Tuesday, December 27, 2011

"EARTH CHARTER IN ACTION" - OCCUPY WALL STREET

Res Ipsa Loquitur -- Legalese for The Thing Speaks for Itself!

Comments:
Ugh. I hate the kind of interminable blather and buzzspeak these people use. Agenda 21 has buried in its blather specific plans to cluster people in cities, depopulate and rewild the majority of US (and other I assume) land, and a lot would still be crop land, but the STATED purpose of improving air quality and living with nature and so forth would be better met by different ways. (E.g., green belts,
which may be a part of their methods some places, but the ultimate goal on that map you can find on youtube.com and elsewhere of the final goal condition is another matter entirely.)

Obviously the real goal only uses this ecological thing as an excuse. The real goal is to create it looks like tightly populated, regimented (such would have to be regimented if packed that tight) cities made of dense multistorey housing, and what about pets? what about horses and riding? what about agricultural animals are we all going to be forced to be vegan, while animal predators roam free to eat all the meat they want? Why are WE the only animals supposed to be vegan, when it is well known that we don't produce all the B12 and taurine and maybe one or two other things we need? Such diets work in filthy environments where insect parts and dust that incl. powdered feces with B12 in it are chronically in the food like India. Move such to clean environments with food standards, and watch their health decline.

Beef organ meat is the highest taurine source. But higher still are insects. Unless these people want us to all learn to eat bugs, and given their elite status leaders I doubt it, we would all be in trouble. PETA used to do a good job exposing abuses in the meat industry and elsewhere, but now others are taking up this chore, and so I no longer support them, because their ultimate goal is to eliminate ALL human animal interaction. no pets. horrible thought.

PETA is probably in this hammer and tongs.

If farmers were to grow not only a cash crop, but the food they need to feed their own families and neighbors and engage in local trade, they could pay their bills even when crop prices are poor. Lowering meat intake BUT NEVER BEYOND ONCE A WEEK would take some pressure off the animals and improve conditions for them, because the crowding and speed of processing required for high demand would not be present.

No one should have more than half their income depend on animal breeding, sales, slaughter, processing, whatever. That way, decisions driven by financial issues that can be cruel won't be made.

Extensive use of green belts and requiring every house have at least one tree and a hedge, would do just as well as rewilding to make for good air.

Agenda 21 stated purpose, do not need Agenda 21 means or ultimate goals. It should be fought wherever it shows its head. However, limits and controls on property use by zoning has ALWAYS been upheld in court, and has some minimal Biblical precedent. But ZONING CAN AND HAS GONE TOO FAR, and needs to be severely amended, so that work, living and farming are not so distant from each other.

Everyone who has a yard should have a vegetable garden or at least an herb garden or some effort. This written into law would go far to improve air conditions, and mean in the event of a serious economic failure people don't have to go as hungry as they normally would.
 
Justina: You are somewhat of a dictator. You sure have a lot of ideas about what other people should have to do. YOu're kind of scary.
 
Anon. 7:23,

Haha! I think I quite agree.
 
Anon 7:23 and Anon 9:15,

I agree too.

Troll much?
 
Human Feces Used as Fertilizer Has Neighbors Fuming
Local farms are using fertilizer made up of human sewage and residents say they can't drink their water because of contamination.


By Teresa Masterson
Wednesday, Dec 28, 2011

Residents in a Lehigh County township are waging a battle against local farms that are using a fertilizer made from human feces.

Several Lynn Township, Pa. farmers have obtained permits from the Department of Environmental Protection to use a bio-solid called “granulite” to fertilize their crops. “Granulite” is sewage sludge turned into dried pellets, 30 percent of which is made of human waste.

Residents like Bill Schaffhouser fear the health effects when this chemically-treated sewage fertilizer seeps into the ground and water.

“There’s a huge difference between using fertilizer and using human feces that’s been treated with different chemicals,” Schaffhouser tells NBC Philadelphia's Stacy Stauffer. “This stuff will end up in the food and meat they eat, the milk they drink…this is a real issue.”

But township officials tell NBC Philadelphia that they have no control over the situation. Because the DEP issued the permits, the township cannot override the permits.

Schaffhouser says that he and his neighbors can no longer drink their water because the sewage fertilizer has seeped into the drinking water, the storm drains and the nearby creek.

“It’s on the streets, it’s all through our neighbors yard right by this swing set and it’s supposed to be regulated but who’s regulating it? The DEP? I don’t think so,” Schaffhouser says.

Despite the township’s apparent impotence in the situation, Schaffhouser says he will continue to press the municipal leaders to ban farms from using bio-solids.

“We’ve got the chemicals going into the ground, got human feces going into ground none of its normal, none of its natural,” Schaffhouser says.



http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Human-Feces-Used-as
-Fertilizer-Has-Neighbors-Fuming
-136290803.html?dr
 
Christina,
I've had my feathers ruffled
by you a few times. I just want
you to know that I'm not the
anonymous that's now taking
potshots. If I have a criticism
of you, I'll sign my name to it.
Sometimes I get the distinct
impression that these anonymous
people are just trying to disrupt
and divide. I've said many times
that they're creeps and cowards.
 
Christine,

I find the behaviour of those criticising you on this page today to be very unchristian indeed. It is clear that the trolls are out today.

Incidentally, I am the anon that criticised you before for coarse language. You have not continued with coarse language for which I commend you. I have also agreed with you anonymously on this site before as well.

The behaviour of those taking swipes at you now is disgraceful and unwarranted. I have found nothing dictatorial in what you've said at all.

Peace be with you.

God bless,

A different anon from the trolls in here tonight.
 
Anyway, it would now be nice to completely ignore said anon-trolls so that they do not detract from the blog's purpose and this page's topic.

Anon from 5:23 PM
 
christina's comin' down fast, but, she's MILES ABOVE YOU
 
Let's see what Christine actually said that led to her being attacked here. (This is my first contribution to the present thread.)

"Extensive use of green belts and requiring every house have at least one tree and a hedge, would do just as well as rewilding to make for good air... ZONING CAN AND HAS GONE TOO FAR, and needs to be severely amended, so that work, living and farming are not so distant from each other... Everyone who has a yard should have a vegetable garden or at least an herb garden or some effort. This written into law would go far to improve air conditions, and mean in the event of a serious economic failure people don't have to go as hungry as they normally would."

These ideas are basically good; what I disagree with, and what probably irritated others, is the idea of legal compulsion. So, the question is: Can these things be left to self-interest? And if not, should they be enforced by law?

Re self-interest, government should have the guts to say: "We are not omnipotent, by grace of God we are a great nation but it's still a wicked world and bad things can happen; in particular there's an outside chance that fiat currency will lose its value overnight in a catastrophic crash, leaving people with no medium of exchange with which to buy food etc, so citizens who can would do well to keep a vegetable garden. This should not be enforced by law as there will be grey areas, eg dwellings with tiny plots of land that some officious government official turns up and says you must grow potatoes on even though there isn't enough light, or whatever. Or says you must plant a tree on, even though its roots will soon undermine your house. No thank you!
 
Just last night heard Jack Van Impe praising the Sufis for being the only peaceful Islam. Wow.
 
90% of the Occupy tents are unoccupied at night - Ezra Levant checked with an infrared camera, see

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/opinions/archives/2011/11/20111118-174059.html

RES IPSA LOQUITUR INDEED!
 
Hi Susanna,

The human feces being used as fertilizer could turn about anybody into a rabid environmentalist!!

DANGEROUS stuff!

Happy New Year to you!

Constance
 
The SUFIS are the NEW AGE Moslems!

Constance
 
Except that Sufism preceded the New Age movement by about one thousand years, yes.
 
Interesting about the Occupy
people in Toronto. They even
had a lookout there when Levant
showed up with cameras.
They are the same ilk as those
Acorn people that helped get
Obama elected.
Frauds.
 
The "New" Age religion (the church of the devil) is the same religion that was practiced by the Egyptians and was started when Cain slew Abel.
 
Hi Constance,

I hear you!

The only problem with becoming a rabid environmentalist - in Pennsylvania at least - is that the contamination is not being confined merely to the farmland where the human feces fertilizer is being used.

In any case, the part about the human feces fiasco that really got my attention was that it was the Pennsylvania DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION that granted the permits to use human feces for fertilizer to begin with - and these permits cannot be overridden by the local powers that be.

A little further digging on my part revealed that Pennsylvania residents are already blaming "biosolids" (DEP euphemism for human poo)for E. coli in the water.

Pennsylvania Residents Blame Biosolids for E. coli in Water

Sustainability

Dec 29, 2011

http://www.foodsafetynews.com
/2011/12/pennsylvania-residents
-blame-biosolids-for-e-coli-in
-water/
 
Speaking of the EPA and "Occupy" peeps... Did you see the following from today's news?


"Occupy" Protestors Arrested At Ron Paul's Iowa Headquarters

Five members of the Occupy the Caucus movement in Des Moines Iowa were arrested this morning while blockading the entrance to Ron Paul's campaign headquarters.

Using their iconic mic-check speaking style, the protestors spoke out against Ron Paul's campaign pledge to close the Environmental Protection Agency if elected.

http://tinyurl.com/d66dddo

[Thu, Dec. 29]
 
The koran commmands Muslims (in suras 8,9) to forcibly convert the whole world to Islam, killing apostates and those who refuse, apart (theoretically) from Jews and Christians who are treated as untermensch and must pay a heavy protection tax. So if Sufis are peaceful Muslims then I'd rather have them to authentic ones, whether you call them New Age or not.
 
I am one of the original anons commenting on Christine's post. I apologize to her and to all for not being loving. I should have just plainly disagreed, but in love and with tact. I hope that Christine and all can forgive me for being rude.

Thanks to the other anon for calling out my unchristian behavior. That is why I need Jesus, I am not good and am a sinner who desperately needs the Lord to cleanse me of my unrighteousness.

I apologize again, and will try my best to respond more lovingly next time.
 
.....she's miles above you
 
"I hope that Christine and all can forgive me for being rude. "
of course. actually, I hardly noticed it, I have a thick skin, and am more concerned about the arrogance of the no govt. crowd, than personal affront, but another poster about no light and tree roots is correct, rather, there should be a prohibition on zone and CC&Rs and homeowner association prohibiting backyard farming,
and some tax incentive or something and public education on farming to get this going.

Humanure as someone called human poop fertilizer, should be composted correctly so the heat kills the germs. no chemicals. I have seen photos of some sewage plant that uses huge sun drying places to make the solids dry, and if no or few chemicals are present this plus more heat or maybe an alcohol or other disinfectant soak in the process should make this safe to use.
 
Speaking of the EPA and "Occupy" peeps... Did you see the following from yesterday's news?


"Occupy" Protestors Arrested At Ron Paul's Iowa Headquarters

Five members of the Occupy the Caucus movement in Des Moines Iowa were arrested this morning while blockading the entrance to Ron Paul's campaign headquarters.

Using their iconic mic-check speaking style, the protestors spoke out against Ron Paul's campaign pledge to close the Environmental Protection Agency if elected.

http://tinyurl.com/d66dddo

[Fri, Dec. 30]
 
I still say the Just-Tina has shown a tendency to control others and that is not Christian. And there is nothing unchristian about making that observation.
 
Constance,

I have a suggestion for your consideration; why not eliminate the use of "anonymous" names entirely? Posters, IMO, should be allowed one name in which to post. I think that the use of “anonymous” creates quite a bit of unnecessary confusion, etc.

RayB
 
Dear Ray

Because some of us live in countries where telling the truth under our own names is illegal, and we regard pseudonyms as lying.

Yours sincerely
Anon (Very)
 
11:08 and or 11:57
In that case try shutting up.
No one will miss your pointless
comments and there will be
less confusion.
Problem solved.
But I want to say that your
comment at 11:57 is just
bull. in fact it's two lies in
one sentence.
 
This thread has been very interesting. A rather mild criticism of one poster brought out some very angry comments from other??? posters. It all seems very much an over-reaction to me. The ones objecting to the anons are much meaner an angrier in their responses than the original posters. V-e-e-e-r-y
i-n-t-e-r-e-s-t-i-n-g.
 
Paul: - Anon@11.57am here (though not 11:08). This is Constance's blog and she has chosen to permit Anons. If you don't like that then I suggest you take your own advice, or use your imagination to consider what it is like living under totalitarianism. Incidentally I am not one of the Christiine-trashers on this thread.
 
people who are paranoid about people trying to control them, are usually the first to exert tyranny at home. The problem is not control, it is control by people who have wrong goals, wrong information, wrong tactics, wrong intentions, wrong judgement.

did I not back down on the local issue about trees when it was brought up that in some cases a tree will disrupt foundations, and if the property is too small there is no room for it?

The Bible gives controls, for that matter. Even a mobocracy is going to be a control vis a vis those who don't have a large enough voting bloc.

Now, as for anonymous posting, merely putting a name up is not any less anonymous, it can be a fake name. I was criticized for posting on an egroup as Infowolf1 instead of my name, and I pointed out any name given can be fake, and my real name tells you nothing much about me, but a handle does tell you something about the attitudes and mentality of the poster.

I think the practice developing of putting a time of post after "anon"
in response or in identifying an answer, is the best solution to all this. Of course, that can be faked too, but the real anon of such and such a time can always holler hey I didn't post that answer! This possibility should act as a control against the attempt.
 
http://occupywallst.org/

I am trying to understand what occupy wall street means by this picture of the statue of liberty wearing a Native American feathers hat and what they have her holding and what the symbols on the foundation of the statue mean if anything. Can anyone help me on this one? What message are they conveying?
 
I am the anon blogger at 5:23 pm & 5:36 pm, who spoke out against those attacking Christine.

Also, I agree with Christine's comments at 7:49 pm, and see no reason why folk shouldn't post anonymously. Unless of course some think otherwise ... in which case they should lead by example and post their social security number, driver license, photo and address links, tel number etc. No? I didn't think so ....
 
"people who are paranoid about people trying to control them, are usually the first to exert tyranny at home. The problem is not control, it is control by people who have wrong goals, wrong information, wrong tactics, wrong intentions, wrong judgement."

Are they? Who came up with that rule?
 
"people who are paranoid about people trying to control them, are usually the first to exert tyranny at home. The problem is not control, it is control by people who have wrong goals, wrong information, wrong tactics, wrong intentions, wrong judgement."

"Are they? Who came up with that rule?"

PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. also it was observed long ago that the peaceniks were often violent in their personal lives. The biggest complainers about control, are the criminal element also. Freedom freedom to do whatever to whoever.

As one woman on a call in show said, when police search of cars powers were increased years ago in the 1980s or 1990s, she felt more oppressed by the people who were a daily potential and occasional actual violator of her rights, than by some cop getting to rummage through her car. indeed. The tyranny that can operate close to you is more dangerous than that which operates at a distance.

Ask any battered woman or abused child whose abusers are protected by laws about proof, non enforcement of restraining orders, easy release from jail to avenge themselves of the complainers, and abominable policies of keeping families together when the kids need to be freed from any chance of every seeing the monster(s) again.

I had a very evil mother who was always screaming about divide and conquer being pulled on her by her mother in law (when she was the only one doing it) and complaining of nazism when anything got in the way of her obsessive and hypnotic partly paranormal rule over me.
Thank God she's dead.

Finally, look to George Washington who said that "every man would be a tyrant if he could," and note that while some of the founding fathers thought that slavery was an institution incompatible with a freedom loving country, many more did not. liberty is for the gentleman elites between each other, not for the rest of us.
 
"people who are paranoid about people trying to control them, are usually the first to exert tyranny at home."

That's true. However, objecting to many of the intrusive laws currently being enacted in Western countries is not paranoia.

The benchmark for comparison is Mosaic Law. Christians tend to suppose that, because they are under grace not law, they do not need to think much about the Old Testament once they get past the Israelites' escape from Egypt. Wrong! Every aspiring politician should read Mosaic Law and understand it. Of course the parts relating to people's relationship with God is nowadays strictly for the church to spiritualise, not for the State to enact - but the laws governing interpersonal relationships, ie moral laws, should be a starting point today, because human nature has not changed.

So what do we find? The amount of responsibility carried by an individual for his or her own life was considerably greater in Mosaic Law than in the USA today, let alone the EU.
 
Slavery was always incompatible with the US Declaration of Independence stating that liberty was a self-evident human right. Jefferson's hypocrisy in penning that while owning slaves is breathtaking.

Some say that the church supported slavery, but you have to ask which church. It is true that the New Testament never called for it to be abolished, but that is because the NT, unlike the OT, is not a political document. In Britain, which led the way to abolition, it was nonconformists who were most fervently abolitionist, at a time when senior members of the Church of England even owned slave plantations. The nonsense that it was OK to enslave blacks because of what Genesis says about relations between the three sons of Noah (and their descendants) is easily debunked by quoting the Golden Rule from the Sermon on the Mount: Do to others what you would have them do to you (Matt 7:12). No Anglican bishop ever put up a cogent reply to that argument against slavery. They couldn't, because there isn't one. They just acted deaf.
 
"
"Are they? Who came up with that rule?"

PERSONAL EXPERIENCE."

Your personal experience doesn't make for good laws. Reading what you write makes my head spin. You're on all sides of an issue. Whatever serves your purpose. I shudder to think laws would be made by people who think like you do.
 
Sufism = occult Islam
New Age Movement = Occultism
occult islam = occult Hindu = occult "Christian" = occult Judaism

All the same stuff by whatever moniker

Constance
 
"eading what you write makes my head spin. You're on all sides of an issue. Whatever serves your purpose. I shudder to think laws would be made by people who think like you do."

Whatever serves my purpose? are you really so simple minded that you think issues are so simple that there can be only one possible position, which of course has to be whatever YOURS is, I suppose?

Ever hear of flexibility in dealing with things being essential and the main reason central planning can't work too well all the time everywhere?

I don't call my blog "politicallyunclassifiable" for nothing. Right, Left, Center, they are all played by the problem people and the problem isn't having rules and direction per se.

Try learning from the past before you reinvent the wheel at the expense of how many lives and wellbeing of how many survivors?

the fractional reserve banking and charging interest has to go if we are to have a solution to the economic problems. (Instead of a flat one time fee perhaps, or use and profit off the collateral until the debt gets paid back if ever, not paid from the profit off use of collateral).
The only reason dumping more money into the situation drives up prices is because this is allowed. the free market isn't the mind of God in action. Some limit on percent of price hikes has to be in place when some flood of cash is allowed into play.

And the whole central bank thing has to go, the founding fathers didn't care for it for a good reason.

There are many angles on issues you assume are simple one shot solution things, and precisely your kind of simplistic thinking is why central planning, when run by people like you as they usually are, make trouble.
 
Christine,

You criticize others for having simple, one-shot solutions for complex problems, yet you adhere to simple, one-shot explanations for how the world works - ie, "Right, Left, Center, they are all played by the problem people...." It's always the evil bankers, or the Illuminati, or some other small cabal of people behind the curtain who make the world awful for the masses - a cabal that is untouchable and we couldn't get rid of even if we knew who they were. What a frustrating world to live in! It's not my world, I'll tell you that.

I think this is what the anon poster meant by making our heads spin.

In many ways, history is far more complex than what the "conspiratorial view of history" makes of it. In others, it's really pretty simple - Man is flawed, and sinful by nature.

Whatever man-made arrangements can be put together by mutual consent that takes that nature into account is the best we're gonna get while yet on this earth. I believe the free market is such an arrangement. You and others here apparently disagree.

Having said that, I do believe that for certain periods of history, certain groups of men and/or women can shape the future for a large number of people - perhaps the whole world. But the common denominator in it all - the prime conspirator - is Satan, the one who is out to destroy what God has created, through any means at his disposal. He is the one who plays one group off against the other - he cares not what we do to each other, as long as we get our attention off of God.

Let not our wrath fall on mere men - the enemy of our souls should get the blame for it all!
 
I'm the Anon who's been going on about Mosaic Law here, and I think that it can assist in the latest discussion on this thread. In Mosaic Law you find a free market in goods but regulated markets in labour, land/property and money.

There was a system in which a man who was prepared to work (ie, work his land) was guaranteed subsistence for his labour, but there was no centralised social security system, although charity to the poor was regarded as a duty.

In the West when it was industrialising, a man who lost his job was at risk of losing his home (he couldn't pay rent) and of starving. You now have two unMosaic options: set up social security, at risk of subsidising sloth; or let men who want to work go homeless and hungry. Which side you take determines whether you are 'left' or 'right', although these categories are only 1/10th as old as the church. Maybe the State should pay subsistence wages to unemployed persons to do certain categories of work. Just a suggestion.
 
welfare for work, or workfare, has been tried a few places, I suppose it works.

the thing is, social security and welfare in general is NOT unbiblical or unChristian at all. It is a logical extension into a more complicated higher population impersonal situation of the mandatory charity. Charity wasn't just encouraged, there was a MINIMUM AMOUNT REQUIRED and you had to make a public accounting showing you had paid this tithe and you can be sure there were penalties and enforcement, because if not done, the nation was in danger of God's wrath. It was only after the people were in dispersion that it was encouraged as a duty, not enforced as law and encouragement to go beyond that.

safety codes like seat belts, pollution, helmets, industrial safety procedures, food safety regulation etc., while some specific rules might be wrong, the existence of this KIND of rules is mandated by the safety codes in the Mosaic Law. environmentalism up to a point, insofar as it involves pollution issues, would be in the safety code precedent.

A bird was not to be taken with her eggs, only the eggs. A food bearing tree was not to be cut down to use as a battering ram in war, so presumably not in other situations either. (maybe a fallen limb or some cut limbs for some kinds of special wood, maybe a dead tree if not too old.)

you were not allowed to harvest the perimeter or corners of your fields, or go over the ground or trees twice, this was to be left for anyone to glean. Begging was not illegal - it would be unthinkable to penalize a panhandler.

There were no rules mandating different pay for same work depending on sex or tribal identity.

water toilets would be dubious, you were supposed to dig a hole, poop and cover it.

both sexes wore skirts or robes, it was a difference in styling between the sexes, so no dress code should exist as some dominionists want that keep women from wearing pants, it would be a matter of some minor difference. pants are a product of horse riding and some kinds of climate.

All debts were to be cancelled every seven years, and on the fiftieth year.

You could not plant your land on the seventh year it had to lie fallow.

A general phrasing about oppressing would cover anything else. Regulation of weights and measures would be mandated.

safety and endangering others Mosaic Law issues would mandate prohibition or control of dangerous substances in general, whether industrial or for internal use.
 
Ooooooh. Now my head is really spinning. Must - stop - reading - posts - of - confused - people....
 
Christine,

This is the Mosaic discusser again. How to apply and/or modify these laws and principles today is fascinating and I appreciate your comments. If I do not wholly agree with one or two of them, as below, it is in a spirit of constructive discussion.

Yes the tithe was compulsory but it was not a social security system; it was designed specifically to maintain the Levite priesthood. It was not available to the poor upon application to a centralised authority. Also, the phrase "mandatory charity" is a contradiction in terms. We can discuss mandatory tax and redistribution, but by definition that is not charity, which is voluntary or it is not charity at all. Remember that "charity" was the King James translation of agape.

Yiou have come down on the Left side of the dilemma I set up in my earlier post. That means you can be accused of subsidising laziness. Remember that St Paul said if a man refuses to work then he should not eat. Conversely, if you come down on the Right then you run the risk of people starving. I don't claim to have the answer - workfare was a tentative suggestion - but I do think it is over-simplistic just to assert that the Left or the Right way is correct. Each side can ask the other hard questions.

NB The tithe was 10% of the fruit of your *land*. If you also ran a business from your home, such as weaving (or carpentry!) then that was not included.

Safety legislation might reasonably be included in the Lex Talionis part of Mosaic Law (eye for an eye etc). How much better would people drive if they thought their lives were at risk if they caused a fatal accident?

I also question the very concept of company law and limited liability.
 
Maybe the State should pay subsistence wages to unemployed persons to do certain categories of work.

Haven't you learned ANYTHING from reading this blog? Didn't you know that Jesus Christ Himself set up market capitalism? Those who promote it are true followers of Jesus Christ, and anyone who questions Conservatism is a tool for the Evil One and Anti-God. This goes for both Christians and Jews.

Please, become a morally responsible person and go and join the Republican Party now before your soul is damned eternally.
 
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/102688.html
 
At Mary Christine's suggestion I visited her blog. Comment: God is not the author of confusion.
 
look at farmers site...posts, tony/ vt.
 
For those interested in an excellent expose on the so-called "Apostolic/Prophetic" or, "Third Wave" movement, read Keith Gibson's new book Wandering Stars. Gibson resides in Kansas City, MO, near Mike Bickle's International House of Prayer and is part of the Apologetics Resource Center of which he is the director of the KC center.

The book is a Biblically-based refutation of a number of practices associated with the A/P movement and specifically quotes from (in no particular order) Mike Bickle, Rick Joyner, Jack Deere, Bill Hamon, Bob Jones, Chuck Pierce, Kim Clement, C. Peter Wagner, Francis Frangipane, Ryan Wyatt, Todd Bentley (with a photo 'featured on the front cover'), Ed Silvoso, George Otis Jr, Choo Thomas, and a host of others from the "Elijah List" site.

The book can be purchased directly from the publisher (could be a possible source for Constance's new book):

http://tinyurl.com/7g5c7sd

...and, on Amazon where you can read a review by Pastor Scott Pursley:

http://tinyurl.com/6tecqmb

I will probably submit my own review on Amazon.
 
Has Farmer repented of his sins (which were made public on this blog some time ago) and embraced a Biblical Christianity, or should we simply not ask and not care so long as he "shares information"?
 
"Yes the tithe was compulsory but it was not a social security system; it was designed specifically to maintain the Levite priesthood."

Only two out of three years. The third year tithe was to the poor.


" It was not available to the poor upon application to a centralised authority."

In a primitive disorganized situation nothing would be. Once the cities grew and The Temple was established in Jerusalem, that would be another matter. Even before that, the Tabernacle wherever God decreed it be located was a centralizing point.

Centralizing enough of a point, that Jeroboam after he split the northern tribes from Judah, established a false religion of his own calves and probably syncretistic YHWH worship up north, specifically to keep people from going to Jerusalem to worship and hence risk a political realignment back to Judah.


"Also, the phrase "mandatory charity" is a contradiction in terms."

Not at all. Even now, it is mandatory if you want to escape hell or at least punishment, remember Christ warned His servants would be punished for doing things more punishment if they knew better or less if they didn't, and the worst who became drunken abusers on the basis of "my Lord delays His coming" so has more time to do their own will instead of Christ's will, would be cut asunder and thrown with the unbelievers.

Consider the rich man who ignored the beggar at his door.

" We can discuss mandatory tax and redistribution, but by definition that is not charity, which is voluntary or it is not charity at all. Remember that "charity" was the King James translation of agape."

I am using "charity" in the pop term to mean giving to the poor. Charity as an external act.

Remember that failure to do these things meant risk of losing divine protection and getting active divine punishment.

That we do this voluntarily out of compassion or charitas, agape, etc., is ideal. But it needs to get done because God loves the poor.

As for distribution of wealth, people were not supposed to get rich, that is greed and ambition, VICES. Just do okay, be comfortable, and share the excess.

As for taxes, long before there was any idea called "socialism" or anything else, Christian King Alfred the Great of England instituted the Plough Tax, one penny (used to be a big deal) on each plough, which went to the poor.
 
"Haven't you learned ANYTHING from reading this blog? Didn't you know that Jesus Christ Himself set up market capitalism?"

Boy, are you ignorant and brainwashed. Jesus was no more a capitalist than a communist.

Do you not know that we own nothing? All is on loan to us from YHWH. "naked we came into the world and naked we go out, and if we have food and clothing and shelter that is enough" Paul.

" Those who promote it are true followers of Jesus Christ,"

READ THE BIBLE not just excerpts out of context. There is no one system of economics or one form of government mandated. Rather, it is entirely pragmatic, with the issue being, what in a given context will do YHWH's will best?

"Please, become a morally responsible person and go and join the Republican Party now before your soul is damned eternally."

I do hope you are joking. I didn't vote in the last election and I doubt I will vote in this one, though maybe Ron Paul I might vote for if he gets the nomination. At least (though libertarianism is no better than the republithugs, the dummycrooks, or the commies in the long run and Ayn Rand, the primary inspiration of the first two was a psychopath narcisist and atheist)
he wouldn't sign off on a martial law FEMA camps etc. crackdown on the US population given the opportunity like anyone else would from either side of the left right spectrum.

Republicanism is run by closet satanists and perverts who brandish the Bible and so forth to fool the voting public.

Democrats are a mess, blindly mixing good and evil on a similar pattern of "systematic thinking" that unites incompatible issues, such as help for the poor and murder of infants, as much as the Republicans do in their way.
 
"Safety legislation might reasonably be included in the Lex Talionis part of Mosaic Law (eye for an eye etc). How much better would people drive if they thought their lives were at risk if they caused a fatal accident?"

I guess that's all you have read of it, like most people. There are specific rules I am talking about.

put a fence around your rooftop (flat in those days, regularly in use) if someone falls anyway, you are in the clear, if it was not fenced and they die, you have bloodguilt.

dig a hole, cover it up.

have a dangerous animal and you know it is dangerous and you don't fence it in and someone regardless of sex or status dies, you die, or you might be given the option to pay a ransom for your life (big fine).

set a fire on your land (trash burning or slash and burn agriculture)? it goes into another person's land you pay. (extension: all the industrial waste issues and air pollution.)

who is going to enforce all this unless you have an impartial police force of sorts? that such existed is indicated in the organization of society in tens, hundreds and fifties and the existence of a temple focussed military force or guard. (police as distinct from military or paramilitary is a modern innovation, and based in part on military copying in the late 1700s or early 1800s, the sheriff is a phenomenon borrowed from Arabic influence and being elected can be a major corruption center.)

"I also question the very concept of company law and limited liability."

True, there isn't any obvious precedent for this in The Bible. Now, any family or tribal group can be viewed as a collective like this, and there is the rule that children should not be put to death for the sins of the parents or vice versa but each for his own sin. This would on the one hand shelter a company to some extent from malfeasance or incompetence of a lower level employee and vice versa, I haven't given it much thought.

The automatic bankruptcy so to speak, or rather cancellation of debt every seven years, no matter how little of it was paid off, might have some impact whether pro
or con the interests of a company.

The advantage to everyone, consumers incl. of corporations, was that the individuals in it were shielded enough from failure that they could take risks and were able to poor enough money to finance ventures, that made a lot of good possible. Like anything it has become subject to abuse, and

in terms of small groups of conspirators running things, there was a study done a while back, that showed that all the big corporations and so forth running the world, narrow back to a very few that run them, mostly through shared membership in directorates and stock holding of one company by another.

"The conspiracy" then is largely a social and business network, with an elitist attitude and bad personal and business morals.
 
"At Mary Christine's suggestion I visited her blog. Comment: God is not the author of confusion."

God is not the author of greed, ambition, power lust, and deception which is what runs the left AND the right, and the research links on that blog exposes.
 
"Yiou have come down on the Left side of the dilemma I set up in my earlier post. That means you can be accused of subsidising laziness."

1. There is no Left or Right that is an illusion, created in recent centuries.

2. In the modern complex and inflated rents, prices etc. situation, combined with prohibition on day laborers standing around and prohibition on begging, you cannot make enough money scrambling around to support yourself and family much of the time.

Begging was the normal way to get money by the poor, in all ages in all lands until prohibitions on it began in anglo american lands, started by the phenomenon of "[I forget the term used it meant strong and healthy] beggars" in a
simpler time when physical strength and health was all you needed and there were no rules about sleeping outdoors, etc.

If you gave to a beggar you might be subsidizing laziness also.

Let me tell you something of my own experience. I did some begging several years ago. It is impossible to put together much money doing that, and take time off to look for work. Once you get a job you don't get paid for the first two or three weeks, that is standardized practice.

what are you going to eat and live on while running around putting in applications, doing interviews, then doing the work and waiting for pay?

It doesn't help when the damn drug addicts are out there competing for the available money and looking worse and more pathetic than you do either.

3. Laziness is more of a myth than anything else. In earlier times, people died young for a lot of reasons incl. overwork, also incl. the conditions that we survive now, and at a certain point, if you don't slack you are going to shorten your life.

When you demand that a welfare recipient work at something, that is all very well, HOWEVER, when it is an issue of work leaves kids unattended in a dangerous neighborhood, or having to traverse such neighborhood to get to work, and exhaustion and concomitant temper makes you bad company and incompetent and not noticing something in your exhausted haze at home - or even to and from or at work where you might get mugged or even sexually attacked - then this is a problem.

I know what it means to barely be able to get around on foot and in the bus with droning life sapping pain that instead of being sharp is a deeper ongoing thing that makes you seriously think that you dread waking up and there are all kinds of physical depression (and clinical depression is highly physical and lasts for decades),
and other conditions that are borderline enough you seem healthy even to a doctor unless put on a treadmill and run to exhaustion and blood tests and stuff and oh, wait,
you can't afford to see a doctor anyway.
 
Fortunately, that's all behind you now and you have plenty of time to spend ranting at others on the web via your computer and internet server.
 
Christine,

This is the Anon Mosaic discusser. I am not one of the sarcastics here.

Mandatory charity IS a contradiction in terms. Tax-and-redistribute nationalises charity but it cannot nationalise the love behind charity, and you have avoided commenting on Paul's "A man who will not work should not eat." How can you distinguish those who are genuinely looking for work from those who are shirking on the taxpayer? No objective criteria can determine, can they? That is why it is best left to individual charity.

Charity is mandatory coz you don't go to heaven otherwise? It is not compulsory to go to heaven; we get to choose where we go. You'd be mad not to be charitable once you know heaven's entrance criteria, but still it is your choice a lot more than taxes are.

I've read the various safety legislation in Mosaic Law. For obvious reasons it doesn't cover the motor car, though. Lex Talionis does.

I think it is fairly clear that Anon@7:22AM wrote a parody.
 
anonymous re charity - Paul is addressing the issue of value to the GIVER. I am talking about the survival issues of the RECIPIENT, who hopefully will have gratitude to God.

When I say "charity" I am talking like everyone does, when they refer to "giving to charity" or "a charitable institution." Emotions or caring beyond your tax break or
being esteemed for doing this is not implied, proven or required.

So what "charity" means in Paul's letter is irrelevant. People who want to choose whether to give to the poor or not, obviously don't care too much about the poor.

Now, how well the govt. administrates all this is another matter.

But the SAME issue arises in many charitable organizations, which is why we have BBB ratings on some, and membership in the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability broadcast on the pages and paperwork of others.

The Mosaic Law making charity in the sense of ACTION mandatory, could be dismissed in the same terms, and of course the Prophets denounced game playing that reflected an evil heart, and the evil hearts back of it.

Lex Talionis is a top maximum level, that IF you take revenge it is not to be worse than what was done.

The safety codes plus the issue of lack of intent to do harm (accidental manslayer) would penalize to some extent those who accidentally do harm with a car, but if they drove with brakes so bad they could barely stop the car and killed or crippled someone, this would be like someone not putting the fence around the flat roof and someone fell off, so the penalty could be more severe.

In brief, most of the laws we have now, with some individual exceptions, that people complain about "running their lives" would, in a biblical analysis, stand up fairly well.

Incl. mandatory insurance coverage, so you can repair damage to persons and property. (legal minimum won't really do it for major damage.)

the problem with the "sovereign citizens" and similar people, is that they think only of themselves and of their pride (something The Bible repeatedly warns is bad), and only focus on control freak motives some legislators and enforcers may have, and forget the value to the people at large (themselves included).
 
"Fortunately, that's all behind you now and you have plenty of time to spend ranting at others on the web via your computer and internet server."

While I was still begging, I was on the Internet using a public access computer.

I have experience on both sides of the issues, that is my point. I doubt any of you do. I also used to believe the John Birch Society and RW Christian view and economics ideas, but I found that this doesn't fit The Bible, and doesn't fit the big picture aka "parapolitics" see Peter Dale Scott for starters, and other things. Also, a real eye opener was when I read Adam Smith The Wealth of Nations.

The two things I came away with was, that his entire plan was aimed at internation trade, to remove tariffs, to create such a commonality of interest between England and traditional enemies as to prevent war which was expensive,
AND
something to the effect that all businessmen's associations should be made illegal, because they never meet except to rig prices and conspire against the public.

Obviously the people waving his book as reason for economic theories were exploiting his reputation.

And practical experience, the era of laissez faire and entrepreneurial
captains of industry who built empires figuratively speaking, note the pride and conquest motifs in this kind of labelling, was also the era of heartless exploitation of labor, use of illegal (but unprosecuted) violent measures against workers and competitors, and all we take for granted now in safety laws and wages and so forth, that are now LAWS, were originally won by the struggle of the unions, falsely called "communist" (and an attempt to exploit them to make communist of course existed), in order to get the govt. to go against them. Strike breaking a couple of times was done, violently, by govt. forces.

Supposed freedom of choice in contract and choosing bosses and so forth is another howler, what freedom to choose do you have, if all of them have the same policies, and you can't afford to move elsewhere anyway when only one or two employers in various categories of employment is available anyway?

This is a bad joke at best.

While we are running from one evil, the one worlders or the commies or whatever, let us not fall into another evil.
 
Constance!!!!
Announcement video of new world order begun today: http://kauilapele.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/the-first-post-of-2012-seed-of-hope-for-humanity-a-new-global-economy

Nkosazana
 
Anybody thinking the Sufis are "peaceful" has done superficial research on them at best. They are the hoped for "Army" for the Alliance of Civilizations. Here is a link to an excellent piece that Rich Peterson (Rich of Medford) wrote on the subject. There are many others. Richard Gilman did excellent research on the Sufis as well.

http://pineline.blogspot.com/2009/05/michael-savage-trial-run.html

http://tinyurl.com/8yfbj7r

Constance
 
Christine,

Yes, communist trades unions and hire-and-fire tactics by exploitative bosses are two sides of the coin of sin. But I would like to suggest that if the unbiblical concept of limited liability companies were abolished then companies would never have grown into the impersonal monoliths that they did. The antitrust laws would not have been necessary. Industrial relations might have been a lot better.

Adam Smith put a caveat time and again into Wealth of Nations, that his theories of wealth creation apply only in a sufficiently moral populace. That caveat is often forgotten today, but economics is a moral science, not a natural science (to use the terminology of Smith's own era). You can't get a business off the ground where everybody is corrupt; your workforce steals from you, you have to pay protection money, you need a night watchman, HE might steal from you, contract law is not enforceable when people don't pay you, etc. THAT is the biggest difference between the West and the Third World. But morality is learned primarily within the family, and as family breakdown worsens it will have knock-on effects that could reduce us to poverty over several generations...

There are things you say about Mosaic Law and how to apply it in our systems that I don't entirely agree wtih, but to say more I'd merely be repeating myself and I appreciate the dialogue. NB Ancient Israel was policed not by State employees but by a hierarchy of elders, as apppointed originally by Moses on Jethro's advice.
 
I never said that Sufis were peaceful. They have been referred to here as "New Age Muslims" and I replied that if they were less bellicose than Muslims who are faithful to what Muhammad told them in the koran (ie, conquer the world by force) then I am glad of it. To call them the army of the Alliance of Civilizations is overdoing it, though.
 
"Tony Blair, reportedly a new ager,"
well, so much for love (define love),
peace (define peace)and bliss (define bliss). This creep along with the Bushes (whose money and background are linked to the Nazis through Prescott Bush the Hitlerite, and who had no problem with the Nazi puppet soaked Ethnic Heritage Committee in the Republican Party that briefly became a scandal in the early 1980s during the investigations and deportations of war criminals and such like and then was quickly forgotten by the easily distracted and stupid American public, with a little help from the heavily interfaced to CIA etc. American mainstream media putting their attention elsewhere)
pulled off that Iraqi scam.

first, arm Saddam Hussein then turn on him with a drawing out lure of assurance he wouldn't be stopped if he invaded Kuwait. Then, leave him in power so another round of expensive military action (which funds the military industrial complex) would be inevitable, then do more WMD scamming and more invasion, effectively leaving Iran with no counter in the region for much longer.

Meanwhile, the Iraqi body count is probably close to a million by now from all this, incl. deaths from the food and medicine embargo.

Now, they may not be very nice people by and large, but neither are the rest of our allies. God may be using our evil played off against local evil to do something, but that doesn't exonerate the USA and Britain etc. any more than it did ancient Babylon.

There is a theory, I forget who put it forward, that one of the reasons Lady Di was killed, was her refusal to get too into the occultism of her husband, which would imply it went beyond tree hugging, though she did avail herself of astrologers and such like now and then. Another reason was her campaigning against land mines, a constant problem for those who have to live with the unexploded mines left behind.

Don't forget the use of depleted uranium. And don't forget the fluoridation campaign, which began NOT with the Communist Party, but with the military industrial complex's atomic energy subdivision so to speak, having to figure out how to unload all that sodium fluoride that is part of the production of uranium of use for atomic power and/or bombs.

now, we don't need to worship nature to be concerned about "raping the planet" or whatever.

we should be careful of the creation that the Creator YHWH has made.

In Revelation, it talks about Christ coming back to take revenge on the evil doers which include those "who are destroying the earth." Interesting phrase. It might well incl. new agers poisoning psychic environments with their luciferic energies and labyrinths are a case in point. In San Francisco there is a labyrinth, which thinking it was just an interesting little design and not realizing there was a real problem, I walked. And I was infested with that icky slightly yellow light, took some prayer and banishing it in Jesus' Name to get rid of it.

Interestingly enough, labyrinths though they are treated by New Agers as of some spiritual significance ("spiritual" meaning "good" but there is much evil in the spiritual realm, in fact all evil comes from that level, even the level of spirit of the individual structure, because that is where one starts in making decisions, even if the final decision is in the soul level and then acted in the material level),
but the original legend has an evil destructive thing in the center. Spirals seem to have some danger significance some archaeologist pointed out, perhaps relating to whirlpools at sea, and then of course there is the dizziness thing.
 
I agree about corporations. limited liability has less of a corporate shield to hide behind. they have been of use up to a point, but they seem to have gone into the realm of not useful and more harmful, so, like the brass serpent in the wilderness that once was good, but became an object of worship to later Israelites so was destroyed by a Prophet of YHWH, it may be time to get rid of them.

The difference between a bunch of elders with goon squads to back them up, and state police, is a matter of degree.

If it wasn't for the govt. being able to exert force the predatory corporations in the past would never have backed down to the unions, once the govt. started backing the unions instead of the corporations.

It was not just some committee of elders. First, everyone was organized down to the street level so to speak, someone over tens, someone over fifties, someone over hundreds. Direct action by armed groups under the command of a priest or an elder is noted.

In the Book of Judges, you see a phrase at the start and at the end,
"in those days there was no king over Israel, and every man did as was right in his sight."

And the book is a history of the disasters that come when this is the case.

A different set of disasters can come with a king, but all you need is corrupt elders and an entrenched mess goes on.

There is no real left or right, no truth to be determined by fitting solutions or whatever into boxes of this sort, and then assigning one to satan and one to God. satan is evident on both sides of the political equation.

Further aiding this illusion, is our two party system. The multiparty systems of other countries would be better. They also have better party discipline, you get elected on platform A and then don't follow it, you are out of your party, and have to form a new one, and meanwhile you get reelected or not depending on how the voters liked your shift or didn't.

St. John Chrysostom not only denounced those who hoarded wealth, extra clothes and so forth, but also said (I think he was the one who said this) that the beggar should be careful how he receives, in other words, not abuse the charitable act (like the druggies and so forth who claim hunger and in fact mean hunger for drugs and don't expect them to make good on the will work for food story), and be grateful to God.
 
Christine,

Chrysostom denounced the Jews pretty savagely too.

Yes the era of the judges was pretty anarchic in Israel, but the point was this. In those days a king set the laws in each land. God had set the laws in Israel, so all that was needed was enforcers and judges. Samuel warned the Israelites in strong terms that although God did give license for them to have a king (in Deuteronomy) that it would lead to worse problems, and it did - a cesessionist movement and civil war, something that resonates clearly in US history.
 
Dear Christine:
As one of the Brits commenting here let me add to your words re Tony Blair and Princess Diana.

Blair polarised the British people. We re-elected him twice (although by the time we finally kicked his Labour party out the electoral value of a Labour vote had been fixed far higher than that of a vote for any other party). Yet those of us who saw through him during his first stint as Prime Minister generally think him the worst PM in living memory. If he is popular in the USA for standing by your president then you are welcome to him. New Age? You bet! It is reliably recorded that he and his wife, on a holiday in Mexico in August 2001 while PM, underwent a mayan rebirthing ritual in which they were told to bow and pray to the four winds as Mayan pagan prayers were spoken. May God help us!

Princess Diana died quite soon AFTER she consulted a fortune teller, if I recall. In contrast Prince Charles' has syncretist religious views but is not known to be into divination and occult practice.

I am in no doubt that Diana's death, convenient as it was for the Royal Family, was humanly speaking an accident. (I have no idea what discussions had taken place in the councils of heaven, eg Job 1&2, and I doubt that anybody else does.) Assassination attempts of that sort have two features: (1) plausible deniability; (2) as little as possible is left to chance. A good example would be subtle tampering with a private plane. In the case of Diana's death, the event would fit criterion (1) but emphatically not (2). The driver might have remained sober that might. Dodi might have said Take another route to shake off the press photographers pursuing on their motorbikes. Or he might simply have checked them in at his father's hotel, the Ritz, where they had spent the evening. Or said let the photographers do their worst, I don't care. Or the crash might not have been fatal - one man survived, after all. Very clearly an accident. I like a good conspiracy - I should hardly be at this website otherwise - but accidents do happen and Diana's death fits this hypothesis far better for the reasons stated.
 
Constance: your antispam has binned my post on this thread about Tony Blair and wife undergoing a pagan mayan ceremony on holiday in Mexico in August 2001and about why Princess Di's death was clearly an accident; please could you recover and repost it?
 
"Yes the era of the judges was pretty anarchic in Israel, but the point was this. In those days a king set the laws in each land. God had set the laws in Israel, so all that was needed was enforcers and judges."

Without a king, those judges can make all kinds of decisions or become corrupt and no higher authority to go to. The King's role in Israel was filled by God under Moses, with pretty immediate terror on hand. But the people wanted a visible king to go before them in battle like everyone else."

(Reminds me of the stereotypical kid, "but everybody is doing such and so why can't I?")

An example of how the people even those technically keeping the law, had changed it, probably due to overly reproductive (a pagan social issue) oriented judges, Deuteronomy tolerated the levirate marriage ONLY IF THE TARGETTED MAN WAS LIVING WITH HIS BROTHER (which could incl. half brother or first cousin by popular phrasing of many people incl. them apparently), AT THE TIME OF THE DEATH OF THE WIDOW'S HUSBAND, and HE WAS ALLOWED TO REFUSE.

Yet in The Book of Ruth, which is from that time of Judges, we see it taken for granted that ANY male relative, though a total stranger who had never lived with the couple, or even met the woman, could have a claim or rather be claimed by her, and the nearest such was the target or claimer.

This is against the Mosaic Law. God managed to pull something good out of it anyway.

Then there was the family who snagged some priest to be a live in priest and I think I recall some teraphim carved images were involved as well.

"Samuel warned the Israelites in strong terms that although God did give license for them to have a king (in Deuteronomy) that it would lead to worse problems, and it did - a cesessionist movement and civil war, something that resonates clearly in US history."

yes, God said that the king was not to lift his heart above his brethren, but Solomon did and Rehoboam more so, and hence the problem.

NO SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT IS INCAPABLE OF CORRUPTION OR FLAW, and the local tyrant is more dangerous than the distant one.

the tribal familial etc. system didn't work, the central system didn't work forever, but the bigger the population the more you are going to need some centralization and rules, to keep people out of each other's hair and prevent fights escalating to clan feuds.

A classic example, is cars. with lower population, fewer cars on the road, in the old days, you have more margin for error so less regulation needed. Once the place is crawling with fast moving cars, you need to tighten things up to lessen the body count on the highway. I remember when it was 50,000 dead a year on the roads in the USA, every year. It got less despite cars increasing. Why? more safety rules and tighter alcohol blood level standards. In a small population it doesn't matter if some drunk is weaving all over you have plenty of room to avoid him. 50 years later it is another matter.

someone noticed that rural and low population states are different in attitudes about guns that high population places. Why? stray bullets more likely to hit someone.

HOWEVER, centralization can only go so far, before it becomes incompetent. Over huge regions and populations, different conditions will apply making what works one place not work another.

Back to Agenda 21 - they want to squeeze everyone into high density living eventually. A recipe for disaster - pandemics, earthquakes, fires, social stress from crowding erupting as violence, etc. etc.
If these were to concentrate on the coasts as they tend to now, more people would die or become refugees as sea levels rise and volcanism and tsunamis increase.

of course, if the ultimate goal is "population reduction," it makes a horrible kind of sense.
 
I'm unhappy about drink-driving as the major sin that secular society touts it to be. Criminalising seombody who has no intent to cause harm, nor who has actually caused any harm, is deeply ungodly.

In accepting the covenant and being given the Law, Israel took on an awesome responsibility. It is not possible to obey good laws with bad hearts, and not even God can legislate changes of heart. That's why we have two Testaments in the Bible.
 
Princess Di had consulted fortune teller not long before she died, if I recall. Charles had (and has) syncretist religous views but at least he has never been into divination and occult practice.

Diana's death was very clearly an accident. OK, it suited the Royal Family to have her out of the way, but assassination attempts on such people have two characteristics, both for obvious reasons: (1) deniability; (2) inevitability. A good example would be expert tampering with an aircraft in which somebody is to fly. Diana's death, if deliberately engineered, certainly had plausible deniability - it could easily be said to be an accident. But it was very far indeed from being inevitable. The driver might have stayed sober. Dodi might have avoided the photographers by booking in at the Ritz where they had spent the evening, a hotel owned by his father. He might have told the driver to take a different route with a better chance of losing them. Or brazened it out. They might have been wearing the safety belts with which the car was provided. If there is a conspiracy about her death, it was in the councils of heaven (eg, Job 1,2) not on earth.
 
SARAH LESLIE and I are teaming up tonght on my radio program to discuss 2012, including its many false prophets. We will be tackling Ervin Laszlo, the Mayan prophecies, the Emerging Church, etc.

7 p.m. Eastern time, 4 p.m. Pacific time on
www.themicroeffect.com

Please join us by listening AND IN THE CHATROOM.

Constance
 
SARAH LESLIE and I are teaming up tonght on my radio program to discuss 2012, including its many false prophets. We will be tackling Ervin Laszlo, the Mayan prophecies, the Emerging Church, etc.

7 p.m. Eastern time, 4 p.m. Pacific time on
www.themicroeffect.com

Please join us by listening AND IN THE CHATROOM.

Constance
 
here is some statistics about 37 million families in America living below the poverty line.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0YYG-f3qYE8

The picture painted of what will one do without to keep the budget, leaves out what is mostly likely to be cut - some of the food, and some of the medical care, clothes, shoes, school supplies are typically cut, the recreational and entertainment stuff listed to cut isn't even in play. There are people who are living in poverty in cold parts of the country, who have to choose between expensive medicine, food and heating. Experientially then, some of the utilities use may get cut, like say, heat. Everyone sits around in one room using body generated heat and extra coats, if they have them.
Laziness has nothing to do with it.
 
whatever the basis for believing a global currency is in the works, even if shabby as one here argues, you can assume it is in the works, since it has been stated as someone pointed out as a goal.

the de facto global currency for a long time was the dollar. That is getting phased out.
 
Anon at 5:50 am


You wrote,

"Diana's death was very clearly an accident."


Nonsense! It was no accident. The French / Parisian emergency services were unavailable for about 20 minutes at the time of Diana's death. Unprecedented in any Western country.


It took approximately two hours before a doctor was allowed anywhere near Diana.


A powerful light was probably used as the cause of the crash. Unlikely to be a papparazzi camera and far stronger too. Oh... and that mysterious white Fiat never found.

There was alot of speculation as to whether any alchohol was drunk by Henri Paul at all. If Dodi and Di had booked into another hotel they'd have been followed from there too, and arrangements adapted. Moreover, only two days before the incident / 'accident' he passed a rigorous medical to renew his flying license. The medical found no signs of alcoholism. He most likely worked for the secret services, despite the coroner's unfounded denial.

Then there was the letter Di wrote about someone (she thought her husband, though I doubt it was)was going to have her murdered and make it look like a car accident.

Then there is the symbology of crashing into the 13th pillar, shining the light into H. Paul's eyes just at the right moment. The fact that the Pont de l'Alma tunnel was once the spot where a temple to the moon and the so-called goddess Diana stood.

http://vigilantcitizen.com/vigilantreport/princess-dianas-death-and-memorial-the-occult-meaning/




Censored Material about Diana's assassination

http://www.public-interest.co.uk/diana/

http://www.public-interest.co.uk/diana/dianahpbio.htm
 
Anon at 5:50 am


You wrote,

"Diana's death was very clearly an accident."


Nonsense! It was no accident. The French / Parisian emergency services were unavailable for about 20 minutes at the time of Diana's death. Unprecedented in any Western country.


It took approximately two hours before a doctor was allowed anywhere near Diana.


A powerful light was probably used as the cause of the crash. Unlikely to be a papparazzi camera and far stronger too. Oh... and that mysterious white Fiat never found.

There was alot of speculation as to whether any alchohol was drunk by Henri Paul at all. If Dodi and Di had booked into another hotel they'd have been followed from there too, and arrangements adapted. Moreover, only two days before the incident / 'accident' he passed a rigorous medical to renew his flying license. The medical found no signs of alcoholism. He most likely worked for the secret services, despite the coroner's unfounded denial.

Then there was the letter Di wrote about someone (she thought her husband, though I doubt it was)was going to have her murdered and make it look like a car accident.

Then there is the symbology of crashing into the 13th pillar, shining the light into H. Paul's eyes just at the right moment. The fact that the Pont de l'Alma tunnel was once the spot where a temple to the moon and the so-called goddess Diana stood.

http://vigilantcitizen.com/vigilantreport/princess-dianas-death-and-memorial-the-occult-meaning/




Censored Material about Diana's assassination

http://www.public-interest.co.uk/diana/

http://www.public-interest.co.uk/diana/dianahpbio.htm
 
Anon@3:20am,

Everybody at this website appreciates a good conspiracy, but as has been said here many times, not all conspiracy theories are equal.

Regarding Princess Diana's death, you wrote: "Nonsense! It was no accident. The French / Parisian emergency services were unavailable for about 20 minutes at the time of Diana's death. Unprecedented in any Western country. It took approximately two hours before a doctor was allowed anywhere near Diana."

Acording to the Wikipedia page on the accident, the crash is estimated to have happened at 1223 and the first police patrol cars arrived at 1230. Given how long it must have taken for whichever pursuing paparazzo to make an emergency call, probably exiting the tunnel on foot to get radio/mobile phone reception, that is perfectly normal. A *doctor* pronounced Dodi dead at the scene at 0132, so doctors were there in at most half the time you state, probably much less, and doctors are trained to assess who is in most need of the care they can provide in view of the fact that backup is coming.

"Oh... and that mysterious white Fiat never found."

If you'd been driving it, and believed that you might be fingered for causing the death of a princess, what would you do?

"Then there is the symbology of crashing into the 13th pillar, shining the light into H. Paul's eyes just at the right moment. The fact that the Pont de l'Alma tunnel was once the spot where a temple to the moon and the so-called goddess Diana stood."

We may believe what we like about that; it has nothing to do with whether there was a human conspiracy to murder Diana in a car crash that night. But you can't consistently assert (as you do) that these things are significant and then say the crash would still have happened if they'd driven another route.

Read up on a history of assassination attempts on prominent people. The assassins do all they can to reduce uncertain factors. When they fail, it is because of further factors they hadn't considered and over which they failed to exert control. The number of uncontrollable factors if Diana's death really were deliberate was massive. That is simply not how methodical assassins work. All of the other things you quote are, rightly, couched in the language of uncertainty.

Things that no assassin could have controlled: The driver might have stayed sober. Dodi might have avoided the photographers by booking in at the Ritz where they had spent the evening, a hotel owned by his father. He might have told the driver to take a different route with a better chance of losing them. Or brazened it out. They might have been wearing the safety belts with which the car was provided.

Any assassination attempt would have taken place in a much more carefully controlled situation. Diana's death was an accident. Her own sons believe that and they would surely speak out if they believed otherwise. One of them is going to be king.
 
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]



Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]