gift of life, I don’t see where Catholics can say anything else that what our traditional teaching is.”
“That is not a very popular, politically correct expression of views in our society,” the bishop said. “If you can knock down that and kind of bring the Catholic Church to its knees, I would think the opponents would be very pleased to do so.”
Bishop Henry lays part of the blame with an activist judiciary that has read “sexual orientation” into the section of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that protects against discrimination. “And further, they’re reading in ’sexual practices,’” said the bishop.
Precedents
Christian groups have a losing record before Canada’s human rights tribunals for alleged discrimination. In November 2005, the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal ordered a Knights of Columbus council to pay two lesbians $1,000 each in damages, plus legal costs, after the council declined to rent their hall to the couple for a same-sex marriage ceremony.
In 2000, the Ontario Human Rights Commission fined Scott Brockie, a Protestant print-shop owner, $5,000 for declining to print, on moral grounds, homosexual-themed stationary.
The same tribunal fined London, Ontario, $10,000, plus interest, in 1997 when Mayor Diane Haskett declined to proclaim a gay pride day for the city.
Carmen Grigoire, an official spokeswoman for the Canadian Human Rights Commission, would not discuss the complaint against Father de Valk when contacted by ZENIT. The commission is investigating a similar case against the Christian Heritage Party, a political party co-founded by pro-life Catholics and Protestants. The complaint against the party was also initiated by Rob Wells.
Both Bishop Henry and Father de Valk point out that while Catholics have limited their criticism to homosexual acts, many homosexual activists have made statements openly promoting hatred toward Catholics without being investigated by Canada’s human rights commissions. “There is a distinct lack of reciprocity in how Catholics react,” Bishop Henry said.
In the end, Bishop Henry feels that Canada’s human rights tribunals are censoring the expression of traditional Christian teaching: “The social climate right now is that we’re into a new form of censorship and thought control, and the commissions are being used as thought police.”
SOME BRITS ARE AS ‘BAD’ AS CALIFORNIANS:
OUTRAGEOUS LAWS IN THE NAME OF POLITICAL
CORRECTNESS
UK Government Education Guidelines:
Don’t use terms ‘Mom’ and ‘Dad’
By Hilary WhiteLONDON, January 30, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Government guidelines for training school officials to be more sensitive to homosexuality, instruct teachers not to use the terms “mum and dad” when referring to students’ parents, and to treat “even casual” use of terms like “gay” as equal to racism.The guidedance was commissioned by the Labour government directly from the homosexual lobby group Stonewall. The document was launched today at a Stonewall conference by Schools Secretary Ed Balls.Ed Balls said, “Homophobic insults should be viewed as seriously as racism.”“Even casual use of homophobic language in schools can create an atmosphere that isolates young people and can be the forerunner of more serious forms of bullying.” The guidelines say that the word “parents” must replace “mum and dad”, and that teachers should educate pupils about civil partnerships and gay adoption rights.In Britain’s current political climate, even young children have been subject to police interventions on accusations of making “racist” or “homophobic” comments.In October 2006, a 14-year-old school girl was arrested by police and detained in a cell for three hours after she asked to be moved into a group of students who spoke English in class. Stott was denounced to police for “racism” by her teachers. In April 2007, a ten-year-old boy was questioned after the boy sent an email calling another boy “gay”.
In the “Frequently Asked Questions” section of the guidelines, in answer to the question, “We have to respect cultural and religious differences. Does this mean pupils can be homophobic?” the guidelines specifically state that those with religious views regarded by the homosexual movement as “intolerant” must be silent.
“A person can hold whatever views they want but expressing views that denigrate others is unacceptable.”
For Stonewall, youth and sexual innocence is no reason for an exemption. To the objection that primary school students are too young to understand issues of homosexuality, the guidelines respond, “Primary-school pupils may be too young to understand their own sexual orientation but it is likely that some primary-school pupils will know someone who is gay.”
“Homophobic language is used in primary schools without the pupils necessarily realising what it is that they are saying. Primary schools should respond to homophobic bullying in an age-appropriate way whilst demonstrating that it is not acceptable in school.”
For parents who object to their children being exposed to instruction on homosexuality, the guidelines say, “Regardless of their views on gay people or sexual orientation, parents and carers have to understand that schools have a responsibility to keep pupils safe.”
Stonewall, perhaps the most successful homosexual activist organization in the world, has been accepted by the Labour government, first under Tony Blair and now by Gordon Brown’s leadership, as the leading voice on all issues regarding homosexuality. The guidelines take this a step further in actually allowing the lobby group to author a government document.
Under Tony Blair’s “New Labour” government, Section 28 – the law which banned the promotion of homosexuality in schools, was repealed. Since then, homosexual activists have used their influence in Parliament to implement a full roster of training for both teachers and students in normalizing homosexuality.
Catholic Church vote recommendation
angers Spain’s ruling Socialists
MADRID, Spain, Feb. 1 (AP)- Spain’s ruling Socialists on Friday slammed Catholic bishops for urging people not to vote in next month’s elections for parties who favor gay marriage or negotiations with armed separatists in two obvious jabs aimed at the government.“The bishops have decided to enter the election campaign. They have decided to call for votes for the (right wing) Popular Party,” Socialist spokesman Jose Blanco told Cadena SER radio.But Blanco said it was logical given that for the past four years the church had joined the Popular Party in numerous anti-government demonstrations against negotiations with the armed Basque group ETA, gay marriage and curtailing religious education in schools.Describing the bishops’ stance as “immoral” and “hypocritical,” Blanco said he was sure that many Catholics, like him, felt ashamed of the church’s political interference. Spain holds general elections March 9 with latest polls indicating the Socialists and the Popular Party are in a dead heat.In Spain, the Catholic Church’s leaders have long sided with the right and even supported the fascist forces of late Gen. Francisco Franco in the 1936-39 Spanish Civil War and his ensuing near four-decade dictatorship.Under democracy, the church has consistently backed the conservatives in elections although it never actually names any political party.
In a statement Wednesday, the Spanish Bishop’s Conference statement said that while “Catholics may support and join different parties it is also true that not all (electoral) programs are equally compatible with the faith and Christian demands in life.”
The statement cited Pope Benedict XVI in urging protection for the traditional form of marriage and it criticized government moves to restrict religious teaching in school.
Blanco said that Spain had the same abortion and divorce laws when the Popular Party was in office and the church never complained.
On the issue of talks with armed groups, the bishops said: “A society which wants to be free and fair must neither, explicitly nor implicitly, recognize a terrorist organization as a political representative of any sector of the population.”
Zapatero’s efforts to negotiate an end to the Basque conflict with ETA were supported by all parties barring the conservatives. The bid collapsed when ETA called off a cease-fire after failing to win concessions.
Blanco accused the church of hypocrisy saying it took part in talks with ETA under former Popular Party Prime Minister Jose Maria’s Aznar.
“When Aznar sent a bishop to negotiations with ETA it wasn’t a sin,” Blanco said.
In a statement Thursday, the Socialists said: “If people are not to vote for parties who have negotiated with ETA, then they won’t have to vote as no party fulfills that requisite.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4473001.stm
Friday, 22 April, 2005
|
Vatican condemns Spain gay bill
|
||
|
The Vatican, under the new leadership of Pope Benedict XVI, has condemned a Spanish government bill allowing marriage between homosexuals.
The bill, passed by parliament’s Socialist-dominated lower house, also allows gay couples to adopt. A senior Vatican official described the bill – which is likely to become law within a few months – as iniquitous. He said Roman Catholic officials should be prepared to lose their jobs rather than co-operate with the law. The bill would make Spain the first European country to allow homosexual people to marry and adopt children. Only Belgium and the Netherlands allow same-sex marriages. It is also a dramatic step in the rapid secularisation of what was once one of the most devoutly Roman Catholic countries in Europe. The head of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council on the Family, Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, denounced the legislation as profoundly iniquitous. Secular state Interviewed in the Italian newspaper, Corriere de la Sera, Cardinal Lopez Trujillo said the Church was making an urgent call for freedom of conscience for Roman Catholics and appealing to them to resist the law. He said every profession linked with implementing homosexual marriages should oppose it, even if it meant losing their jobs. The cardinal insisted that just because something was made law it did not make it right. Socialist Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero took office a year ago making it clear he intended to remove what he called the church’s undeniable advantages and make Spain a secular state. There are likely to be further tensions with Pope Benedict XVI. Mr Zapatero has made it clear that he intends to streamline divorce law and even to relax the conditions placed on abortion. |
||
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=afC8F.fnUKvg
Spain’s Zapatero Assailed by Church Over Gay
Marriage (Update1)
By Flavia Krause-Jackson and Ben Sills
Feb. 7, 2008 (Bloomberg) — It isn’t just People’s Party leader Mariano Rajoy who’s running against Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero.
Spain’s Catholic bishops, angered by the prime minister’s decisions to legalize gay marriage and speed divorce procedures, are targeting his re-election effort with messages urging their flock to use the March 9 election to overturn what they call “seriously unjust” policies.
While the Spanish clergy has released moral-guidance notes in most elections since Spain became a democracy in 1978, it has never before so pointedly targeted a candidate.
With Mass attendance at its lowest level ever, the nation’s Catholic leaders “feel they are under attack by secular forces, and are defending themselves like a wounded beast by lashing back,” said Sebastian Balfour, professor of Spanish studies at the London School of Economics. “This shows the extent of the politicization of the church.”
In December, the first church-organized protest in 30 years drew 1 million supporters in Madrid; Pope Benedict XVI spoke via video link. The capital’s archbishop accused the premier of taking a “step backward for human rights.”
Belligerent Bishops
Zapatero, 47, shows no signs of bowing to the pressure. The day after the Jan. 31 bishops’ note labeling his policies unjust, his Socialist Party announced plans to increase access to abortion. A party spokesman said the election manifesto, to be released this week, will include a pledge to increase availability of the morning-after pill.
“I can’t accept that they say laws made in this legislature are undermining democracy or are a reversal for human rights,” Zapatero, who will have lunch with the Vatican’s emissary in Madrid next week, said today in a radio interview. The church’s attitude “has to change.”
Zapatero’s government has also curbed church control of religious education and passed a law honoring Republican soldiers who fought against the church’s side in the 1936-1939 civil war. The Socialist leader cites his grandfather, a Republican soldier shot by General Francisco Franco’s firing squads, as the inspiration for his political career.
The premier also declined to attend Mass with 1.5 million pilgrims in Valencia during the pope’s July 2006 visit; even Communist dictator Fidel Castro attended Pope John Paul II’s 1998 Mass in Cuba, Vatican spokesmen pointed out to the press.
Zapatero’s Lead
Zapatero’s Socialists led Rajoy’s People’s Party by 44.6 percent to 38.2 percent in a Jan. 21-31 poll by the newspaper Publico, and it isn’t a given that Rajoy will benefit from the church’s efforts against the government. While 78 percent of Spain’s 45 million people identify themselves as Catholics, regular church attendance fell to as low as 27 percent last year from 36 percent a decade ago, according to polling by the Center for Sociological Research.
The church “isn’t doing the PP any favors,” said Francisco Llera, professor of political science at the University of the Basque Country in Leioa, northern Spain. “It may undermine the party’s support among moderate, liberal and non-religious voters.”
The People’s Party “can’t afford to ignore a long-standing and steadfast ally like the church, yet with the shifting nature of Spanish society it’s not in their interest to pander to the bishops,” said Vanessa Rossi, associate fellow with the International Economics Program at London-based Chatham House.
No Rollback
Rajoy, 52, doesn’t promise to roll back Zapatero’s gay- marriage and divorce policies, but says the social agenda would go no further under him. At a Feb. 2 political rally in the northern town of Valladolid, he accused Zapatero of using the “same old trick” of getting into an argument with the clergy to divert attention from signs that the economy is sputtering.
“We are not a Christian Democrat party and never have been,” said Gabriel Elorriaga, the People’s Party communication secretary. The church’s advice to the faithful is something it “has always done before elections. The only thing that’s new is the reaction of the government.”
The church’s ties with Spain’s political right date back to the Franco era, when it came under a government-supported financial system that defied the changes of the 1965 Second Vatican Council calling for a separation of church and state.
Those subsidies were maintained through the nation’s transition to democracy; under a January 2007 agreement, the Socialists actually raised the amount that taxpayers can opt to contribute to religious institutions, giving the church a total subsidy of about 152.4 million euros ($223 million) this year.
Reassessed
That deal may be reassessed after the elections, Socialist party secretary Jose Blanco said in a Feb. 4 interview. “Nothing can be the same after March 9 now that the church hierarchy has shown such a belligerent attitude,” he said.
Meanwhile, the Spanish Episcopal Conference, the organization of the country’s 85 bishops, has kept up the anti- Zapatero drumbeat. The church-owned radio station Cadena Cope has branded the prime minister a “traitor.” Zapatero’s government is “shaking the foundations of the family with its wicked and unjust laws,” Cardinal Antonio Canizares, the archbishop of Toledo, said at the December rally.
SEX ABUSE LAW IN MARYLAND FLAWEDFebruary 19, 2008
The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, USA.
Maryland lawmaker Eric Bromwell has introduced legislation that would suspend the statute of limitations on child sexual abuse cases for almost two years. It would allow alleged victims to sue the predator and the organization where the abuser worked.The bill, however, does not apply to public institutions, which are subject to less punitive measures.Catholic League president Bill Donohue spoke against the proposed legislation today:“Unlike some lawmakers in other states who have sought to penalize private [read: Catholic] schools while giving public schools a pass, Delegate Bromwell appears to have benign motives. But he is wrong on the issue nonetheless. It is simply intolerable to allow one set of penalties for private institutions and another for public institutions. If protecting students is the goal, then justice demands that all institutions be treated equally. It is mind-boggling to think that a young person who was previously abused by a public school teacher should be afforded less justice than a neighbor who was molested by a Catholic school teacher.“This bill should either be amended to blanket all institutions equally or withdrawn altogether. To discriminate on the basis of religion—even if it is not the intent of the legislation—is indefensible. We are contacting the House Judiciary Committee about this issue.” ”Foley is obviously seeking to exculpate his behavior, despite protestations to the contrary by his attorney. Foley knows that the public is prepared to believe the worst about priests in today’s environment … [and] will stop at nothing to mitigate his actions.”“As for the alleged abuse, it’s time to ask some tough questions. First, there is a huge difference between being groped and being raped, so which was it Mr. Foley? Second, why didn’t you just smack the clergyman in the face? After all, most 15-year-old teenage boys wouldn’t allow themselves to be molested. So why did you?” by Bill Donohue – a great defender!!!
MORE OF WHAT WE HAVE TO PUT UP WITH THESE DAYS!
GOD BLESS THOSE WHO ARE FIGHTING THE TREND
U.S. appeals court rules
‘gay’ exposure is OK in kindergarten;
Parents citing religious beliefs
vow to take case to Supreme Court
WorldNetDaily.com
February 1, 2008In a case that could wind up in the U.S. Supreme Court, an appeals panel upheld dismissal of a lawsuit by Massachusetts parents seeking to prevent discussion of homosexual families in their children’s elementary school classrooms.The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday agreed with a judge’s decision last year that a school can expose children to contrary ideas without violating their parents’ rights to exercise religious beliefs.“Public schools,” wrote Judge Sandra L. Lynch, “are not obliged to shield individual students from ideas which potentially are religiously offensive, particularly when the school imposes no requirement that the student agree with or affirm those ideas, or even participate in discussions about them.”Lynch reasoned that schools must accept the Massachusetts high court’s groundbreaking 2003 decision ruling “that the state constitution mandates the recognition of same-sex marriage.” As WND reported in 2006, U.S. District Judge Mark L. Wolf dismissed the civil rights lawsuit by David and Tonia Parker of Lexington, concluding there is an obligation for public schools to teach young children to accept and endorse homosexuality.The Parkers’ lead attorney, Jeffrey Denner, declared after yesterday’s ruling the parents are preparing to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.“We are fully committed to go forward,” he said, according to the non-profit advocacy group MassResistance. “We will continue to fight on all the fronts that we need to.”
David Parker said the ruling “will surely embolden and enable the schools even more on this if it’s not fought.”
“There’s going to be an accountability, you can count on it,” he said.
The dispute began in the spring of 2005 when the Parkers then-5-year-old son brought home a book to be shared with his parents titled, Who’s in a Family?
The optional reading material, which came in a “Diversity Book Bag,” depicted at least two households led by homosexual partners.
The Parkers filed suit against the Lexington school district in 2006 and later were joined by Joseph and Robin Wirthlin, whose second-grader’s class was read a story about two princes who become lovers.
In another parents-rights case in Massachusetts, Norfolk Superior Court Judge Patrick F. Brady in December allowed Cohasset Public Schools to move forward with special education for an eighth-grader even though the parents opposed the plan.
MassResistance, which has supported the Parkers, contended Lynch’s opinion virtually ignores a major argument made by the Parkers’ attorney, Rob Sinsheimer, “that the basic constitutional protections of religious belief are being trampled on by the school.”
MassResistance notes Lynch uses the state’s controversial 1999 Comprehensive Health Curriculum Framework to justify homosexual-oriented “tolerance” lessons in the lower grades, but she “completely ignores the fact that that document was clearly intended as a non-mandatory, informal set of guidelines.”
The group points out Planned Parenthood is promoting a bill this year to make the document a formal legal guideline.
MassResistance said that to read the concluding words of Lynch’s ruling “is to experience a real sense of the term ‘banality of evil.’”
Lynch reasoned that “the mere fact that a child is exposed on occasion in public school to a concept offensive to a parent’s religious belief does not inhibit the parent from instructing the child differently.”
The opinion said the judges cannot see how the Parker’s son’s “free exercise right was burdened at all: two books were made available to him, but he was never required to read them or have them read to him.
Further, these books do not endorse gay marriage or homosexuality, or even address these topics explicitly, but merely describe how other children might come from families that look different from one’s own. There is no free exercise right to be free from any reference in public elementary schools to the existence of families in which the parents are of different gender combinations.”
The panel said the Wirthlin’s son “has a more significant claim, both because he was required to sit through a classroom reading of King and King and because that book affirmatively endorses homosexuality and gay marriage. It is a fair inference that the reading of King and King was precisely intended to influence the listening children toward tolerance of gay marriage. That was the point of why that book was chosen and used.”
But the judges also dismissed the Wirthlin’s argument.
“Even assuming there is a continuum along which an intent to influence could become an attempt to indoctrinate, however, this case is firmly on the influence-toward-tolerance end,” the opinion said. “There is no evidence of systemic indoctrination. There is no allegation that Joey was asked to affirm gay marriage. Requiring a student to read a particular book is generally not coercive of free exercise rights.”
European Bishops Criticize EU
for Interfering with Marriage
and Encroaching on National Sovereignty
By Maciej Golubiewski
www.c-fam.org/NEW YORK, Jan. 24 (C-FAM) – A report just released by the European bishops calls on the European Union (EU) to focus on what they consider to be the real needs of families in Europe and further calls on the EU to respect national marriage laws of the member states.The report by the Commission of the European Bishops’ Conference (COMECE) entitled “Proposal for a Strategy of the European Union for the Support of Couples and Marriage” focuses on two fundamental problems that present “high emotional, social and financial costs to European society:” the continuing increase in divorce rates and the difficulty faced by young Europeans who decide to raise children.The report says that in the field of matrimonial matters, “[national] diversity has to be respected and family law is and must remain the sole competence of member states.”The bishops found that some legislative proposals of the European Commission for increased cross-border legal cooperation come close to encroaching on the exclusive right of member states to make their own family policy. Moreover, EU policy in the areas of employment, social protection and poverty reduction ignore the importance of marriage altogether, they said.In the area of employment and social protection, the bishops make the case that “loving and stable couples are a social capital for all Europeans” and are “founts of mutual trust in society” as well as “the preferable instance for bringing up children” and charge the EU with ignoring this.They call for EU assistance in sharing European best practices regarding divorce prevention programs such as communication training for high-risk couples, especially those dealing with pressures of dual employment and separation due to increased geographic mobility.
The bishops also took issue with the EU’s assumption that a dual-income family is “a new social norm” among European citizens, arguing that some dual earning households exist primarily for financial constraints. For that reason, they said, EU should support and not discriminate single-earner families.
Staying at home to care for one’s children is “an important and welcome contribution to the well-being of all citizens of the European Union,” according to the report, which cites studies showing family break up as an important cause of poverty.
As for cross-border legal cooperation in family matters, the bishops warn that the EU’s legislative proposals exceed EU mandates by recognizing de facto unions and registered partnerships.
This could prematurely “entail common recognition of such unions in a situation where member states do not provide recognition for the legal aspects of such unions” and dangerously undermine the importance of marriage as endowing parents with social and legal responsibilities which otherwise do not exist, they said.
David Fieldsend, from the Brussels-based CARE Europe, said, “The Bishops’ paper is a timely and well-researched contribution to the debate that is at last being aired at the EU on family matters. For too long talk of the family has been taboo while all sorts of fringe agendas were embraced with enthusiasm. Now the demographic crisis has forced the EU’s leaders to sit up and take notice.”
http://www.cfnews.org/HateCrime.htm
Federal Hate Crime Legislation Looms in America
Compiled by John Vennari
The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 (H.R. 1592) if passed is likely to have disastrous effects on the Church in the United States; on what bishops and priests may preach from the pulpits, and may even affect seminary life and the future of the priesthood in this country.
Traditional Values Coalition Chairman Rev. Louis P. Sheldon warned, “The so-called ‘hate crimes’ bill, H.R. 1592 begins to lay a foundation for the legal framework to investigate, prosecute and then persecute people who do not agree with homosexuality, transgenderism and cross-dressing.”
On April 17, a one-day hearing was held by the House of Representatives Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security. According to all reports, the Act is on the fast-track for a favorable vote at the end of April.
Hillary Clinton announced she was proud to co-sponsor of the Legislation in the Senate. Groups such as the Anti-Defemation League, the ACLU, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, the Matthew Shepard Foundation, and Log Cabin Republicans voiced public support for the Hate Crimes Act.
A disturbing aspect surrounding the 2007 Hate Crimes proposals is the fact that the main people I see engaging in public opposition are Protestants. There is virtually no Catholic voice raising the alarm in the public forum.
What follows is a collection of statements from various Protestant groups that summarize the dangers they see in this Act, followed by a Postscript from CFN.
Homosexual/Cross-dressing Bill Hearing Held On April 17
from Traditional Values Coalition
April 18: TVC held a press conference on Capitol Hill on April 17 to draw attention to the dangers of H.R. 1592, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007.
Joining Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, Founder and Chairman of the Coalition to discuss their opposition to the proposed so-called Hate Crimes bill included:
• Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), Judiciary Committee Member, former Texas Chief Justice of the 12th Court of Appeals.
• Rev. Edwin Melendez, New Harvest Church, Chicago, Illinois
• Kimberly and Ardell Daniels, President of Kimberly Daniels Ministries International, Jacksonville, Florida
• Marianne Salazar, Legal Counsel, El Rey Jesus, Miami, Florida – the largest Latino Evangelical church in America
• Janet Folger, President of Faith2Action–announced a national television campaign ‘Hate Grandma’ bill.
“These people, in the most excellent way, spoke at our morning press conference. Each made a significant contribution and showed how the so-called ‘hate crimes’ bill, H.R. 1592 begins to lay a foundation for the legal framework to investigate, prosecute and then persecute people who do not agree with homosexuality, transgenderism and cross-dressing,” said TVC Chairman Rev. Louis P. Sheldon.
At the press conference on April 16, TVC announced the release of a symbolic “Wanted” poster today for the arrest of Jesus Christ and those who follow Him for violating the proposed Hate Crimes law (H.R. 1592). (see top of this page)
The House of Representatives Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security held its hearing on the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007, H.R. 1592. Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-TX) served as the ranking minority member on this committee and gave a masterful presentation opposing the passage of this dangerous hate crimes bill. Ranking minority member Randy Forbes (R-VA) was with the Virginia delegation at Virginia Tech for the convocation.
This so-called hate crimes act is allegedly designed to help local law enforcement officials deal with bias-related violence, but will actually add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” as federally-protected minority groups. Those testifying in favor of this bill admitted that these will be two new protected categories of individuals.
Congressman John Conyers (D-MI) is lead sponsor of H.R. 1592, but during his comments he seemed to be confused about exactly what was in his bill.
The hearing, chaired by pro-homosexual liberal Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) was heavily slanted in favor of the legislation. Only two witnesses out of six gave strong reasons to oppose H.R. 1592.
Brad Dacus of the Pacific Justice Institute and Timothy Lynch of the Cato Institute gave powerful statements against this bill.
Dacus noted, for example, that hate crimes inevitably are used by homosexuals and liberal judges to suppress freedom of speech. The 9th Federal Circuit Court has sided with homosexuals against a high school student in Poway, California who wore a T-shirt saying that homosexuality was shameful! The 9th Circuit Court cited California’s “hate violence” statute as an excuse to silence this Christian student’s religious viewpoint about homosexuality.
In addition, Slavic students in Sacramento wore T-shirts to protest the homosexual-inspired Day of Silence on campus. They were punished for their views.
Dacus also notes that the Hindu American Foundation is attempting to compare opposition to Hinduism as “hate speech.” The foundation claims that such hate speech could provoke a crazed gunman to attack Hindus in their temples!
The linking of so-called “hate speech” to hate violence is already well underway in America. Criminalizing speech is the next logical step in any so-called hate crime law that is passed by Congress. Homosexual activists are already arguing that such speech must be suppressed in order to avoid “violence” against homosexuals. The homosexual-inspired web site, hatecrime.org describes how speech is to be criminalized.
Timothy Lynch presented sound constitutional reasons to oppose hate crime laws in general and especially the federalizing of more criminal offenses. He also suggested that hate crime laws will take American law “too close to the notion of thought crimes.”
The Democrats featured the testimony of a young Hispanic man who had been brutally beaten by skinheads as an example of why the federal government should pass hate crime legislation. David Ritcheson gave a terrifying account of his brutal attack and described how many surgeries he endured to repair the damage that had been done to him.
When questioned, Ritcheson noted that his attackers had been given life sentences for their brutal attack on him. No federal hate crime law would have helped him. State prosecutors and a jury handed out punishment without any federalizing of hate crimes. Ritcheson’s testimony was actually clear evidence that criminal attacks on individuals are being adequately dealt with by local and state officials. H.R. 1592 isn’t needed.
As noted earlier, the real goal behind H.R. 1592 is to make homosexuals, and gender-confused individuals (cross-dressers, transvestites, etc.) into federally-protected “minority” groups. H.R. 1592 will establish a legal foundation and framework to investigate, prosecute and persecute any person who publicly opposes the normalization of homosexuality in our culture.
TAKE ACTION: Use CapWiz to your U.S. Representative and ask that he vote NO on H.R. 1592: http://www.traditionalvalues.org/hc/
Homosexual/Drag Queen Hate Crimes Bill On Fast Track
From Traditional Values Coalition.
April 18: We must defeat H.R. 1592, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007, by Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Democrat from Michigan.
Without your action, this anti-Christian legislation will pass — under the guise of hate-crime prevention — and accomplish the following homosexual goals:
• Silence the Bible-believing Churches, Pastors and Christians;
• Criminalize so-called “hate speech,” – which is any speech that is critical of homosexuality or cross-dressing behaviors. The suppression of free speech will be justified by the claim that such speech “incites” individuals to commit violence against homosexuals, cross-dressers etc. Any remarks about homosexuality, such as reading Bible passages, preaching on these passages, telling a person they can come out of the homosexual lifestyle, etc. will be deemed critical remarks and will be ruled to be outside the bounds of First Amendment protections for pastors, business owners and individuals.
• Elevate homosexuality and gender confused individuals such as drag queens; cross-dressers, she-males, etc. to the status of federally-protected minorities. These behaviors will be considered equal to race under the federal law;
• Interfere with local law enforcement by elevating every alleged incident of “hate” against a homosexual or cross-dresser into a federal crime;
• Fund anti-Christian curriculum for children K-12, through the U.S. Departments of Education and Justice to promote homosexuality and cross-dressing as normal behaviors.
In addition, HR 1592 makes false claims that:
• Homosexuals are fleeing across state lines to avoid persecution;
• Perpetrators are crossing state lines to commit crimes against them;
• Homosexuals are so persecuted they have trouble purchasing goods and services or finding employment. These false claims about homosexuals fleeing across state lines are being used as a hook to justify federal involvement in local law enforcement through the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
FBI statistics from 2005 (the latest available) reveal that there is no national epidemic of hate against homosexuals.
There were only 5,190 hate crimes directed against all persons. Of this figure, only 1,171 were sexual orientation bias crimes.
Out of 862,947 cases of aggravated assault, only 177 were motivated by sexual orientation bias. This is 0.000205 percent of all aggravated assaults in 2005.
In a nation of 300 million, this is no epidemic of hate against homosexuals that needs federal involvement in local law enforcement.(Source: Tables 2 and 4, FBI Hate Crime Stats, 2005)
The passage of H.R. 1592 will be a serious threat to free speech and freedom of religion. This so-called Hate Crimes Bill begins to lay the legal foundation and legal framework to persecute and prosecute those who refuse, for moral and religious reasons, to agree or teach their children that homosexuality, transgender, cross-dressing etc is normal and desirable.
Ultimately, a pastor’s sermon concerning homosexuality could be considered an incitement to violence and punished with a fine or prison. This has already occurred in Sweden, Canada, and England and efforts are underway in Brazil to punish any person who speaks out against homosexuality.
Hate Crimes Bill is a Fraud on Its Face
Press Release from Concerned Women of America
March 27: Deceptive legislation which would give special privileges and protection to homosexuals and cross-dressers has been introduced in the House by Rep. John Conyers (D-Michigan). The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 (H.R. 1592) is a dangerous bill that would treat homosexuals as a more valuable class of citizens and threaten the constitutional rights of Americans.
Matt Barber, Concerned Women for America’s (CWA) Policy Director for Cultural Issues, said, “H.R. 1592 represents a clear and present danger to our first liberties (freedom of speech, religion and association). ‘Hate crimes’ laws place us on a slippery slope toward religious persecution. These laws are already being employed as a tool in Brazil, Europe, Canada – and even right here in America – to intimidate and silence people who honor natural human sexuality, and who value the sanctity of marriage as between one man and one woman. If you speak out against homosexual behavior, then you are somehow guilty of ‘hate speech’ under the entirely subjective application of similar ‘hate crimes’ laws.
“These laws require law enforcement authorities to get into the mind of the ‘offender’ and penalize him for his thoughts. H.R. 1592 elevates one group of Americans above others based on sexual preferences and other chosen behaviors such as cross-dressing, creating a special class of victims. All things being equal, it means that if a 5-foot-2-inch grandmother is violently attacked on the street (such as the highly publicized incident videotaped in New York earlier this month where a 101 year old woman was brutally assaulted) she is less worthy of justice than a 6-foot-4-inch homosexual man who is attacked by the same assailant while leaving a ‘gay’ bar.
“Reasonably-minded people don’t advocate violence or harassment of any kind, for anything, against anyone regardless of a person’s sexual preferences, behaviors, or chosen wardrobe. And there are laws in place to protect all Americans from both violent crimes and harassment. Violators of those laws should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and there’s no evidence to suggest that they are not. ‘Hate crimes’ laws are dangerous, extraneous and entirely unnecessary,” concluded Barber.
Conyers’ ‘Hate Grandma’ Bill Introduced in House
By Janet Folger, WorldNetDaily
March 27: (Excerpt) The West Virginia Office of Civil Rights has organized teams of middle and high school students and teachers – three students per grade plus one or two faculty advisors – who are to report harassment, which in their definition includes “homophobic slurs,” to law enforcement officers. Throwing the First Amendment by the wayside the manual provides sample scenarios that illustrate how a “victim” may rightfully feel threatened (which would constitute a crime) if the alleged perpetrator is perceived as “more powerful,” has a “hostile tone” of voice, or “stands too close,” etc.
Let’s say two students get into a disagreement which escalates into a close-standing hostile-sounding argument. One is a homosexual and one is a Christian who disagrees with him. Both have done the same thing, but only one is a criminal. Yeah, that would be the Christian kid. Say the Christian kid happens to be tall, then he’s got a triple violation going for him because he’s: a “more powerful,” “close-standing,” “hostile sounding” disagreer with the homosexual agenda. Call the police! Oh, they will.
The West Virginia Hate Crimes Task Force uses the National Hate Crimes Training Curricula in police training centers at selected colleges and universities who receive grants from the U.S. Department of Justice’s division called COPS, Community Oriented Policing Services. The federal grants fund faculty and staff to conduct the “hate crimes” state-based training referred to as Regional Community Policing Institutes (RCPIs)…
Even more disturbing are descriptions of typical offenders outlined in the curricula. Types of bias crime perpetrators for police to watch for include the “mission” offender. This person “believes he has been instructed by a higher order (God, the Fuhrer, …)” (p. 20). Of course the belief in God is as suspect as those who place their beliefs in the Fuhrer – just part of the Government training already in place. No cause for alarm, this bill would just mandate these programs nationally.
The manual also lists “homophobia” as one of the identifying characteristics to spot “hate groups.” These suspect groups also “include apocalyptic Christianity in their ideology and believe we are in, or approaching, a period of violence and social turmoil which will precede the Second Coming of Christ” (p.22). So if you are a Christian who believes what the Bible has to say about homosexual behavior you’re a suspect. If you’ve noticed that reading the paper is strikingly similar to reading the book of Revelation, you are also on a police “most wanted list” of potential criminals. All to be federally funded with your tax dollars if H.R. 1592 becomes law.
Last week a police officer called my radio program and said this agenda was getting so bad, that he and his fellow Christian officers were about to quit. He said, “This bill will force Christians out of law enforcement.”
Look, this is not about prosecuting criminals. State laws already do that. The most famous “hate crime” suspects in the killing of Matthew Shepard were charged with first-degree murder and found guilty. Under Wyoming law, where homosexual Matthew Shepard was killed, first-degree murders are subject to the death penalty. We all agree what happened to Shepard was heinous. But tell me, how does one toughen the sentence of the death penalty? It’s interesting, when I appeared on the Today show with Elizabeth Birch, then spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign; I was actually for a tougher sentence for the killers of Matthew Shepard than she was. She supported a life sentence instead which is what they got.
I was accused of Shepard’s murder just for holding to the traditional biblical view of homosexuality. Didn’t I know that was an illegal thought? In one interview I was asked: “Well, if you’re not responsible for the murder of (homosexual) Matthew Shepard, then who is?” My answer was, “How about the people who actually killed him?” …
And guess what? Both killers have now confessed that their motive in attacking Shepard wasn’t any animosity for his sexual behavior, they killed him for…money for drugs. What do you know? The poster child for “hate crimes” wasn’t even the victim of one. Funny how that never came up in the 13,500 “Mathew Shepard” news stories, massive TV coverage, two major Hollywood specials, three TV movies, and a play.
The bottom line is: all crimes are “hate crimes” – not just those against an “elite group.” Here’s an idea – how about we punish actions instead of alleged “thoughts?” And how about we punish them equally no matter who is victimized? Equal justice. What a concept…
But it’s not about “crime,” it’s about speech. State “Hate Grandma” legislation has actually thrown Grandmas in jail for the “crime” of sharing the Gospel on the public sidewalk in Philadelphia. Meet Arlene Elshinnaway. She told people that God loves them. But the 75-year-old grandma must have been pretty intimidating because they hauled her off to jail for violating the Pennsylvania “Hate Crimes” bill – similar to Conyer’s…
CFN Postscript:
On Thursday April 19 I spoke with Matt Barber of Concerned Women of America, who was in Washington DC working with various groups to oppose the Hate Crimes Act. He is certain this Hate Crimes Act is designed to be followed by Hate Speech measures, and also by legislation that will make it difficult for a seminary rector or bishop to refuse a homosexual or cross-dresser into the seminary.
Mr. Barber says the Bush Administration is playing its cards close to its chest, and it is not clear whether the President would sign the legislation or whether he would veto it. It would take a tremendous amount of courage for him to veto, as the proponents of the Bill have purposely designed the campaign as an emotionally charged issue.
Mr. Barber further told me the Bill is being rammed through on the flimsiest of arguments: claiming that the number of homosexuals and cross-dressers having to cross state lines to flee from harassment is so high that it is having a deleterious effect on interstate commerce.
Furthermore, the alleged “protection of free speech” that the Bill’s promoters claim to be included in the Act is of no worth. Mr. Barber told me that when the hate crimes legislation was passed in Pennsylvania, the judge said it would only be employed if “blood flowed in the streets”. The hate crime laws were then used to jail 11 Protestants peacefully spreading the Gospel truth of the sinfulness of homosexuality. When I asked Mr. Barber if he knew of any Catholic resistance to the Hate Crime Act, he said that there were some Catholic groups in Washington opposing the legislation along with him. When I asked if he knows of any Catholic bishop who publicly voiced opposition to the Hate Crimes Act, Mr. Barber answered, “no”. - JV
For current status of Hate Crime Legislation, go to: www.cfnews.org/cfn.htm
Contact your local bishop and respectfully ask him what he is doing to help derail the Hate Crimes Act. (Please consider sending CFN an account of your conversation with the bishop or the chancery office. Contact cfnjv@localnet.com)
Pray your Rosary! Remember the words of Our Lord: “That kind is only driven out by prayer and fasting”. (Mark 9:29).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/24/wpope24.xml
Pope is victor as Prodi drops gay marriage law
By Malcolm Moore in RomeLast Updated: 12:29am GMT 25/02/2007
Mr Prodi is also trying to lure members of the Union of Christian Democrats, who currently form the Opposition, into his government. “I am seeking more votes. I intend to fight on, but I need to have the strength,” Mr Prodi told his allies.
However, the abandonment of the proposed law was widely criticised and described as evidence of the Vatican’s continuing influence on Italy’s domestic politics.
It was feeding conspiracy theories that the Holy See had engineered the government’s collapse, after warning it for several weeks about the consequences of pushing ahead with the legislation.
There seemed to be satisfaction in the Holy See that the government’s collapse would result in the death of the civil union law.
“The fall of the government was unexpected, but it was predictable, in fact very predictable,” an anonymous senior prelate told the newspaper Il Giornale. “After what happened, I can assure you that no one here shed a tear.
“It was a gift, arriving just at the beginning of Lent,” he said.
However, he denied that the Vatican had been involved in the realpolitik that led to the government’s downfall.
“The people who are screaming about a Vatican plot should look to their own houses, because there has been no trap ordered from this side of the Tiber,” he said.
When questioned on the subject, the Pope also denied that the Vatican was a “centre of power”.
In a meeting with several parish priests to celebrate Lent, he said that it was “very important that people do not see the Church as a super-national organisation. It is not an administrative body, or a body of power”. He then joked: “I like to sleep at night.”
But Franco Grillini, an MP for the Olive Tree party who is also the honorary president of Arcigay, Italy’s gay rights lobby group, said: “What happened is the result of all this illegitimate pressure that the Vatican lobby is exercising on Catholic politicians, who otherwise would be free to vote according to their conscience.
“A day does not pass without the Vatican hierarchy intervening on questions that involve individual liberty.
“Let us remember that there is no institutional duty that the Italian State has entrusted to the Catholic Church.”
In its anger over the proposals on gay marriage, the Vatican issued a dire warning that it would excommunicate any Catholic politician who voted in favour of the motion.
The 2005 award-winning book, “And Tango Makes Three,” draws on the real-life story of Roy and Silo, two chinstrap penguins at the Central Park Zoo in New York. The book, recommended by Simon & Schuster for children ages 4-8, says the two penguins sleep together and attempt to make a nest like other boy and girl penguin couples. At one point, an observer in the book says that the two “must be in love.” Roy and Silo then name their chick “Tango” because it takes two to tango.
An unnamed parent at Loudoun’s Sugarland Elementary School objected to the book several months ago and said it promoted a gay agenda, according to officials.
Following the complaint, the school principal and a district review committee comprised of principals, librarians and teachers convened to review the book. The group did not find the book inappropriate. A similar opinion was reached by a second committee that examined the book after the parent appealed the first review.
The final decision came from Superintendent Edgar Hatrick, who overruled them. He removed the 32-page book from the shelves of 16 elementary schools in Loudon County and placed it in the professional collection at each school library. Students can still access the book through the request by a parent or teacher.
According to officials, “Tango” is still in the general collection at one middle school and two high schools in the county, reported The Washington Post.
Wayde Bayard, spokesman for Loudoun County Schools, told Fox 5 News in Washington, D.C., that Hatrick thought the book’s content might not be developmentally appropriate for some students.
“It might just explore some mature themes that younger children may not particularly understand,” said Bayard.
He said it was “fine” that children were exposed to such themes but advised that a parent, adult, or teacher be with the children as they read the book.
Gay rights advocates have criticized the book’s removal as censorship and rejects claims that the book is gay propaganda.
But according to Peter Parnell, co-author of the book, presenting the issue of same-sex couples to children was the aim of the book.
In a past interview with U.S. News, Parnell said he “wanted to write a book that treated the subject of same-sex couples that kids will adore.”
“Tango is so cuddly. We’re hoping kids will love it and beg their parents to read it again and again, since children are bumping into children from these same-sex families at school and at birthday parties. This [book] makes it comfortable for parents to talk about these families,” he said in 2005.
The incident with Loudon County was not the first time the book has been protested by parents. In November 2006, parents of students of an elementary school in Shiloh, Ill., requested that the book be placed in a restricted section of the library and for the school to require students to get parental permission prior to checking the book out. They were turned down by the school superintendent. Other complaints had also surfaced in North Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Iowa, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Illinois, according to the Boston Globe.
John Stevens, a school board member from Potomac, recently criticized Loudon Schools in his blog for not having policies that allow parents and gay rights activists to appeal Hatrick’s decision.
He intends to propose a new set of policies at a committee meeting on March 4.
Although the book strives to highlight a somewhat success story of a non-traditional family, the two penguins at the center of the controversy have already split.
Italy’s ‘Prince of Darkness’ blamed for Prodi fall
By Malcolm Moore in RomeLast Updated: 1:59am GMT 23/02/2007
The former leader of the defunct centre-Right Christian Democrats was prime minister seven times and remains a life-time senator.
On Wednesday, when the government failed to reach a consensus on its foreign policy by two votes, Mr Andreotti abstained at the very last minute, a de facto “no” vote. Just before the vote, he had assured the government that he intended to support them whole-heartedly, and that he believed in Italy’s mission in Afghanistan.
His shock about-turn convinced many Italians that, once again, he was playing a Machiavellian game. “There is a shadow of a vendetta,” said the newspaper La Repubblica, pointing out that 10 months ago, Mr Andreotti had failed in an attempt to become president of the senate by two votes.
Franco Monaco, a politician in Mr Prodi’s Olive Tree party, said Mr Andreotti’s “irresponsible cynicism explains a lot about his opaque biography”. In 2002, Mr Andreotti was convicted of ordering the murder of Mino Pecorelli, a journalist who published allegations that he had ties to the Mafia while prime minister.
Although he was acquitted on appeal, a court in Palermo then found him guilty of Mafia connections. In the end, he avoided jail because the time on the statute of limitations ran out during his trial.
Others speculated that Mr Andreotti, a prominent Catholic, could even be following Vatican instructions to vote against Mr Prodi.
The Vatican is furious that Mr Prodi’s government has been trying to legalise same-sex marriage. The Pope said two weeks ago that it was a politician’s “responsibility” to vote against the proposals.
Gianfranco Pasquino, a former Left-wing senator and professor of politics at Bologna University, said: “I hold Andreotti in very low esteem.” However, he said Mr Andreotti was not fully responsible for Wednesday’s events. “It was just one vote, although it was a very important vote. We can say he was a collaborator, but one among many.”
Mr Andreotti denied that he wanted to topple the government. “Honestly,” he said. “I did not do it on purpose.”
Instead, he said that he had changed his mind because he did not like the speech given by Massimo D’Alema, the foreign minister.
Just a few neighbourhoods away at Piazza Navona, hundreds of gay rights supporters held a smaller counter-demonstration. A third event on Saturday is a prayer vigil by gay Christians in defence of the rights of gay families.
Italy approves ‘gay couples’ bill
The Vatican and some Catholic politicians on the right and left fear this would lead to what they call “pseudo-marriages” for gays in civil ceremonies, undermining the traditional Christian family based on marriage between men and women.
The issue has divided public opinion in Italy.
Rabbi fires on gay rights’ bill
By Web Editor. Filed under General, Lifestyle, News from Italy on May 12th, 2007
A Jewish leader drew the wrath of gay rights’ groups on Monday by saying that the legal recognition of homosexual couples was “unacceptable”.
Riccardo Di Segni, Rome’s chief rabbi, urged the Jewish community to speak out against government plans to give certain rights to cohabiting heterosexual and same-sex couples under a bill known as DICO.
The bill, which has yet to win parliamentary approval, has come under repeated attack from the Catholic Church, which has expressed particular alarm over its extension to gay partners.
In a long article to be published later this week in the Jewish monthly Shalom, Di Segni rebuked the Italian Jewish leaders for their “strange silence on this hotly debated issue”.
He noted that this silence was in strong contrast to the Catholic Church’s active condemnation of the DICO bill and said there were “good reasons to break it”.
“Society is about to make a decision which, according to our traditions, abundantly exceeds permitted limits and it is our duty to oppose these decisions and not remain indifferent,” Di Segni said.
Left-wing MP and veteran gay rights’ campaigner Franco Grillini immediately accused the rabbi of “unacceptable anti-homosexual racism”.
“Perhaps he’s forgotten that along with the Jews, there were many gays in the Nazi death camps,” added Grillini, who is honorary chairman of top Italian gay rights’ association Arcigay.
Arcigay, meanwhile, accused religious leaders of creating a “homophobic Holy Alliance”.
It said Di Segni and Catholic leaders were turning an upcoming pro-family values rally into an anti-gay demo.
The ‘Family Day’ demo, which has been promoted by Catholic groups and is backed by the centre-right opposition, is to be held in Rome on Saturday.
Supporters of the protest are calling on the government to do more to help families and, although the DICO law is not mentioned in their manifesto, they oppose putting marriage on a par with “other forms of cohabitation”.
Italy is one of the few countries in the European Union which does not recognise unwed couples or same-sex unions.
Centre-left Premier Romano Prodi promised such a law in his election programme.
Under the terms of the DICO bill, cohabiting couples would be able to register their union, obtaining certain financial and inheritance rights and ‘next of kin’ rights if their loved one is physically or mentally incapacitated or in hospital.
Prodi needs the full support of his disparate, nine-party coalition if the DICO bill is to pass the Senate without opposition help.
The premier holds only two more Senate seats than the Silvio Berlusconi-led opposition and DICO supporters fear the bill could be sunk there by rebel Catholic allies.
Justice Minister Clemente Mastella, who heads the tiny, Catholic UDEUR party, is one of the bill’s most vocal critics.
The minister will be attending Saturday’s Family Day rally.
CASINI: CON IL PACS IL FIUME DELLA FAMIGLIA STRARIPA |
| (02/02/2006) Intervenuto stamattina a Radio Repubblica Pier Ferdinando Casini ha motivato perchè è contrario al Pacs. |
Roma. Intervenuto stamattina a Radio Repubblica Pier Ferdinando Casini, presidente della Camera e leader dell’UDC, ha motivato, ai numerosi ascoltatori che volevano capire, perché è contrario ai Pacs. Per Casini la campagna mediatica più che sulla giustizia andrebbe fatto sul programma del centro sinistra. Pur, come lui stesso ha dichiarato, non essendo contrario alle coppie gay per il presidente della Camera è importante non arrivare alla deriva spagnola. “Temo – ha dichiarato Casini – che il Pacs sia solo il primo passo del centro sinistra per poter equiparare le coppie omosessuali all’istituto della famiglia”. “Se – ha concluso Casini – il fiume della famiglia straripa bisogna piuttosto rafforzare gli argini”
True Catholic leaders do not fight for votes –
they fight for what is right!!
Texe Mars (non-Catholic) on gender, Codex Magica, pg 243. “Men are to be made feminine, women masculine. Marriage is to be perverted. No longer between man and woman, it shall be used also to join men with men and women with women. Abortion- the reckless slaughter of innocents- is to be applauded. Sex is to become rife with perversion. Children are given over to the terrible passions of lustful pedophiles. Spiritual values are converted to material desires. False gods are exalted. False Bibles are invented. Murder and assassiation become religious goals.” The double-headed eagle of Masonry represents chaos and the concept of trans-gender… apart from the shining darkness of course…
But sin is a disgrace to any people.
Proverbs 14:34
The gospel of Saint Luke 19:43-44 mentions, “The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.” The Jewish wars of 66 – 70 against the might of Rome began with the fanatical (justifiable) Jewish zealots demanding freedom from the yoke of the oppressing Roman conquerors. Strategic murders were carried out throughout the country, the procurator Florus demanded 17 talents from the temple treasury, the Jews responded by overrunning the Roman garrison and Jerusalem fell into their hands, the Roman sacrifice to the gods, ceased. On October 30, 66, Cestius Gallus, the Governor of Damascus, Syria descended into Israel with one legion and many auxiliary forces. However, the Jews fought back and Gallus had to retire with heavy losses. All Israel was in Jewish hands. Emperor Nero in Rome chose his three ablest legions to descend upon the Jews. General Flavius Vespasianus and his son Titus, commanded these legions, which had just returned victorious from the British Isles. By October 67, Galilee was under Roman rule. Then a turn of events occurred. Nero in Rome committed suicide; likewise, three successive Caesars lost their lives. Vespasianus was elected Caesar and returned to Rome leaving Titus, his son, to conclude the Jewish matter. In spring of the year 70, Titus arrived at Jerusalem with four Roman legions, the cavalry and auxiliary troops. His army consisted of 80,000 men, who on arriving at Jerusalem were greeted by the scoffing and laughter of the Jews. Within the city a conflict arose pitting the moderates against the zealots. The Romans laid siege to Jerusalem and showered the city ceaselessly with barrages of rock and stone. They also battered the fortress walls with their rams and within three weeks opened a breach through two fortified walls. The Jews arrested their own internal conflict and directed all their efforts at repelling the Romans. When Titus saw that he had the upper hand in the matter, desiring not to destroy Jerusalem he called off the attack. In full view of the beleaguered city, the Roman legionaries were ordered to polish their helmets and bedecking themselves with their fine armor, they marched in formation before Titus, receiving their pay and rations. Such were their numbers that the spectacle took four days to complete, nonetheless, this grandiose show of power and authority infuriated the Jews who were resilient and intended to defend Jerusalem to their last. Titus, desiring not to destroy the city, attempted one last time at convincing the inhabitants to give up their obstinate opposition. He sent Flavius Josephus, the Jewish commander-in-chief of Galilee, who from beneath the fortified walls cried out in the following manner: “Men of obstinate heart, give up your cause and weapons, the country which you are fighting for stands at its complete ruin. Behold the beauty of the city! Behold the many treasures within the temple! Should all of this go up in the smoke of destruction? Does any one of you desire this? No other nation owns such treasure, your unfeeling hearts are harder than the stones of these walls.”(2) His pleas and rebuke were useless for God hardened the hearts of the people. The Romans restarted their attack. At night many escaped from the city and on discovering these people, Titus ordered them to be crucified. The crucifixion of these escapees continued daily, at one point five hundred city escapees were crucified daily. The crosses dotted the hills around Jerusalem and from the city ramparts, one could view hundreds of crosses encircling the Holy City. Thousands more dead were thrown down the city walls and the stench of rotting bodies was unbearable. A “circumvallatio” or a high wall of earthwork was erected around Jerusalem. Titus, ordered the Romans to besiege the city once again, and after a few more days breaches were made and the Romans overran the Jews. An event which shocked Titus himself occurred, A noble Jewess was found roasting and consuming her own child, this and other events infuriated the general against the people, who were beaten by famine. The resistance gave in and a great plunder ensued. The temple was initially spared; however, a fire destroyed much of it. The Romans placed their banners in the temple precincts and sacrifice to the gods restarted. Throughout the nation synagogues were destroyed and much of the Jewish population was sold into slavery.
Israeli President, Moshe Katzav, asks Vatican to reveal list of Temple treasures and Judaica held by them
On more than one occasion the Temple Mount Faithful Movement demanded that the Pope return the Temple treasures to Israel to be used in the soon-to-be-rebuilt Temple
 |
During his recent visit to Italy, the President of Israel, Moshe Katzav, asked the Prime Minister of the Vatican, Cardinal Angelo Sudano, to prepare a list of all the Temple treasures, vessels, and Judaica that are being held by the Vatican. The President asked for the Vatican’s co-operation on this sensitive matter. The major importance of this request is the fact that the Vatican holds the Temple Menorah of pure gold which, together with other holy vessels from the Temple, was stolen by the Romans and taken to Rome. After the destruction of the Temple and the Israeli kingdom in 70 CE, the Roman emperor Titus built a triumphal arch in Rome. The arch portrayed Israeli captives carrying to Rome the Menorah and other vessels taken from the Temple in Jerusalem. The information regarding the taking of the Menorah and the holy vessels to Rome and later, when the Roman Empire became Christian, being placed in the basement of the Vatican, has been passed down from generation to generation of the Jewish people. During the exile the holy Menorah and vessels remained at the focus of the memory of the Jewish people. Their dream was that one day soon they would recover them from the Vatican and return them to Jerusalem. This would be a sign of the beginning of the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem and the redemption of the people and land of Israel. The fact that the Vatican holds these holy Temple vessels has been very well known since 70 CE. Many Jews traveled to the Vatican when they could do so to look for them and to see them. Some of the travelers testified that they had personally seen the golden Menorah and the vessels in the basements of the Vatican. Some priests have even confirmed this fact. On more than one occasion over the past years, The Temple Mount and Land of Israel Faithful Movement have demanded of the Vatican and the Pope that they immediately return the golden Menorah and the other Temple vessels as well as any other Judaica that they hold. The Vatican and the Pope have never responded to these demands. The Temple Mount Faithful Movement advised them to do it immediately and to no longer hold them in captivity and that, if they would not do so, the G-d of Israel would “help” them to do so. The Temple Mount Faithful Movement and all the Jewish People and Israel were very happy that President Katzav had requested this now and had given official status to the request. He did so in the name of all the Jewish People as well as the State of Israel. This was the first time it has been done by an Israeli president since the destruction of the Temple. It was a very important event. It signified in a very exciting way that Israel is now living in the prophetic endtimes of redemption, that the Temple of the G-d of Israel is soon to be rebuilt in Jerusalem, and that the golden Menorah from the Second Temple and the other vessels will soon be returned to Jerusalem to be used in the Third, endtime Temple. Many people in the world did not pay attention to this exciting, endtime event. This should move the heart of everyone in the world. It should be noted that a previous Israeli Minister of Religion, Shimon Shitreet, had requested the Vatican return the holy golden Menorah as well as the other vessels. He presented the Vatican with the results of historical research showing that the Menorah and vessels were taken to Rome (and later stored within the Vatican) together with the Israeli captives after the destruction of the Second Temple. The research was also based on the ornamentation on the Titus’ triumphal arch in Rome which confirms it in a very clear manner. The request was ignored and even raised opposition and disapproval from the Vatican. Although the Prime Minister of the Vatican did not disapprove of the request by President Katsav, he did not show any readiness to accept it and no progress was made with regard to the matter. Sources in the Vatican denied that the Pope is holding the holy Menorah. They stated that the current Pope is sensitive to the life of the Jews and that he would act to return any item which has such a religious and symbolic value as has the Menorah. The sources said nothing about the request of the Israeli president to prepare a list of all the other holy vessels from the Temple. The reaction of these sources raised great disappointment and anger in Israel and among the Jewish people. Historians and researchers and everyone in Israel again stressed what has been very well known since 70 CE: the Temple Menorah and the other Temple vessels are, indeed, held by the Vatican in its hidden basements and, as in the past, they do not want to return them to the Jewish People, to Jerusalem, to be used in the Third Temple. Israel has very clear evidence, making this an undeniable fact. It is very well known that the Vatican also holds ancient Torah Scrolls, Jewish manuscripts, and other holy vessels in its basements.
The Office of the President of Israel confirmed the president’s request and stated that it is “a meaningful break-through and the first major request of this kind from an Israeli president”. The fact that the Vatican and the Pope are not ready to return the Temple Menorah and the other vessels to Israel will not deter The Temple Mount and Land of Israel Faithful Movement in their campaign to bring about their return to their rightful place in Jerusalem. Israel is now living in G-d’s time of redemption and the Temple Mount Faithful Movement is the vessel of the G-d of Israel to rebuild His holy Temple on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. The demand of the Faithful Movement is the demand of G-d Himself. We are His messengers to present it without delay. It will not help the Vatican and the Pope to try and stop the march of the prophetic history of Israel and even all the world. They have no chance to fight against the G-d of Israel and His clear intention to redeem Israel and all the world and to rebuild His house in Jerusalem. Israel is now in the midst of a major, prophetic, endtime struggle and campaign to rebuild the kingdom of G-d in the land of Israel, to once again locate the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in His rebuilt house in Jerusalem on Mt. Moriah. It is the desire of G-d Himself to see the original Menorah and the holy vessels from the Temple liberated from captivity in the Vatican and used in worship in the endtime Temple. We advise the Pope and the Vatican to give up trying to stop the march of G-d and history to Jerusalem. We demand of them that they immediately return the Menorah, the holy vessels, and other holy items to Israel and Jerusalem before the anger and judgement of G-d forces them to do so. However, as we see, we are living in very special, exciting, and prophetic endtimes. We are witnesses of the fulfillment of endtime prophecies by the prophets of Israel thousands of years ago. The time of the destruction, exile, and captivity of Israel is over, thanks to G-d, and we are living in the midst of a very exciting time of redemption that for so many years was a dream, a desire, and a prayer of the people of Israel. It is now becoming a reality. We are witnesses of major endtime events. Many more will occur in the near future. The significance of this for all mankind is even greater than people can imagine. We are at the beginning of a major godly time and everything will come from Jerusalem, from the Temple Mount, the holy hill of G-d. Oour lives are completely dedicated to this end. Everyone is called on to lift their eyes to Israel and Jerusalem — mainly to the Temple Mount — to see what the G-d of Israel is doing now in the holy land with His people, Israel, and what He will do in the near future. Blessed are and will be the wonderful friends of Israel and the Faithful Movement who have decided to be a part of this major event and who stand so devotedly with us. They have heard the call of G-d and answered it with no doubts. Together we shall soon see the great godly fulfillment. |
VATICAN CITY, FEB. 7, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI modified the prayer for the Jewish people prayed in the Good Friday liturgy according to the 1962 Roman Missal. The Pope’s changes to the prayer were publicized Tuesday in a note from the Vatican Secretariat of State.Vatican Radio clarified that “the possibility of using the 1962 Roman Missal during the Sacred Triduum is exceptional, and only affects certain groups.”Here is a non-official English translation of the Latin prayer:“Let us also pray for the Jews, that God our Lord should illuminate their hearts, so that they will recognize Jesus Christ, the Savior of all men.
“Let us pray. Let us genuflect. Rise.
“All-powerful and eternal God, you who wish that all men be saved and come to the recognition of truth, graciously grant that when the fullness of peoples enters your Church all of Israel will be saved.
“Through Christ Our Lord, Amen.”
* * *
The statement from the Vatican Secretariat of State reads:
In reference to the norms contained in “Summorum Pontificum,” issued “motu proprio” [on his own initiative] on July 7, 2007, regarding the possibility of using the latest version of the Missale Romanum previous to the Second Vatican Council, published in 1962 with the authority of Blessed John XXIII, the Holy Father Benedict XVI has established that the “Oremus et pro Iudaeis” from Good Friday’s liturgy included in that Missale Romanum will be replaced by the following text:
Oremus et pro Iudaeis
Ut Deus et Dominus noster illuminet corda eorum, ut agnoscant Iesum Christum salvatorem omnium hominum.
Oremus. Flectamus genua. Levate.
Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, qui vis ut omnes homines salvi fiant et ad agnitionem veritatis veniant, concede propitius, ut plenitudine gentium in Ecclesiam Tuam intrante omnis Israel salvus fiat.
Per Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen.
This translation should be used starting this year in all Good Friday celebrations using the cited Missale Romanum.
[English translation by ZENIT]
She Offered Me Two Crowns
Father Maximilian Kolbe, born in Poland in a very poor but devout family, was quite a turbulent child until the day his mother cried out, “My poor child, what will become of you?” This question completely overwhelmed Maximilian.A turning point in Maximilian’s life followed that he confessed to his mother: “I prayed so hard and asked the Holy Mother of God to tell me what I would become. Then she appeared to me, holding two crowns, one white and one red. She looked at me with love and offered them both to me. The white one represented that I would always be pure and the red one that I would be a martyr. I accepted both of them!”On February 17, 1941, the Gestapo arrested Father Maximilian Kolbe and four other brothers, and took them first to the Pawiak prison in Warsaw. The priest was severely beaten as a religious and a priest. He wrote to his congregation left in Niepokalanow: “The loving Immaculate Mother was always with us with her tenderness and will always watch over us. Let her guide us, more and more perfectly wherever she wants us to go and according to her good desire, fulfilling our duties until the end, so that we may save all souls out of love.”A few days later, Father Kolbe was transferred to Auschwitz.
Satan Exists, and Christ Defeated Him
Gospel Commentary for 1st Sunday of LentBy Father Raniero Cantalamessa, OFM Cap
VATICAN CITY, FEB. 8, 2008 (Zenit.org.- Demons, Satanism and other related phenomena are quite topical today, and they disturb a great part of our society.
Our technological and industrialized world is filled with magicians, wizards, occultism, spiritualism, fortune tellers, spell trafficking, amulets, as well as very real Satanic sects. Chased away from the door, the devil has come in through the window. Chased away by the faith, he has returned by way of superstition.
The episode of Jesus’ temptations in the desert that is read on the First Sunday of Lent helps us to have some clarity on this subject. First of all, do demons exist? That is, does the word “demon” truly indicate some personal being with intelligence and will, or is it simply a symbol, a manner of speaking that refers to the sum of the world’s moral evil, the collective unconscious, collective alienation, etc.?
Many intellectuals do not believe in demons in the first sense. But it must be noted that many great writers, such as Goethe and Dostoyevsky, took Satan’s existence very seriously. Baudelaire, who was certainly no angel, said that “the demon’s greatest trick is to make people believe that he does not exist.”
The principal proof of the existence of demons in the Gospels is not the numerous healings of possessed people, since ancient beliefs about the origins of certain maladies may have had some influence on the interpretation of these happenings. The proof is Jesus’ temptation by the demon in the desert. The many saints who in their lives battled against the prince of darkness are also proof. They are not like “Don Quixote,” tilting at windmills. On the contrary, they were very down-to-earth, psychologically healthy people.
If many people find belief in demons absurd, it is because they take their beliefs from books, they pass their lives in libraries and at desks; but demons are not interested in books, they are interested in persons, especially, and precisely, saints.
How could a person know anything about Satan if he has never encountered the reality of Satan, but only the idea of Satan in cultural, religious and ethnological traditions? They treat this question with great certainty and a feeling of superiority, doing away with it all as so much “medieval obscurantism.”
But it is a false certainty. It is like someone who brags about not being afraid of lions and proves this by pointing out that he has seen many paintings and pictures of lions and was never frightened by them. On the other hand, it is entirely normal and consistent for those who do not believe in God to not believe in the devil. It would be quite tragic for someone who did not believe in God to believe in the devil!
Yet the most important thing that the Christian faith has to tell us is not that demons exist, but that Christ has defeated them. For Christians, Christ and demons are not two equal, but rather contrary principles, as certain dualistic religions believe to be the case with good and evil. Jesus is the only Lord; Satan is only a creature “gone bad.” If power over men is given to Satan, it is because men have the possibility of freely choosing sides and also to keep them from being too proud (cf. 2 Corinthians 12:7), believing themselves to be self-sufficient and without need of any redeemer. “Old Satan is crazy,” goes an African-American spiritual. “He shot me to destroy my soul, but missed and destroyed my sin instead.”
With Christ we have nothing to fear. Nothing and no one can do us ill, unless we ourselves allow it. Satan, said an ancient Father of the Church, after Christ’s coming, is like a dog chained up in the barnyard: He can bark and lunge as much as he wants, but if we don’t go near him, he cannot harm us.
In the desert Jesus freed himself from Satan to free us! This is the joyous news with which we begin our Lenten journey toward Easter.
[Translation by Joseph G. Trabbic]
* * *
Father Raniero Cantalamessa is the Pontifical Household preacher. The readings for this Sunday are Genesis 2:7-9; 3:1-7; Romans 5:12-19; Matthew 4:1-11.
http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=5544
Satan fights back through his recruits - PAN
Pagans lash out at Church over exorcism blame
Published: February 19, 2008
“A pagan ritual is no more dangerous than going to a church, a temple, or a mosque,” PAN president David Garland said.
“The Catholic Church is once again trying to create a moral panic about devil-worship and the occult. This kind of fear-mongering belongs in the Middle Ages, not in the 21st century.
“Exorcisms endanger lives and physical safety. Anyone worried that they might be possessed by spirits should seek referral to a psychiatrist or other mental health expert, not a witch-doctor in a priest’s collar.
“The Catholic Church should ban this barbaric practice.”
************************
7. The Morning Star
“Who is she that comes forth as the morning rising,
fair as the moon,
bright as the sun,
as terrible as an army set in full battle array?”
Song of Songs 6:10
“Now a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman, adorned with the sun, standing on the moon, and with twelve stars on her head for a crown. She was pregnant, and in labor, crying aloud in the pangs of childbirth. Then a second sign appeared in the sky, a huge red dragon that had seven heads and ten horns, and each of the seven heads crowned with a coronet. Its tail dragged a third of the stars from the sky…. The woman brought a male child into the world, the son who was to rule all the nations with an iron scepter… And now war broke out in heaven, when Michael with his angels attacked the dragon. The dragon fought back with his angels, but they were defeated and driven out of heaven. The great dragon, the primeval serpent, known as the devil or Satan, who had deceived the entire world, was hurled down to the earth and his angels were hurled down with him…. As soon as the devil found himself thrown down to the earth, he sprang in pursuit of the woman, the mother of the male child, but she was given a huge pair of eagle’s wings to fly away from the serpent into the desert, to the place where she was to be looked after for a year and twice a year and half a year… Then the dragon was enraged with the woman and went away to make war on the rest of her children, that is, all who obey God’s commandments and bear witness for Jesus.”
Rev 12
Our Lady Protectress of Portugal
The twentieth century apparitions of Our Lady at Fatima, Portugal, symbolically appeared at a town named after a Moorish Princess who was converted to Christianity in 1158. The apparitions at Fatima (Fatima – Mohammed’s daughter and a wife) indirectly contributes at healing the rift between Christianity and Mohammedism. The feast day reserved for Blessed Gerard of Tonque, the founder of the Sovereign Military and Hospitaller Order of Saint John the Baptist of Jerusalem, Rhodes and Malta and the commemoration of the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima, both fall on October 13. The occasion might not be coincidental. The Icon most venerated by the Order of Saint John the Baptist, was the Icon of Philermos (Our Lady of Hope), whose chapel in Rhodes built in commemoration of Our Lady’s apparition, had originally replaced the Indo-Phoenician Temple of the Sun.
Before the First Crusade, Blessed Gerard of Tonque was the humble keeper of the hospice/hostel adjoining the Santa Maria Latina Church (opposite the Holy Sepulchre) in Jerusalem. He tended the sickly pilgrims who arrived in Jerusalem with the hope of praying at the Holy Sepulchre. At the city gates, the Christian pilgrim paid a hefty sum of money to the Islamic over-lords, this was necessary to be allowed entry and pray at the Holy Sepulchre. Blessed Gerard, therefore, had to establish a sort of dialogue with the Muslims and although tortured during the First Crusade, he was not killed. This could also have occured due to the fact that the Islamists had no time to accomplish such an act, the Crusaders were upon them. Later, the Kingdom of Jerusalem kept diplomatic ties with the Muslim world and defended well the Christian territories from the more aggressive Islamic leaders. Albeit the fact that certain Islamic Muslims preferred to wage war, the Christians pursued a policy of peace and dialogue rather than war, this was contrary to Papal instruction. Due to this policy and negotiation, the Christians suffered the loss of members of the Templar Order who absorbed certain antichristian ideas. The whole Kingdom of Jerusalem was later lost.
In the 1800s the Russian Czars were fond of having acquired the title of ‘Grandmaster of the Sovereign Military and Hospitaller Order of Saint John the Baptist.’ Indeed, the messages of Fatima were principally directed at the consecration of Russia. Interestingly, it was on October 13, 1884, that Pope Leo XIII received a vision, witnessing Our Lord and Lucifer in conversation. Following Mass in his private Vatican Chapel, the Pope fell into a meditative state. So ominous was the color of his complexion that the surrounding Cardinals thought the Pontiff had died. When the Pontiff regained his composure, His Holiness stepped into the sacristy and composed the prayer of Saint Michael the Archangel, to be recited in all Masses. His Holiness explained that he witnessed a conversation between the Devil and the Lord, emerging from a spot close to the tabernacle. He heard the rough Devil demand from the Lord certain requirements so as to be able to overpower His Church. The Lord asked what it is that he needed and the Devil demanded: “Seventy five to one hundred years and more power over those who give themselves over to my service.” The Lord said, “You have the time, you will have the power. Do with them what you will.”(1) His Holiness Pope Leo XIII, composed the following prayer to Saint Michael, which was commonly recited at the end of the Mass: “Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle. Be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the devil. Restrain him, O God, we humbly beseech Thee, and do Thou, O Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God cast him into hell with the other evil spirits, who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.”(2) Together with other prayers, the Saint Michael’s Exorcism prayer was recited at the end of the Catholic Mass up till the years of Vatican Council II, when it was deemed that this practise was unnecessary. Many believed that the Exorcism was stopped for it had successfully helped the Church reach the times of Vatican Council II, where the third secret of Fatima was to be revealed. Unfortunately, the third secret was only divulged thirty years later.
One hundred years following Pope Leo XIII’s vision, (that is at the end of the pledged 100 years) in 1984, Pope John Paul II fulfilled Our Lady’s desire of consecrating Russia to her Immaculate Heart. Our Lady loves indeed Moscow, the third Rome, and the Russian people. Evidently, as regards to ‘the challenge’ witnessed by Pope Leo XIII, the Consecration of Russia brought about the definite victory for Our Lord over: “…the evils emerging from Russia.” The Church was not overpowered by, in the Devil’s own words: “…those who give themselves over to my service.” Arguably, all sinners give themselves over to the ‘Dragon/Devil’ even though unknowingly. Therefore, who are those people whom the Devil referred to as: “…those who give themselves over to my service?” Since 1884, who were the humans who knowingly gave themselves over to the Devil’s service?
Pope Benedict XIV was instrumental for the cause of Fatima. On May 5, 1917, His Holiness invited the entire world to recite a novena to Our Lady of Peace, for the First World War to come to a swift end. A few days later, on May 13, 1917, Our Lady appeared at Cova da Iria, disclosing that the First World War will come to an end, but yet another more serious war would result during the next Pontificate, this on the condition that the world does not renounce to offend God with sin. “Many people must reform their lives,”(3) was the Blessed Virgin’s basic message and a terrifying apparition of hell, where the souls of all sinners descend, was shown to the three children.
Following October 13 and the Miracle of the Sun, the popularity of Fatima spread far and wide. The secret fraternal societies’ incapacity to arrest the growing devotion was evident proof that Our Lady’s power was involved. Certain men from Santarem and Vila Nova de Ourem, chopped off with an axe one of the trees at Fatima and stole the crucifix and Image of Our Lady and other artifacts from the apparition scene. They proceeded to expose the artifacts in a mock museum and set up a mock procession, using these holy objects to ridicule the apparitions. In the streets of Santarem, they paraded the sacred artifacts, with the accompaniment of blasphemous litanies. Sister Lucia was quite relieved to know that the tree the men chopped off, was not the actual one over which the Blessed Virgin appeared. In response to Our Lady’s apparitions at Fatima, the ‘Portuguese Federation of Free Thinkers’ promulgated their pamphlet manifesto titled: “The ridiculous comedy of Fatima.” The pamphlet explained: “As if the pernicious propaganda of reactionaries were not enough, we now see a miracle trotted out in order further to degrade the people into fanaticism and superstition… This, citizens, is a miserable and retrograde attempt to plunge the Portuguese people once more into the dense darkness of past times…. Raise the mentality of our co-citizens to the realms of Truth, Reason and Science, convincing them that nothing can alter the laws of Nature, and that the pretended miracles are nothing but miserable tricks… Let professors in the schools and colleges educate their pupils in a rational manner, liberating them from religious preconceptions as from all others, and we shall have prepared a generation for the morrow, happier because more worthy of happiness…. Let us, then, liberate ourselves and cleanse our minds, not only from foolish beliefs in such gross and laughable tricks as Fatima, but more especially from any credence in the supernatural and a pretended Deus Omnipotent (all-powerful God), omniscient and omni-everything, instrument of the subtle imaginations of rogues who wish to capture popular credulity for their purposes…. Long live the Republic! Down with Reaction! Long live Liberty!”(4)
Portuguese loyal patriots, faithful to both religion and country, immediately opposed the impious sect and the mocking ‘patriotic’ propaganda. They published letters in popular newspapers defending the apparitions at Fatima. One letter published in a newspaper in Santarem said: “As believers, and sons of a nation which has been made great by the Faith of its warriors and the heroism of its saints; as citizens of a city which has been in the forefront of civilization and culture, we strongly and earnestly protest against the scandalous processions tolerated by the public authorities, which, on the night of the 24th of this month passed through the streets of Santarem.…. The Cross of Our Redeemer… and the Image of the Virgin who has presided over our destinies in all periods of our history, were held up to sacrilege and profanation. The Litany of Our Lady, whose name is the strength and comfort of our soldiers on the field of battle, was drunkenly intoned by the organizers of this satanic orgy… We, therefore, proclaim blessed, the Cross of Christ who in other days rode the seas with our caravels when they went forth to conquer new worlds for the Faith and for civilization. We also proclaim blessed, the great Protectress of Portugal who, through the troubles and trials of our history has watched with maternal solicitude over our destiny. May God forgive these impious men, destitute of all decent feeling, who blaspheme her adorable name, and may He withhold the punishment which would justly fall on a nation which consented to such crimes.”(5) Santarem, October 28, 1917, Signed ‘A Group of Catholics.’
On October 13, the Miracle of the Sun, occurred irrespective of the fact that previous to the event, a Masonic mayor kept hostage the children for three whole days. Secret fraternal societies and occultic political forces, set themselves against the Blessed Virgin of Fatima. Freemasonry, was in its ascendancy in Portugal and by armed conflict gained power in 1910. During the month of October, the Masonic government expelled the Jesuit Order from the country and persecuted all other religious orders. Catholic Portugal had an enviable oath set by ancient Royalty upon the state, that is, to uphold the defense of the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady. The Portuguese Freemasonry abolished this practice, of the defense of Our Lady’s Immaculate Conception and the religious oath in the court system. Religious holidays became working days and divorce was legalized in Catholic Portugal. The union between a man and his wife in Holy Matrimony, was declared ‘a legal union,’ and all the religious were forced to wear lay clothing, putting aside their religious habits. This anti-clerical ultimatum had to be observed or the religious faced the penalty of suffering imprisonment. The Church and State separation was inaugurated with the confiscation of the Church’s property and the conversion of monasteries into prisons and government offices. These events, were Karl Marx’s ‘Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto’ put into practice. The secret fraternal societies openly declared that the Faith would be soon abolished and no one in Portugal will remember what the Catholic Faith stood for, the Protestant Christians were invited into the country.
In later years, a Portuguese communist regime also attempted at taking over the political reigns of power. Their attempt failed and in 1926 a true patriotic statesman was elected. The new Prime Minister of Portugal, Antonio Salazar, placed his trust in God’s help. He strove as much as possible, to establish a Catholic social order which protected the family and was legally geared against divorce. Mr. Salazar restored the Church in Portugal and also restored the country’s economy. The ideologies of secret societies and atheistic communism were exposed as Satanic lies, for their usual rhetoric that the ‘opiate of the people’ or ‘dogmatic Catholicism,’ foments poverty, ignorance and bigotry, were disproved, for Prime Minister Antonio Salazer helped both ‘Church and State’ and Portugal became both holy and financially prosperous. May 13, 1931, was an important day for the Portuguese Bishops, who consecrated Portugal to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. At Fatima, in the presence of three hundred thousand of the faithful, the bishops placed their land under the protection of Our Lady. They pleeded with her to intercede against the growing communist ideologies, which menaced their country. In 1942, the Bishops of Portugal in a collective pastoral letter said: “Anybody who would have closed his eyes twenty-five years ago and opened them now would no longer recognize Portugal, so vast is the transformation worked by the modest and invisible factor of the apparition of the Blessed Virgin at Fatima. Really, Our Lady wishes to save Portugal.”(6)
The Nation of Portugal was also preserved from the scourges of both the Spanish Civil War and the Second World War. During the second consecration of Portugal to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Cardinal Cerejeira said: “Since Our Lady of Fatima appeared in 1917… A special blessing of God has descended upon the land of Portugal… especially if we review the two years which have gone since our vow, one cannot fail to recognize that the invisible hand of God has protected Portugal, sparing it the scourge of war and the leprosy of atheistic communism.”(7) His Holiness Pope Pius XII recognized that the Red Dragon was: “…so menacing and so close to you (Portuguese) and yet avoided in such an unexpected manner.”
Before the Great War, Sister Lucy wrote to bishop Msgr. da Silva, that the war was imminent and pledged that: “…in this horrible war, Portugal would be spared because of the national Consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary made by the bishops.”(8) On December 2, 1940, she wrote again this time to Pope Pius XII informing His Holiness that Portugal was specially protected from the ravages of the Second World War and that other countries would have received the same protection if the bishops consecrated their lands to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. On May 13, 1942, Cardinal Cerejeira attributed the graces obtained for Portugal to the Blessed Virgin, adding also that such graces she will bestow on the whole world following such ‘Acts of Consecration to her most Immaculate Heart.’
The specter of communism did not all together vanish from Portugal. On April 25, 1974, the Portuguese Communists re-gained power. That same day people gathered at Fatima and were determined to win over their country, resolved to spread the devotion to Our Lady of the Rosary they reminded the Portuguese of the glorious prayer and weapon, which is the Holy Rosary. Preparations were conducted for a Rosary Crusade, the Bishop at Fatima and his envoy Father Guerra, instructed the apostles of the National Rosary Crusade, to initiate the crusade from Braga and Guimares to the North. On April 28, 1974, they commenced by inviting relatives, friends, neighbors and the people of the North to spread the word and pray five decades of the Holy Rosary daily, for the protection of Portugal. In November 1975, the Communists were ousted from power. Fr Guerra (war) won, what an appropriate surname.
In our modern day, the specter of Freemasonry has unfortunately re-emerged. In Portugal on February 11, 2007, Feast of Our Lady of Lourdes, the ‘pro-choice’ or ‘pro-abortion,’ Masonic and liberal lobby, gained an unholy victory in direct violation of the ‘Ten Commandments.’ The referendum of February 11, 2007, which should have been declared ‘null,’ due to the fact that less than 50% of the population voted, is being supported as a bill to legalize abortion in the land of Our Lady of Fatima. The Portuguese Episcopal Conference said through the spokesman Bishop Carlos Azevedo: “What happened was that the values defended by the Church are not very highly esteemed in Portuguese society at present.”(9) A major daily newspaper, the Diario de Noticias, indicated: “It was a great defeat for the Catholic Church.”(10) On the morning of February 12, 2007, the morrow of the referendum, an earthquake registering 6.0 magnitude on the Richter scale was felt in Southern Portugal, where the pro-abortionists obtained their highest votes, and was barely perceptible in the North of Portugal, where the ‘No’ vote had won. God’s displeasure was surely noticed and ‘unquestionably,’ Portugal and the rest of the world, need to resort once again to the Holy Rosary Crusade. However, ‘Moloch’ or the ‘Dragon/Devil,’ would argue that the secret fraternal societies, who draw their power from the ‘Grand Architect of the Universe’ or the ‘Prince of this world,’ need to perform his blood sacrifice. In July 2007, the political ‘health’ representatives of Portugal announced that 20,000 state monitored abortions, will be carried out yearly. Far removed seem those days when the Portuguese boasted their, ‘Salve Nobre Padroeira’: “Hail, O noble Patron, Of the people whom you protect, Of the people chosen among all others, As the people of the Lord! O Thou glory of our land, Whom you have saved a thousand times! As long as the Portuguese people exists, You will always be their love!” Emperor Constantine’s son, abolished and made illegal the ancient sacrifices to the Roman gods. Applying Constantius’ words in respect to the modern day abortion of human fetuses, by way of sacrifice to the modern ‘god of convenience,’ we the Faithful declare: “Cesset superstitio; sacrificiorum aboleatur insania” or “…let the folly of sacrifices be abolished!”
Our Lady Protectress of Austria,
Brazil and the World
In the 1200s a certain monk named Magnus, departed from the Benedictine Monastery of Saint Lambrecht, to reach Mariazell in the region of Styria, Austria. Magnus carried a statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary, which was carved out of linden wood. In 1200 he built the first church in honor of the ‘Mater Gentium Slavorum.’ In 1370, following the victory against the Ottoman powers, King Louis rebuilt a church on the same site. The ‘Magna Mater Austriae’ is the Basilica, which today stands at the site and was erected in the seventeenth century. In September 1983, Pope John Paul II visited Mariazell and at this shrine, His Holiness invoked Our Lady’s Motherly aid.
The Austrian born Adolf Hitler, embarked on his invasion of Austria in March 1938, with the intention of joining both the Austrian and German Nations into one country. In 1943, following the end of the Second World War, the Allies split Germany and Austria into four zones, each zone was handed over to the victors; the USA, England, France and the USSR. The Soviets held their grip on many countries, including; Bulgaria, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and the newly formed German Democratic Republic. The world was steeped into the Cold War, set between the world’s Western and Eastern hemispheres. In this period, a priest by the name of Father Petrus Pavlicek would help galvanize a complete change in the Austrian political scene. He performed a pilgrimage to the ancient site of Mariazell and on February 2, 1946, on the Feast of ‘Our Lady of Lights,’ the priest ardently prayed to the Blessed Virgin for a sign or an instruction, for the protection and deliverance of Soviet dominated Austria. Father Pavlicek founded a ‘Rosary Crusade of Reparation’ in honor of Our Lady of Fatima. In 1947, the Rosary Crusade was underway and the people particularly prayed for the liberation of their land from Communist Soviet rule. The Bishop of Leira, Portugal, donated a statue of Our Lady of Fatima, for the Rosary Crusade. The statue had been crafted by the same artist who sculpted the original Statue of the Blessed Virgin.
Father Pavlicek preached for the conversion of sinners and heard countless confessions, he would stay for three days at a stretch in the confessional booth, ministering the Sacrament of Reconciliation and absolving people’s sins. In 1948 the priest conducted his famous crusading acts of reparation, in a Capuchin Church in Vienna. The crusading acts consisted of the celebration of Holy Mass, sermons, the blessing of the sick and infirm, confessions and the recitation of the Holy Rosary. One crusading act usually lasted for five days, for Father Pavlicek said that, ‘Peace’ was a gift from God and not from politicians and it must be sought assiduously with prayer, repentance and a sincere change of life. On the 13th of each month, processions with the statue of Our Lady of Fatima were conducted. On September 12, the Feast of the ‘Holy Name of Mary,’ he invited all Austrians in every town to conduct processions. This particular feast was selected for it was the feast day Pope Innocent XI had instituted in 1683, following the victory against the Ottoman Empire in Vienna. Austria’s Prime Minister, Leopold Figl, together with the ministers of his cabinet, joined Father Pavlicek and with candle and Rosaries in hand, they all recited the Holy Rosary. In 1953, Julius Raab, the successor of Leopold Figl, also joined Father Pavlicek in the processions.
The prayers to the Lord and the pledges of countless of Austrians, Germans and Swiss, who recited the Rosary to Our Lady of Fatima for the conversion of sinners, peace in the world and the freedom of Austria, kept storming heaven for six years. In London approximately two hundred and sixty meetings between the allies, attempting at forging a sustainable peace, took place. These meetings all resulted in failure. However, on March 24, 1955, the Soviets announced that their forces were to be removed from Austria and on May 15, the Allies signed a treaty for Austrian Independence. The last Communist soldier left Austria on October 26, 1955. On September 12, Feast of the Holy Name of Mary, thousands gathered at Vienna and marched with their Holy Rosaries thanking Our Lady of Fatima for her intercession. The Austrian Prime Minister, Julius Raab said: “Today, we, whose hearts are full of faith, cry out to Heaven in joyful prayer: We are free. O Mary, we thank thee!”(1) The Austrian Nation was victorious through the powerful intercession of Our Lady, and this country achieved what its neighbor could not. One year following the Austrian peaceful victory, Hungary attempted an armed uprising against Soviet domination. 2500 Hungarians perished in a blood bath, crushed by the Russian Communist forces. The German mystic, Therese Neuman, who was for ten years nourished solely on the Holy Eucharist, said that it was definitely the prayers of the Austrians and their determination at reciting the Holy Rosary, which earned their liberation. According to Therese Neuman, the liberation was an astonishing achievement for Austria. On the twenty-fifth anniversary of the ‘Rosary Crusading Acts of Reparation,’ which began with the efforts of Fr Pavlicek, before an audience of thirty thousand people, an Austrian Bishop declared: “Just as Austria was freed from the Communist yoke by the fervent recitation of the Rosary, it will be in like manner by the arm of the Rosary that the world will be freed from the present assaults of the devil and his associates.”(2)
Communism held sway on the Soviet States, China, Vietnam, Korea, Spain, Mexico and Cuba. As Our Lady had very well stated at Fatima in 1917, the Russian errors did propagate throughout the world. In the 1960s, Marxist ideologists were gaining ground in Brazil. Public policies and education were styled upon the atheistic, communist and humanistic thought. In 1964, with the intention of reproducing the Cuban Communist order Joao Goulart, the Brazilian President, attempted to bring a Communist government to power. Apart from the government officials backing his plan, his infiltrated agents in unions, universities, factories and schools, were ready set for a revolution. In 1965, Father Patrick Peyton, a member of the Congregation of the Holy Cross, in the hope of emulating an Austrian-like victory, preached persistently for the accomplishment of a Rosary Crusade throughout Brazil. The Brazilian women were the first to respond to Father Patrick’s admonition; to turn to the Blessed Virgin with confidence in this hour of need for deliverance. Dona Amelia Basto coordinated a procession in Sao Paulo; an army of 600,000 women gathered to recite the Holy Rosary. In Belo Horizonte, 3,000 women gathered to disrupt the Cuban ambassador’s speech. As the women stormed in the conference hall, with Rosaries in hand and the ‘Ave Marias’ on their lips, they successfully interrupted Lionel Brizola’s speech craftily designed to entice and provoke the Brazilian people to revolt and support a Communist regime.
On March 13, 1964, President Goulart abolished Brazil’s Congress, amended the constitution and confiscated all industries and private enterprise. These political moves were in accordance with Karl Marx’s ‘Communist Manifesto.’ Invited to speak at the Soviet Supreme, Prestes boldly stated that: “…anyone who resisted communism in Brazil will have their heads cut off.”(3) On March 19, the Feast of Saint Joseph, a 1,000,000 strong protesting procession of women, armed with their Rosaries, marched through the streets of Sao Paulo, declared: “This immense and marvelous land which God has given us, is in extreme peril. We have allowed men with unlimited ambition, devoid of all Catholic Faith and scruples, to bring misery to our people, to destroy our economy, to perturb our social peace, to sow hatred and despair. They have infiltrated our nation, our administrations, our army, and even our Church, with servants of a totalitarianism which is foreign to us and which would destroy all that we hold dear…. Holy Mother of God, protect us from the fate that threatens us, and spare us the sufferings inflicted on the martyred women of Cuba, Poland, Hungary, and the other nations reduced to slavery.”(4) Luiz Carlos Prestes, the Leader of the Brazilian Communist Party and President Goulart, declared their victory. The Rosary Crusades raged on and were enjoined by hundreds and thousands of men and youth. Two hundred thousand men enrolled in the two thousand Marian congregations. The situation began to change immediately, Our Lady was responding to the prayers for intercession, President Goulart was loosing support from his own coalition of politicians and military leaders. On March 17, 1964, the ‘March of the Family for Freedom, with the help of God’ was organized. The Cardinal of Rio de Janeiro demanded the Catholic people to sincere repentance, receive the sacrament of Reconciliation and pray according to the spirit of Fatima. On March 31 of the same year, the communists were declared officially ‘defeated,’ and on March 26, to avoid a coup by the communists, the military moved against Goulart and democratic rule was restored. On April 2 the Brazilians flooded the streets in large populace numbers, thanking the Lord and Our Lady for the victory granted to their country over the Communist Red Dragon. The promoter of Marian confraternities of Brazil, Father Valerio Alberton, personally wished to pay homage and thanksgiving to Our Lady of Fatima in Portugal. There he said: “We have overcome, thanks to Our Lady of the Rosary. It is the message of Fatima, lived in Brazil, which just saved us in time.”(5)
In the 1970s, the American Bishop Sheen preached that: “The trouble with the world today is that there are not enough rosaries being prayed!” A century earlier on September 21, 1885, the future Saint Pius X wrote: “My dear children… because in our time a deplorable intellectual pride which refuses all submission, corrupts hearts, and saps Catholic morality, holds sway, there is no surer means of securing the triumph of the Faith than meditation of the mysteries of the Rosary.”(6) His Holiness Pope Saint Pius X was undoubtedly right, the victories described are veritable proof to the saint’s words. On May 13, 1917, the first apparitions at Fatima coincided with the consecration of the future Pope Pius XII, as Bishop. Once elected to the Chair of Peter, he twice attempted at consecrating Russia and the Russian people to the Immaculate Heart, on October 1942 and July 1952. On September 15, 1959, on the Feast of Our Lady of Sorrows, Khrushchev visited the United States. On September 29 and October 12, 1960, (Our Lady of the Pillar) the leader of the Soviet Union, Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev, visited the New York head quarters of the United Nations. During the General Assembly, to state clearly his ideological point and hammering Soviet intentions to the world, Mr Khrushchev publicly took off one of his shoes and slammed it upon his podium, similarly, as a judge would use his hammer in court. His exhibitionism was in support to the adamant beliefs in atheism, the non-existence of the Christian God and the pledge of subjugating the United States and Europe, and the rest of the world, to Communist ideals. He interrupted the speeches held by British, Filipino and American representatives, stating that: “We will bury you!”(7) The Cold War was at its height.
It was during these days, previous to the Cuban crises, that the Polish Pope John Paul II authorized the Bishop in Leira, Fatima to invite the Bishops of the world, to pray the Holy Rosary at Fatima. On the same day, which Khrushchev chose to slam his shoe at the United Nations General Assembly, coincidentally the Feast Day of Our Lady of the Pillar, on October 12, 1960, the Catholic Bishops met at Fatima and prayed for Russia’s conversion and denouncement of communism. On October 24, 1960, the Nedelin catastrophe occurred, the Russian top-secret research facility of the R-16 intercontinental ballistic long-range missiles, blew-up. One hundred and twenty Communist military and scientific experts died in the accident. This was a severe set back for Soviet Russia, however, the R-16 was fully developed by the time of the Cuban Crises, albeit in short supply. On August 5, 1962, Feast of Our Lady of the Snows, the Soviet-Union detonated a 40-megaton nuclear bomb. On the Feast dedicated to the Purity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, October 16, 1962, the Cuban Missile Crises occurred. The crises lead the world on the verge of a third conflagration, which was everted on October 22, when the Russians removed their nuclear arsenal from Cuba. This turn of events occurred on the Russian Orthodox Feast of Our Lady of Kazan. On August 5, 1963, Feast of Our Lady of the Snows, the USA and the USSR signed a treaty banning nuclear tests. On October 15, 1964, Brezhnev replaced Nikita Khrushchev and on September 11, 1971, Khrushchev died. His death occurred on the eve of the Feast dedicated to the Holy Name of Mary, September 12.
On May 13, 1982, for the 65th anniversary of the apparitions at Fatima, Pope John Paul II traveled to Fatima. He consecrated the world to the Blessed Virgin Mary, however, Sr. Lucia reiterated that this consecration was not accepted. On the solemnity reserved for the Annunciation by Saint Gabriel, on March 25, 1984, Pope John Paul II: “…united with all the pastors of the Church in a particular bond whereby we constitute a body and a college,” consecrated: “…the whole world, especially the peoples for which by reason of their situation you (Our Lady) have particular love and solicitude,”(8) “…the consecration was fulfilled!”(9) said Sr. Lucia to the papal nuncio to Portugal. On March 25, 1984, Pope John Paul II invited the whole world to pray the Holy Rosary; His Holiness initiated a Rosary Crusade. On May 13, 1984, while large crowds in Fatima prayed the Holy Rosary for world peace and the conversion of Russia, another explosion took place at the Soviets’ Severomorsk Naval Base, destroying much of a missile depot and maintenance workshops, killing 200 scientists and skilled technicians belonging to the Soviets’ Northern Fleet. Certain estimates place the degree of destruction to 80% of Russian missiles, but this figure is not verifiable. This was the worst ‘peace time’ disaster for Communist USSR since the Second World War. Adding to the disasters, were the deaths of high-ranking communist officials. The Soviet Defense Minister, who abruptly died in December 1984, was devising secret invasion plans for Western Europe. Marshal Ustinov, the Minister of Defense died on December 20, 1984, he was succeeded by Sergei Leonidovich Sokolov, who was ‘relieved of his duties,’ in 1987. The Head of State, Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev, died on November 10, 1982, while the General Secretary of the Communist Republic, Yuri Vladimirovich Andropov, died on February 13, 1984, on the morrow of the Russian Feast dedicated to Our Lady of Iveron. One year after the Consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, on March 10, 1985, Soviet Chairman President Konstantin Chernenko, died and Mikhial Gorbachev became the new President on March 11, 1985, just in time for the Feast of the Annunciation of March 15. In truth others died who belonged to the military machine, such as; Kiselyov, Pelshe, Rashidov and Suslov, while due to a process of reshuffling, many communist leaders retired or ‘were relieved of their duties’ such as; Kunayev, Sokolov and Aliyev. This reshuffling and change of government kept occurring for many more years. The explosions were confirmed as real accidents and not sabotage (such as the trans-Siberian gas pipeline ‘accident’ of June 1982, which prevented a cash strapped USSR from selling gas to Europe). President Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev met several times to reach agreements on non-nuclear proliferation and other issues. They met on October 11-12, 1986, Feasts of the Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary and Our Lady of the Pillar, in Iceland and on December 8, 1987, Feast of the Immaculate Conception, in the USA. In 1988, they met once again on December 6-8.
On May 12, 1988, the eve of the apparitions at Fatima, many were praying the Holy Rosary at Fatima and throughout the world, yet another explosion blew up a communist Russian factory that produced the rocket engine for the long-range SS-24 missiles, which can each carry ten nuclear war heads. On August 29, 1989, Sr. Lucia re-affirmed that the Consecration to the Immaculate Heart: “…had been accomplished” and that “God will keep His word.”(10) The fall of the Berlin Wall occurred on November 9, 1989, in November and December 1989, there occurred the peaceful revolutions in Czechoslovakia, Romania, Bulgaria and Albania. On the Feast Day of the ‘Purification of Mary,’ February 2, 1945, the Island of Malta was chosen for the ‘Malta Conference,’ where previous to the Yalta meeting with Joseph Stalin, US President Roosevelt and the British Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill met. On December 2-3, 1989, Feasts of ‘Our Lady of Liesse’ and ‘Our Lady, cause of Our Joy,’ US President George Bush and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, met within weeks of the fall of the Berlin Wall, to discuss the rapid changes in Europe. The Summit of 1989, off the coast of Malta in a Soviet ship named the Maxim Gorky and the USS Belknap, signaled a reversal at many of the decisions and plans taken at the Yalta Conference in 1945. President Bush supported Gorbachev’s ‘Perestroika.’ The summit followed a series of arms-reduction treaties between the two superpowers, including Salt II in 1979 and the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces treaty in 1987. Presidents Bush and Gorbachev went on to sign a treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe in November 1990, establishing parity between East and West, and the first of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties (Start) in December 1991. On March 15, 1990, ‘Perestroika’ or ‘Restructuring’ was announced, Russian troops were pulled out from Afghanistan, the Soviet bloc governments were allowed to choose their own governments, Russian troops were also withdrawn from Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Estonia, ‘Glasnost,’ the freedom of the press was introduced. Two days following the Russian Feast dedicated to Our Lady of Kazan (July 8), on July 10, 1991, Boris Yeltsin was elected President of Russia. He suppressed the ‘Communist coup of eight’ of August 19-21, 1991, where Gorbachev was held hostage. On the eve of the Feast of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, on August 21, 1991, the coup leaders were arrested and Boris Yeltsin officially ended the Communist Soviet Party by suspending all party structures and seizing the party papers.
Finally, the much awaited confirmation, the Immaculate Heart of Mary indeed triumphed over the Soviet Communist machine and on the Feast Day of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, August 22, 1991, the Russian people woke up in a Russia, which had no official Communist Party. The Russian Communist Party survived for 74 years in power; Christianity has survived for 2000 years. The guy who enjoyed slamming his shoe on the podium, at the United Nations International Assembly meetings in the 1960s, who affirmed his absolute belief in the atheistic principles of the USSR and the rejection and disbelief in the Christian God, was together with his Communist Party, vanquished by the Immaculate Heart of Mary, a victory which took place just thirty years following Nikita Khrushchev’s international public exhibitionism.
On October 13, 1991, Holy Mass from Fatima was shown live on Russian TV. In 1990 Eastern and Western Germany were unified and on Christmas Day 1991, the dissolution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics took place. On the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, December 8, 1991, Russia, Ukraine, Belarus formed the Commonwealth of Independent States. On Christmas Day, Gorbachev resigned and on January 1, the Feast of Mary, Mother of God, the USSR was formally dissolved. President Boris Yeltsin would go on to defeat other small battles such as the October 2-4, 1993, parliament uprising. The Feast of Our lady of the Rosary of October 7, 1993, was celebrated throughout the world.
The former President of Russia, Boris Yeltsin, died on April 23, 2007, on the Feast Day of Saint George the ancient Roman Military Martyr. President Boris Yeltsin truly helped Russia overcome its ‘Red Dragon of Communism’ and suppressed the coup organized by the last Communist officials. The famous pictures taken on August 19, 1991, of Mr Yeltsin standing on a Russian tank and urging mass demonstrations, are forever immortalized in people’s minds not only in Russia but all over the world. Nevertheless, it is up to the Russian people to decide whether the comparison of President Boris Yeltsin with Saint George is indeed fitting.
On May 13, 1917, the Blessed Virgin made this clear point: “Pray the Rosary everyday in order to obtain peace for the world and the end of the war… If my wishes are fulfilled, Russia will be converted and there will be peace. If not, Russia will spread her errors throughout the world, promoting wars and persecution of the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer, and various nations will be annihilated.”(11) The solemnity of Fatima commemorated on May 13, is also reserved for the Feast of Our Lady of the Most Blessed Sacrament and the morrow of the non-universal solemnities such as Our Lady of the Abandonment and Our Lady of Grace, May 12. To summarize the meaning of these events, it can be safely concluded that the Holy Rosary is primarily the prayer of choice for bringing peace in the world. Politicians need not waste time pledging the elusive and ever promised ‘peace and security.’ Just as the Austrian Prime Ministers Julius Raab and his successor Leopold Figl have done, if contemprory politicians have at heart the well being of their people, let the leaders of age old Christian countries be they Catholic, Protestant or Orthodox, take in hand those beautiful Rosary Beads, humble themselves with such a simple, albeit, profound prayer and gaze upon a miraculous Image of Our beloved Mother, with confidence.
Chapter 47
1 Adapted from numerous sources including the websites www.members.aol.com/bjw1106/marian7a.htm, (Accessed 25 July 2007) and www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prayer_to_Saint_Michael, (Accessed 25 July 2007) 2 Ibid. 3 C.C. Martindale S.J., The Message of Fatima, London, 1950. 4 Ibid., pg. 107. 5 ibid., pg. 108. 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid 9 Quote from www.catholictradition.org/Mary/fatima27.htm, (Accessed 25 July 2007) 10 Ibid.
Chapter 48
1 Schaffer, Charles E., The withdrawal of Soviet troops from Austrian soil, New York, USA, 2002-2006, quotes taken from www.tfp.org/magazine/mag69/austria.htm, (Accessed 25 July 2007) 2 Ibid. 3 Gaspari, Elio, A Ditadura Envergonhada, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 2002, pg. 77. 4 The Fatima Network, Father P. Leite, SJ, Arm of Peace, Quotes from www.fatima.org/crusader/cr72/cr72pg21.asp, (Accessed 25 July 2007) 5 Ibid. 6 Dal-Gal pg 87, McGovern, Fr Thomas, A Charter for Priestly Holiness, www.christendom-awake.org/pages/mcgovern/charter1.htm, (Accessed 25 July 2007) 7 Khrushchev, Nikita, We Will Bury You, quoted in www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_will_bury_you, (Accessed 25 July 2007) 8 Fatima – 1984 Consecration, quotes at www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/Fatima1984.htm, (Accessed 25 July 2007) 9 Ibid. 10 Ibid.
11 C.C. Martindale S.J., The Message of Fatima, London, 1950.
************************
Cesarean VS Vaginal Birth – the risks.. the facts..
Cesarean Fact Sheet
- A cesarean section is major abdominal surgery. When a cesarean is necessary, it can be a life saving technique for both mother and infant.
- The World Health Organization (WHO) states that no region in the world is justified in having a cesarean rate greater than 10 to 15 percent.
- In the past twenty years, the cesarean section rates have nearly quintupled in the US to 23.8% in 1989 and nearly quadrupled in Canada to 18.3% in 1987-8.
- A cesarean section poses documented medical risks to the mother’s health, including infections, hemorrhage, transfusion, injury to other organs, anesthesia complications, psychological complications, and a maternal mortality two to four times greater than that for a vaginal birth.
- An elective cesarean section increases the risk to the infant of premature birth and respiratory distress syndrome, both of which are associated with multiple complications, intensive care and burdensome financial costs. Even mature babies, the absences of labor increases the risk of breathing problems and other complications.
- Cesareans can delay the opportunity for early mother-newborn interaction, breastfeeding and the establishment of family bonds.
- In the US and Canada, over one-third of all cesareans are repeat cesareans. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommends that the concept of routine repeat cesarean be replaced by a specific indication for surgery, and that most women can be counseled and encouraged to labor and have a vaginal birth after a cesarean (VBAC).
- In 1989, 81.5% of all US women with a previous cesarean had a repeat cesarean. The VBAC rate was 18.5%. The VBAC rate is greater in every eastern and western European country.
- The “once a cesarean, always a cesarean rule is outdated now that most of uterine incisions are low and horizontal and the risk of rupture of the old scar is almost nonexistent. A review of all VBAC literature from 1985-1990 found a rupture rate of 0.22% for low transverse scars in 22,000 planned labors after cesarean. (In developed nations the rupture rate was 0.18%.) By comparison, the incidence of other childbirth emergencies, such as prolapsed cord, placental separation, or sudden fetal distress is 1-3%.
- ACOG states that the hospital requirements for VBAC are the same standards for all obstetrics. These include the capacity to respond to acute obstetric emergencies by performing a cesarean within 30 minutes. However, many hospitals in North America that offer maternity care do not allow or encourage women to labor and have a VBAC.
- In a review of all the medical reports published on VBAC from 1926-1990, 75% of all women who planned labor after a cesarean gave birth vaginally. Several medical studies record VBAC rates of over 90%.
- The latest statistics indicate that 967,000 cesareans were performed in the US in 1989. The Public Health Citizen’s Research Group estimates that over one-half the cesareans performed in 1987 were unnecessary and resulted in 25,00 serious infections, 1.1 million extra hospital days and a cost of over $1 billion. About 500 women a year die from bleeding, infections and other complications of cesarean sections, although these may be related to the reasons the operation was performed and not just to the procedure itself.
- A cesarean costs nearly twice as much as a vaginal birth ($7,186 average vs. $4,334 average in 1989 in the US). It has been estimated that in Quebec, Canada, if the current rate of cesareans (18.8%) were reduced to that of Finland (11.9%), costs incurred by the provincial health care system could be reduced approximately $19 million per year.
- The four most common medical causes contributing to the increase in cesarean section rates in North America are: routine repeat cesareans; dystocia (non-progressive labor); breech presentation; and fetal distress. Some reports suggest that more careful diagnosis and management of dystocia could halve the primary section rate. Combined with fewer cesareans for breech presentation (along with more cephalic versions), careful diagnosis of fetal distress and active encouragement of VBAC, these efforts have resulted in lowering cesarean rates to less than 12% in various parts of the world.
- Up to 77% of women for whom the indication for cesarean delivery was a non-progressive labor (sometimes diagnosed as cephalopelvic disproportion or CPD) and who tried labor again, had a VBAC for a subsequent birth. Approximately one-third of these women gave birth to babies that were larger than their previous “CPD” baby.
- ACOG states that a woman with two or more previous cesareans deliveries with low transverse incisions who wishes to plan a VBAC should not be discouraged from doing so in the absence of contraindications.
- Cesarean rates are influenced by non-medical factors. Rates are higher for women who have private medical insurance, are private rather than public clinic patients, are older, are married, have higher levels of education and are in a higher socio-economic bracket.
- In 1989, a medical study done in Houston, Texas, concluded that epidural analgesia is associated with significant increases in the incidence of cesarean section for dystocia in women having their first labor.
- Cesarean sections are sometimes performed for other than maternal or fetal well-being, such as avoidance of patient pain, patient or provider convenience, provider legal concerns or provider financial incentives.
- Although rare, there have been reports of court-ordered cesareans performed on women against their will. One such case was appealed, supported by 118 US organizations, claiming that the decision was unconstitutional and raises complex legal, moral and religious issues. The appeal judge issued a forceful decision asserting that “in virtually all cases the question of what is to be done is to be decided by the patient -the pregnant woman- on behalf of herself and her fetus.”
- In March 1990, an ACOG survey of 2,213 obstetricians documented the changing attitude about VBAC in the US. The survey reported that women under the care of younger physicians and physicians in practice for fewer years were more likely to accept the option of VBAC than women under the care of older physicians and those in practice the longest.
- Of 11,814 women admitted for labor and delivery and attended by midwives to 84 free standing birth centers in the US, 15.8% were transferred to the hospital and 4.4% had a cesarean section. Although the women were lower than average risk of a poor pregnancy outcome, their cesarean rate is one-fifth of the national average.
Copyright © 1995 – 1998 by Childbirth.org All rights reserved.
http://labortrials.wordpress.com/2007/12/05/2006-cesarean-statistics-released-it-aint-good/
2006 Cesarean Statistics Released – it ain’t good
December 5, 2007 at 10:32 pm (ICAN, Missoula, Montana, VBAC, VIP, Western Montana, advocacy, cesarean, childbirth, data, news)
Tags: 2006 cesarean rate, annual birth and death data, Annual birth data, caesarean, CDC, cesarean rate, pregnancy, vaginal birth after cesarean
About Cesareans: ICAN recognizes that when a cesarean is medically necessary, it can be a lifesaving technique for both mother and baby, and worth the risks involved. Potential risks to babies include: low birth weight, prematurity, respiratory problems, and lacerations. Potential risks to women include: hemorrhage, infection, hysterectomy, surgical mistakes, re-hospitalization, dangerous placental abnormalities in future pregnancies, unexplained stillbirth in future pregnancies and increased percentage of maternal death. http://www.ican-online.org/resources/white_papers/index.html Mission statement: ICAN is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to improve maternal-child health by preventing unnecessary cesareans through education, providing support for cesarean recovery and promoting vaginal birth after cesarean. There are 94 ICAN Chapters across North America, which hold educational and support meetings for people interested in cesarean prevention and recovery.
Doctor Joseph Mengele murdered thousands of people
and conducted hundreds of experiments on pregnant women
during WWII
8. Doctor Rebecca Gomperts and the Ford Foundation
http://www.lasttrumpetministries.org/2000/July2000.html
There is so much to pray about, and our prayer meetings are getting longer every week. Now we have learned that a Dutch doctor is planning to launch an abortion ship to sail to countries where abortion is outlawed. Dr. Rebecca Gomperts, the founder of a group called “Women on Waves”, said that the plan is to sail just outside a nations territorial waters to perform the abortions. (25) Women would be picked up in harbors and sail out to sea, where the murderous procedure would be performed, and would then be taken back. Financing is expected to come from the Dutch Government and the U.S. based Ford Foundation. (26) The ship is referred to as a floating clinic and has been named “Sea Change.” Dr. Gomperts is the former ship’s doctor of the Rainbow Warrior, a ship owned by the organization “Greenpeace.” When the ship is in harbor, it will provide contraceptives and serve as a training school for doctors who want to learn how to do abortions. (27) In response to protests by pro-life groups, Dr. Gomperts had this to say, “I don’t care much about them…I don’t have moral problems with abortion; it is assistance, that’s it. A fetus that can’t survive on it’s own outside the mother’s womb is in my view not a child.” (28)
http://www.fordfound.org/searchresults?Rebecca%20Gomperts
Search Results
| Grantee | Year | Amount | Region | Field | Program |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Rebecca Project for Human Rights | 2006 | $180,000 | New York Office | Sexuality and Reproductive Health | PSJ |
http://www.fordfound.org/grants/database/detail?22450
Grant Detail
| Grantee | The Rebecca Project for Human Rights |
| Amount | $180,000 |
| Period | 2006 – 2008 |
| Program | PSJ |
| Unit | |
| Region | New York Office |
| Field | Sexuality and Reproductive Health |
| Initiative | |
| Description | General support to address the condition of mothers incarcerated because of drug addiction |
General support to address the condition of mothers incarcerated because of drug addiction ????
incarcerated mothers ???? in Malta ???? Dr Gomperts did not embark to Malta on this mission for sure!!
http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg43977.html
Woman on Waves hopes the project will be up and running as soon as
sufficient funding has been obtained. The group needs around $1 million to
buy and outfit the ship, which will be large enough to provide accommodation
for five crew and 25 patients, and some $500,000 a year to operate it.
http://www.catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Igpress/2000-07/w-us.html
Abortion lobby exposed
“Catholic” group heavily subsidized
In a May 16 public statement, the Holy See has called worldwide attention to the fact that the United States bishops’ conference has once more formally condemned the organization known as Catholics for a Free Choice.
The American bishops, in their own statement dated May 12, had said: “‘Because of its opposition to the human rights of some of the most defenseless members of the human race, and because of its purposes and activities deliberately contradicting essential teachings of the Catholic faith, Catholics for a Free Choice merits no recognition or support as a Catholic organization.” The US bishops issued their statement in response to a movement, inaugurated by Catholics for a Free Choice (CFFC), to downgrade the status of the Holy See at the United Nations. The American bishops had previously condemned the group, noting its clear contradiction of Church teaching.
Shortly after the bishops’ statement was released, a Christian web site reported that the Ford Foundation, one of America’s most powerful philanthropic institutions, has become a major source of funding for pro-abortion groups, including CFFC. Crosswalk.com said the Ford Foundation gave $875,000 in 1998 to CFFC affiliates in Latin America and to a companion group, Catholics for the Right to Decide. In 1996, the Ford Foundation gave these groups $1,300,000.
According to the Encyclopedia of Associations, CFFC has an annual budget of $900,000, most of which comes from major donors, including the Ford Foundation, investment guru Warren Buffett’s Buffett Foundation, and the computer pioneer David and Lucille Packard’s foundation. Buffett gave $200,000 to fund CFFC pro-abortion programs in Mexico in 1998, while the Packard Foundation donated $400,000.
Still later in May it was revealed that CFFC has endorsed a new project to circumvent abortion laws in countries where the practice is still illegal. The group is supporting a project in which a ship called the “Sea Change” picks up women and performs abortions on board the ship, 12 miles off shore. The 12-mile limit puts the ship in international waters, officially outside the country’s jurisdiction. The campaign is headed up by The Women on Waves Foundation, which was founded in 1999 by Dutch abortionist Rebecca Gomperts and is based in the Netherlands.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/funderProfile.asp?fndid=5176
-
Assets: $11,615,906,693 (2005)
-
Grants Awarded: $511,847,276 (2005)
The Ford Foundation was chartered on January 15, 1936 by Edsel Ford and two Ford Motor Company executives “to receive and administer funds for scientific, educational and charitable purposes, all for the public welfare.” During its early years, the Foundation was based in Michigan (it would relocate to New York in 1953) under the leadership of Ford family members and their associates. After the deaths of Edsel Ford in 1943 and his father Henry Ford four years later, Henry Ford II (Edsel’s son and Henry’s grandson) assumed leadership of the Foundation’s Board of Trustees. He promptly appointed the Gaither Study Committee, headed by California attorney H. Rowan Gaither, to draft a long-term plan for the institution’s future.In its final report, the Committee recommended that the Ford Foundation should focus its philanthropy on groups and causes that: “promise significant contributions to world peace and … a world order of law and justice”; “secure greater allegiance to the basic principles of freedom and democracy in the solution of the insistent problems of an ever-changing society”; “advance the economic well being of people everywhere and improve economic institutions for the better realization of democratic goals”; “strengthen, expand and improve educational facilities and methods to enable individuals more fully to realize their … potentialities”; “promote greater equality of educational opportunity”; and “through scientific work, increase knowledge of factors which influence or determine human conduct, and extend such knowledge for the maximum benefit of individuals and society.”Those ideals were the precursors to the Foundation’s present-day, fourfold mission: “to strengthen democratic values, reduce poverty and injustice, promote international cooperation, and advance human achievement.”But as with any objective, the methods used to pursue each of the foregoing goals may vary widely depending upon how a particular organization – in this case the Ford Foundation — defines the operative terms contained therein; how it defines the problems; and how it defines success. Because Ford’s leading officials pursued an ever-more leftist orientation politically and ideologically, the Foundation naturally began to direct its funding disproportionately toward donees of similar leanings. When Henry Ford II eventually resigned from the Foundation’s Board of Trustees in 1977, he expressed his profound disgust with how the institution and most of its trustees had drifted so radically to the political left over time. Lamenting the Foundation’s rejection of the economic system that had made its very existence possible, Mr. Ford wrote in his resignation letter: “In effect, the Foundation is a creature of capitalism, a statement that, I’m sure, would be shocking to many professional staff people in the field of philanthropy. It is hard to discern recognition of this fact in anything the Foundation does. It is even more difficult to find an understanding of this in many of the institutions, particularly the universities, that are the beneficiaries of the Foundation’s grant programs.”The degree to which the Ford Foundation’s values and ideals have continued to move leftward since Henry Ford II wrote those words is reflected in the objectives and worldviews of the organizations it currently supports. These objectives and worldviews include: the weakening of homeland security and anti-terrorism measures on the theory that they constitute unacceptable assaults on civil liberties; the dissolution of American borders; the promotion of mass, unchecked immigration to the United States; the redistribution of wealth; the blaming of America for virtually every conceivable international dispute; the depiction of Israel as an oppressor state that routinely victimizes its Palestinian minority; the weakening of American military capabilities; a devotion to the principle of preferences based on race, ethnicity, gender, and a host of other demographic attributes; the condemnation of the U.S. as a racist, sexist nation that discriminates against minorities and women; the characterization of America as an unrepentant polluter whose industrial pursuits cause immense harm to the natural environment; the portrayal of the U.S. as a violator of human rights both at home and abroad; the depiction of America as an aggressively militaristic nation; and support for taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand as an inalienable right for all women.By using its enormous wealth (derived solely from investments in international securities) to promote these ideals, the Ford Foundation plays a major role in shaping American culture, popular opinion, and public policy.Currently headed by President Susan Berresford, the Ford Foundation identifies the following as its three major Program Areas:(a) The Asset Building and Community Development program “helps strengthen and increase the effectiveness of people and organizations working to find solutions to problems of poverty and injustice.” Grants in this area “support vibrant social movements, institutions and partnerships that analyze contemporary social and economic opportunities and devise responses to them.”(b) The Peace and Social Justice program is founded on the premise that “[a]rmed conflict destroys not only human lives but also livelihoods, governments, civil institutions, trust— in short, everything in its wake”; and that “[s]ocial justice is the aspiration of all healthy societies and the only long-term guarantee for sustaining peace.”(c) The Knowledge, Creativity and Freedom program works “globally to advance achievement in the arts, education and scholarship and to advance a positive understanding of sexuality. … It also affirms the importance of freedom to think and act critically, originally and responsibly in facilitating the building of more just and pluralistic societies.One of the Ford Foundation’s most notable disbursements was its 1968 “seed grant” to create the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), an open borders group that is now the most influential Hispanic advocacy organization in the United States. Between 1970 and 2005, Ford gave more than $25 million to MALDEF; nearly half of that amount ($11,285,000) was donated between 2000 and 2004.The Ford Foundation is also a longtime supporter of the American Civil Liberties Union, as evidenced by its $7 million grant to the ACLU in 1999. “The ACLU has no better partner and friend than the Ford Foundation,” said the ACLU’s then-Executive Director Ira Glasser. “It is fitting that the largest single gift … ever to the ACLU, should come from Ford.”The Ford Foundation is a member organization of both the Peace and Security Funders Group (which supports anti-war and radical environmentalist groups) and the International Human Rights Funders Group (a network of more than six-dozen grantmakers dedicated to funding leftwing causes). A further sampling of Ford Foundation donees includes: the Tides Foundation; the Tides Center; People for the American Way; the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Legal Defense & Education Fund; the American Friends Service Committee; the National Council of La Raza; the United States Student Association; the Center for Constitutional Rights; the National Lawyers Guild; Fenton Communications; the Al Mezan Center for Human Rights; LAW; Ittijah; MIFTAH; the New Israel Fund; the Palestinian Non-Governmental Organization Network; Alliance for Justice; the World Social Forum; the Health, Development, Information and Policy Institute; the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund; the National Organization for Women; the Save The Children Fund; the Union of Concerned Scientists; the 2001 United Nations World Conference Against Racism; the Union for Palestinian Medical Relief Committee; the Rainforest Action Network; Public Citizen; the Earth Action Network; the Environmental Working Group; the Environmental Defense Fund; the Earth Island Institute; Friends of the Earth; Human Rights Watch; Human Rights First; the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law; the Institute for Public Accuracy; the Migration Policy Institute; the Brookings Institution; the Ms. Foundation for Women; the International Federation of Human Rights; the National Immigration Forum; Physicians for Human Rights; Physicians for Social Responsibility; the William J. Brennan Center for Justice; the Center for Community Change; the Neighborhood Funders Group; the Council on Foundations; the International Crisis Group; the World Wildlife Fund/Conservation Foundation; the National Wildlife Federation; the Urban Institute; Trust for Public Land; Political Research Associates; Oxfam International; the Pacifica Foundation; the National Women’s Law Center; National Public Radio; the National Immigration Law Center; the American Bar Association Fund for Justice and Education; the National Alliance for Choice in Giving; the Feminist Majority Foundation; the Immigrant Workers Citizenship Project; Democracy Now Productions; the Center for Women’s Policy Studies; the USAction Education Fund; the Rockefeller Family Fund; the Proteus Fund; the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy; the Ploughshares Fund; Oxfam America; the Palestinian American Research Center; the Institute for Social Justice; EcoTrust; the Worldwatch Institute; the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities; the Womens Institute for Leadership Development for Human Rights; the Drug Policy Alliance; the Women’s Environment and Development Organization; the Constitutional Rights Foundation; the Democracy Matters Institute; the Womens Action for New Directions Education Fund; the World Resources Institute; the Women of Color Resource Center; the Center for Reproductive Rights; the Women’s Foundation; the Woodstock Institute; the World Conference on Religion and Peace; the World Order Models Project; the United Nations; Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada; Planned Parenthood; Catholics for a Free Choice; Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health; the New America Foundation; the Native American Rights Fund; National Partnership for Women and Families; National Interfaith Committee for Worker Justice; the Center for the Advancement of Women; the National Council of Negro Women; the International Forum on Globalization; the National Center for Lesbian Rights; the National Center for Human Rights Education; the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Center; the Lesbian and Gay Immigration Rights Task Force; the National Center for Fair and Open Testing; the Mississippi Workers Center for Human Rights; the Center for Voting and Democracy; American Council for Voluntary International Action; Global Rights; the Global Peace Congress; the Fund for Peace; the Environmental Health Coalition; the Environmental Law Institute; the Environmental Grantmakers Association; Earth House; EarthRights International; Earth Day Network; the Center for Public Policy Priorities; the Center for Public Integrity; the Center for Law and Social Policy; the Carter Center; the Border Network for Human Rights; the the International Peace Academy; the Aspen Institute; the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission; the Western Prison Project; We the People Media; Center for International Conflict Resolution; War and Peace Studies; Human Rights Justice Project; the United Nations Foundation; the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice Educational Fund; Refugees International; the Rebecca Project for Human Rights; the Rainforest Alliance; the Public Agenda Foundation; Progressive, Inc.; the Progressive Jewish Alliance; the Poverty and Race Research Action Council; the Population Council; the Organization for a New Equality; the North Carolina Association of Black Lawyers; the Nine to Five Working Women Education Fund; the Institute for Women’s Policy Research; the Immigration and Refugee Services of America; the Humanitarian Project; the Human Family Educational and Cultural Institute; Friends of the Khalidi Library; Free Press; the Center for Economic and Social Rights; the Center for Economic and Policy Research; the Center for Defense Information; the Center for Contemplative Mind in Society; Arts of Peace; the Arms Control Association; the Tamer Institute for Community Education for Palestinians Living in the West Bank; the Arab Image Foundation in Lebanon; the Arab Studies Society; the Palestinian Independent Commission for Citizen’s Rights; and the Citizens’ Commission on Civil Rights.The Ford Foundation also gives large sums to fund various projects, programs, and academic departments in universities across the United States. These include: Harvard University (for its black studies program); Wayne State University (ethnic, black and poverty studies); University of Wisconsin (black and poverty studies); Clark Atlanta University (Environmental Justice Resource Center); the University of Virginia (black studies); the University of Texas (for the [Mexican] Border Philanthropy Project); the University of Southern California (Center for Urban Education); the University of North Carolina (black studies); the University of Notre Dame (Hispanic studies); the University of Minnesota (Institute of Race and Poverty); the University of Michigan (Environmental Justice Initiative); the University of Massachusetts (Center for Inclusive Teaching); the University of Maryland-College Park (Consortium for Gender, Race and Ethnicity Program, African-American Studies Program, and Women’s Studies Program); Barnard College (black and ethnic studies); the University of Kansas (School of Social Welfare); the University of Illinois at Chicago (for integrating diversity into its research, teaching and living environment); Cornell University (Africana studies and the Peace Studies Program); Tufts University (peace studies); Temple University (labor and poverty studies); Swarthmore College (Islamic studies); Spelman College (Women’s Research and Resource Center); Smith College (feminist studies); San Francisco State University (National Sexuality Resource Center); City University of New York (Hispanic, black, women’s and queer studies); Princeton University (diversity studies); Pace University (black and women’s studies); Arizona State University (to study affirmative action and diversity in wake of Grutter v. Bollinger); Ohio State University (to study affirmative action and diversity in wake of Grutter v. Bollinger); Oberlin College (Islamic studies); Brown University (women’s studies); Northwestern University (Institute for Policy Research – urban studies); New York University (civil rights advocacy, black studies, and women’s studies); Duke University (Center for Study of Muslim Networks); Hamilton College (multicultural studies); Boston University (Islamic studies, and peace and security studies); Johns Hopkins University (Institute for Policy Studies); Emory University (Islamic and black studies); Colorado State University (environmental advocacy); and Columbia University (black studies).
YES THAT IS RIGHT… THE FORD FOUNDATION IS TO BLAME FOR THE FUNDING OF REBECCA GOMPERTS WOMEN ON WAVES ABORTION MILL
AS IT FUNDS SUCH DIABOLICAL PROGRAMS THE AMERICAN FORD FOUNDATION MURDERS THOUSANDS OF THE INNOCENT AND NOW DESIRES ALSO TO EXTERMINATE THE MALTESE UNBORN !!!
************************
Righteousness exalts a nation,
But sin is a disgrace to any people.
Proverbs 14:34
THE TRUE TEMPLE OF SOLOMON – THE
ETERNAL ARK OF THE COVENANT AWAITS
OUR CONVERSION – LET US RUN TO HER
SON THE GOD-MAN
