End Of Days News
Monday, February 4, 2013
CTC says opposition to a New World Order is terrorist activity
End Of Days News
According to a report from the "Combatting Terrorism Center" at West Point, 'Anti-Federalists' who oppose a New World Order as well as members of several other far right wing activist groups are potential terrorist threats.
According to a report from the "Combatting Terrorism Center" at West Point, 'Anti-Federalists' who oppose a New World Order as well as members of several other far right wing activist groups are potential terrorist threats.
West Point is the U.S. Military Academy that trains, educates, and prepares Cadets for their service in the U.S. Army. The CTC (Combatting Terrorism Center) at West Point was established following the events on September 11, 2001 because of the belief that strong initiative was needed to prepare Cadets for the new environments they would be headed into upon graduating in the post-9/11 era. The CTC provides a unique terrorism-based education and since its creation, the program has received international recognition for its studies, reports, and teachings on terrorism and terrorist threats. A new report from the CTC, however, suggests that far right wing political activists, not radical Islamic groups, are the new terrorist threat in America and even goes so far as to say that those who oppose a 'New World Order' are potentially violent terrorists. One of the groups this report warns of is the modern 'Anti-Federalist' group, which the report says contains people who believe the American political system has been hijacked by external forces interested in promoting a 'New World Order,' an idea that has even been confirmed by David Rockefeller in his book "Memoirs" [1] and George H.W. Bush in various speeches. The CTC report goes on to say that these 'Anti-Federalists' believe the federal government has become corrupt and tyrannical because of its intrusion on the civil constitutional rights of the American people and support civil activism, individual freedoms, and self-government. According to the report, these people believe that the push for a tyrannical global government would result in disarming the American people and their violence, the report says, may be directed towards the federal government itself and its proxies in law enforcement.
The FBI and Department of Homeland Security have already released documents which suggest that anyone who has coffee grinders, coffee filters, goggles, and scientific equipment could be involved in creating CBR weapons and should be reported to local authorities. They have also stated that photographers should be monitored for potential terrorism and they have released guidelines for suspicious activity reporting at hotels. This newly released CTC report, which showcases the exploitation of people like Timothy McVeigh and the small wave of violence from right wing groups in the 1990s to suggest that all right-wingers are potentially violent and even loosely associates those who oppose a one world government with skinheads, Neo-Nazis, and the KKK, is only a small example of the growing paranoia over terrorism and the expanding surveillance state in America.
Why is this all important? Regardless of personal ties to these groups, we must be asking the following question: If these people can be classified so easily as terrorists, what would prevent everyone from being a potential terrorist? Because according to American policy, anyone suspected of terrorism can now be indefinitely detained without a trial.
The FBI and Department of Homeland Security have already released documents which suggest that anyone who has coffee grinders, coffee filters, goggles, and scientific equipment could be involved in creating CBR weapons and should be reported to local authorities. They have also stated that photographers should be monitored for potential terrorism and they have released guidelines for suspicious activity reporting at hotels. This newly released CTC report, which showcases the exploitation of people like Timothy McVeigh and the small wave of violence from right wing groups in the 1990s to suggest that all right-wingers are potentially violent and even loosely associates those who oppose a one world government with skinheads, Neo-Nazis, and the KKK, is only a small example of the growing paranoia over terrorism and the expanding surveillance state in America.
Why is this all important? Regardless of personal ties to these groups, we must be asking the following question: If these people can be classified so easily as terrorists, what would prevent everyone from being a potential terrorist? Because according to American policy, anyone suspected of terrorism can now be indefinitely detained without a trial.
UK deploys toy-sized spy drones in Afghanistan
End Of Days News
British troops in Afghanistan are now using 10-centimeter-long 16-gram spy helicopters to survey Taliban firing spots. The UK Defense Ministry plans to buy 160 of the drones under a contract worth more than $31 million.
The remote-controlled PD-100 PRS aircraft, dubbed the Black Hornet, is produced by Norwegian designer Prox Dynamics. The drone is a traditional single-rotor helicopter, scaled down to the size of a toy. British troops use the drones for reconnaissance missions, sending them ahead to inspect enemy positions.
Each drone is equipped with a tiny tillable camera, a GPS coordinate receiver and an onboard autopilot system complete with gyros, accelerometers and pressure sensors, which keeps it stable in flight against winds as strong as 10 knots, according to reviews. The tiny aircraft is agile enough to fly inside compounds, and is quiet enough not to attract unwanted attention. If detected, the drones are cheap enough to be considered expendable.
The auto-pilot either follows a preprogrammed flight plan or receives commands from a manual control station, which is about the size of a large smartphone. The drone's camera can feed compressed video or still images to an operator up to a kilometer away, and its rechargeable battery provides power for about 30 minutes of flight.
In addition to the drone and the controller, each system comes with a ground base station, which houses the operating system, main electronics, internal batteries and chargers. It also protects the drone while being transported. The weight of the entire kit is about a kilogram, easily portable in the field.
PD-100 PRS (Image from proxdynamics.com)
Prox Dynamics started working on the nano-drone in 2008, and released a video of the first prototype in flight a year later. The manufacturer initially planned for it to be put to civilian use, to scout sites of natural or man-made disasters for survivors and provide intel to rescue teams. A marketable version of the Black Hornet was first presented at the Counter Terrorist Expo in London in April 2012.
The British Ministry of Defense announced last November that it was awarding Prox Dynamics a contract to supply the drones to its troops in Afghanistan. The initial contract is worth about $4 million, but will likely be expanded to more than $31 million.
Each drone is equipped with a tiny tillable camera, a GPS coordinate receiver and an onboard autopilot system complete with gyros, accelerometers and pressure sensors, which keeps it stable in flight against winds as strong as 10 knots, according to reviews. The tiny aircraft is agile enough to fly inside compounds, and is quiet enough not to attract unwanted attention. If detected, the drones are cheap enough to be considered expendable.
The auto-pilot either follows a preprogrammed flight plan or receives commands from a manual control station, which is about the size of a large smartphone. The drone's camera can feed compressed video or still images to an operator up to a kilometer away, and its rechargeable battery provides power for about 30 minutes of flight.
In addition to the drone and the controller, each system comes with a ground base station, which houses the operating system, main electronics, internal batteries and chargers. It also protects the drone while being transported. The weight of the entire kit is about a kilogram, easily portable in the field.
PD-100 PRS (Image from proxdynamics.com)
The British Ministry of Defense announced last November that it was awarding Prox Dynamics a contract to supply the drones to its troops in Afghanistan. The initial contract is worth about $4 million, but will likely be expanded to more than $31 million.
University Allegedly Kicks Christian Club Off Campus Over ‘Non-Discrimination Policy’
End Of Days News
While students were given an option to submit a new constitution that complied with these rules, they decided to refrain from doing so and to stick with their values. From a practical standpoint, it is understandable why a faith-based club would want its leaders to share theological values, something that a statement of faith would ensure.
“The university is sending the message that religious voices are suspect and should be marginalized,” Jao told Fox News’ Todd Starnes. “I think it sends the message that the university does not understand the nature of religious beliefs and the convictions of religious students.”
As a result of its decision to stick to its convictions, the Asian InterVarsity group was de-recognized by the school and forced to relocate off-campus. Jao noted that this isn’t just a Christian problem, as other faiths will also be impacted.
“I can’t imagine the Muslim Student Association saying you don’t have to be a Muslim to help lead our group,” he noted. “I think the university’s decision will impact any religious group that’s being honest about their leadership criteria.”
Asian InterVarsity students during praise and worship (Photo Credit: Asian InterVarsity/Todd Starnes)
When a University of Michigan spokesperson was contacted by Fox News’ Todd Starnes, a statement was released noting that all registered student groups are required to agree to and sign a standard non-discrimination agreement. Additionally, club constitutions must be reviewed. The response also noted that the Asian InterVarsity Christian Fellowship has not complied with these mandates, but did not get into specifics about the debate between the two parties.
The club plans to use the university’s appeals process to overturn the decision. For now, students are meeting in an alternative location.
This is yet another example of a club embroiled in a battle with a prominent university over a non-discrimination policy. Vanderbilt University, Yale and Tufts, among others, have had similar faith-based wars over the same subject.
Obama Immigration Reform's Inclusion of Same-Sex Couples a 'Deal-Killer?'
End Of Days News
The Rev. Gabriel Salguero, president of the National Latino Evangelical Coalition, told The Christian Post that he questioned the inclusion of another hot button issue in an already tense subject.
"It seems to me that … you are combining two disparate issues when it hasn't been resolved in the national consciousness. I do not understand it strategically," said Salguero. "We want immigration reform, but I think to put this issue as part of it is really going to complicate it for conservatives who really want immigration reform."
Dr. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, told CP that such a proposal would be a "deal-killer."
"Same-sex partner provisions such as those included in the Uniting American Families Act would be strongly opposed by many in our communities who are otherwise sympathetic or even enthusiastic about the benefits of immigration reform," said Land."[President Obama] needs to understand that's a deal breaker for lots of us and it needs to not be in there."
In a speech delivered Tuesday about immigration reform, President Obama laid out the many components to reform that he believed were needed.
The president's proposal will also include extending certain immigration benefits to bi-national same-sex couples, who presently do not receive the same benefits as opposite-sex couples.
According to the section on "Streamlining Legal Immigration" on an online White House fact-sheet, "It also treats same-sex families as families by giving U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents the ability to seek a visa on the basis of a permanent relationship with a same-sex partner."
Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, said in a statement that he took issue with that part of the proposal due to current federal law.
"This is yet another example of the President playing politics rather than enforcing our nation's laws and offering a true, workable solution," said Brown.
"First, his Administration threw in the towel and refused to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Then, he came out of the closet on gay marriage. Now, he is apparently proposing a direct violation of DOMA, currying added favor with gay activists, many of whom have lavished contributions on his reelection campaign."
Regarding how successful such a proposal for this extension of benefits would be, Land told CP that he doubted the effort would get through Congress.
"I don't think it will be in any proposal that passes the House and the Senate because with it in there it won't pass the House and the Senate," said Land.
"So the president needs to decide whether he wants to immigration reform passed this year or not … We're just saying that that's a deal-killer."
Evangelicals who have come together to support immigration reform have expressed concern over the White House's decision to include support for same-sex couples in their official immigration proposal.
While not mentioning the issue during his Tuesday speech demanding comprehensive immigration reform, President Barack Obama's proposal does include measures that pertain to same-sex couples.The Rev. Gabriel Salguero, president of the National Latino Evangelical Coalition, told The Christian Post that he questioned the inclusion of another hot button issue in an already tense subject.
"It seems to me that … you are combining two disparate issues when it hasn't been resolved in the national consciousness. I do not understand it strategically," said Salguero. "We want immigration reform, but I think to put this issue as part of it is really going to complicate it for conservatives who really want immigration reform."
Dr. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, told CP that such a proposal would be a "deal-killer."
"Same-sex partner provisions such as those included in the Uniting American Families Act would be strongly opposed by many in our communities who are otherwise sympathetic or even enthusiastic about the benefits of immigration reform," said Land."[President Obama] needs to understand that's a deal breaker for lots of us and it needs to not be in there."
In a speech delivered Tuesday about immigration reform, President Obama laid out the many components to reform that he believed were needed.
The president's proposal will also include extending certain immigration benefits to bi-national same-sex couples, who presently do not receive the same benefits as opposite-sex couples.
According to the section on "Streamlining Legal Immigration" on an online White House fact-sheet, "It also treats same-sex families as families by giving U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents the ability to seek a visa on the basis of a permanent relationship with a same-sex partner."
Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, said in a statement that he took issue with that part of the proposal due to current federal law.
"This is yet another example of the President playing politics rather than enforcing our nation's laws and offering a true, workable solution," said Brown.
"First, his Administration threw in the towel and refused to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Then, he came out of the closet on gay marriage. Now, he is apparently proposing a direct violation of DOMA, currying added favor with gay activists, many of whom have lavished contributions on his reelection campaign."
Regarding how successful such a proposal for this extension of benefits would be, Land told CP that he doubted the effort would get through Congress.
"I don't think it will be in any proposal that passes the House and the Senate because with it in there it won't pass the House and the Senate," said Land.
"So the president needs to decide whether he wants to immigration reform passed this year or not … We're just saying that that's a deal-killer."
This is why satan is attacking Rick Perry ALSO! Rick Perry Tells Boy Scouts to Keep No-Gay Policy
End Of Days News
"I think most people see absolutely no reason to change the position and neither do I," Perry said, adding his views have not changed since he wrote the book, On My Honor: Why the American Values of the Boy Scouts Are Worth Fighting For, in 2008. It would be "inappropriate" for popular culture to impact 100 years of the Scouts' standards, he said.
In his speech, Perry told hundreds of Scouts from around Texas, who had filled the state House of Representatives, to announce their delegation's recent accomplishments, that society's failure to adhere to the organization's core values was a cause for high rates of teen pregnancy and wayward youth who grow up to be "men joining their fathers in prison."
In his book, the Republican governor wrote, "Because gay activism is central to their lives, it would unavoidably be a topic of conversation within a Scout troop. This would distract from the mission of Scouting: character building, not sex education."
Perry donated profits to the Boy Scouts of America Legal Defense as "they continue to be under attack from the forces of secularism."
The Scouts can legally retain the no-gays membership policy, which was reaffirmed by the organization's leaders about seven months ago.
In Boy Scouts of America v. Dale more than a decade ago, the Supreme Court upheld the right of private organizations to make their own decisions about membership, points out Dr. Eastman, a constitutional law professor at Chapman University and Chairman of the Board of the National Organization for Marriage, on his blog.
Eastman wrote the blog on Saturday, days after the Scouts' national leadership announced that it was considering ending the mandatory exclusion of gay members. Under the proposals each individual sponsoring organization would be left to independently determine whether to infuse homosexuality into the core of the local troop organization.
A source who has knowledge of the situation recently told The Christian Post that the Boy Scouts' top executives had met with top leaders at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Catholic Church and the Southern Baptist Convention, among others, over the last few weeks to inform them of the possibility of this policy shift.
"The policy change under discussion would allow the religious, civic, or educational organizations that oversee and deliver Scouting to determine how to address this issue," the Boy Scouts told CP in an email message last week. "The Boy Scouts would not, under any circumstances, dictate a position to units, members, or parents. Under this proposed policy, the BSA would not require any chartered organization to act in ways inconsistent with that organization's mission, principles, or religious beliefs."
But once the organization's leadership has capitulated by taking "an agnostic position on the question, it will become increasingly difficult for the constituent parts to adhere to the view that homosexual conduct is immoral," warns Eastman, an Eagle Scout.
The Boy Scouts is a major corporation with revenues in 2010 of more than a quarter billion dollars, and has 3,771 employees with the chief executives getting lucrative salaries, Eastman notes. "So, when members of the national board, CEOs of major corporations like AT&T and Ernst & Young, start pressuring the executives at the national office… someone with his own million dollar salary at risk might, just might, have a personal stake at odds with the Boy Scout's long-standing policy against interjecting homosexuality into a youth organization."
Greg Quinlan, president of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays, expressed his opinion on the issue in an article for CP on Friday. Boy Scouts leaders are leaders in the real sense, he wrote: "Boys watch them very closely. Boys also look up to older Boy Scout members and want to imitate them and follow their examples. Boys at that stage of maturity emulate male role models. A homosexual who gently eases boys and young men into exposure of homosexuality by his own personal example promotes homosexual behavior as normal, natural and healthy. This paves the way for youth to question their own sexuality and be affirmed into homosexuality."
Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/rick-perry-tells-boy-scouts-to-keep-no-gay-policy-89363/#2VLd0MzpHibHqUZF.99
Texas Gov. Rick Perry has called on the Boy Scouts of America on Saturday to keep its strict no-gays membership policy, as the organization's national executive board, scheduled to meet in Irving on Monday, is expected to discuss, and possibly vote on, changing the policy.
"Hopefully the board will follow their historic position of keeping the Scouts strongly supportive of the values that make scouting this very important and impactful organization," Perry said, according to The Associated Press. Perry, himself an Eagle Scout, made the comments after his speech at the Texas Scouts' 64th Annual Report to State in the House Chambers at the Texas State Capitol in Austin."I think most people see absolutely no reason to change the position and neither do I," Perry said, adding his views have not changed since he wrote the book, On My Honor: Why the American Values of the Boy Scouts Are Worth Fighting For, in 2008. It would be "inappropriate" for popular culture to impact 100 years of the Scouts' standards, he said.
In his speech, Perry told hundreds of Scouts from around Texas, who had filled the state House of Representatives, to announce their delegation's recent accomplishments, that society's failure to adhere to the organization's core values was a cause for high rates of teen pregnancy and wayward youth who grow up to be "men joining their fathers in prison."
In his book, the Republican governor wrote, "Because gay activism is central to their lives, it would unavoidably be a topic of conversation within a Scout troop. This would distract from the mission of Scouting: character building, not sex education."
Perry donated profits to the Boy Scouts of America Legal Defense as "they continue to be under attack from the forces of secularism."
The Scouts can legally retain the no-gays membership policy, which was reaffirmed by the organization's leaders about seven months ago.
In Boy Scouts of America v. Dale more than a decade ago, the Supreme Court upheld the right of private organizations to make their own decisions about membership, points out Dr. Eastman, a constitutional law professor at Chapman University and Chairman of the Board of the National Organization for Marriage, on his blog.
Eastman wrote the blog on Saturday, days after the Scouts' national leadership announced that it was considering ending the mandatory exclusion of gay members. Under the proposals each individual sponsoring organization would be left to independently determine whether to infuse homosexuality into the core of the local troop organization.
A source who has knowledge of the situation recently told The Christian Post that the Boy Scouts' top executives had met with top leaders at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Catholic Church and the Southern Baptist Convention, among others, over the last few weeks to inform them of the possibility of this policy shift.
"The policy change under discussion would allow the religious, civic, or educational organizations that oversee and deliver Scouting to determine how to address this issue," the Boy Scouts told CP in an email message last week. "The Boy Scouts would not, under any circumstances, dictate a position to units, members, or parents. Under this proposed policy, the BSA would not require any chartered organization to act in ways inconsistent with that organization's mission, principles, or religious beliefs."
But once the organization's leadership has capitulated by taking "an agnostic position on the question, it will become increasingly difficult for the constituent parts to adhere to the view that homosexual conduct is immoral," warns Eastman, an Eagle Scout.
The Boy Scouts is a major corporation with revenues in 2010 of more than a quarter billion dollars, and has 3,771 employees with the chief executives getting lucrative salaries, Eastman notes. "So, when members of the national board, CEOs of major corporations like AT&T and Ernst & Young, start pressuring the executives at the national office… someone with his own million dollar salary at risk might, just might, have a personal stake at odds with the Boy Scout's long-standing policy against interjecting homosexuality into a youth organization."
Greg Quinlan, president of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays, expressed his opinion on the issue in an article for CP on Friday. Boy Scouts leaders are leaders in the real sense, he wrote: "Boys watch them very closely. Boys also look up to older Boy Scout members and want to imitate them and follow their examples. Boys at that stage of maturity emulate male role models. A homosexual who gently eases boys and young men into exposure of homosexuality by his own personal example promotes homosexual behavior as normal, natural and healthy. This paves the way for youth to question their own sexuality and be affirmed into homosexuality."
Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/rick-perry-tells-boy-scouts-to-keep-no-gay-policy-89363/#2VLd0MzpHibHqUZF.99
Wow after Rick Perry spoke out about getting back into the place of worship, the devil uses his diciples to attack him! I WOULD NEVER DIS-ELECT HIM YOU BABY MURDERING DEMON! Feminist Icon Gloria Steinem Calls on Texans to ‘Dis-Elect’ ‘Authoritarian…Dictatorial, Unacceptable American’ Rick Perry
End Of Days News
Feminist icon and activist Gloria Steinem doesn’t much care for Texas Gov. Rick Perry.
“He personally will go down in history as an authoritarian — a dictatorial, unacceptable American,” the 78-year-old Steinem told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram on Friday.
She said the Republican governor and former presidential candidate has made a lasting mark by overseeing recent efforts to have Planned Parenthood funding cut off in the state.
Women are “suffering from the lack of healthcare” because of Perry’s actions and the federal dollars lost to Texas because of him, Steinem added.
She told the newspaper Texans should “dis-elect him, get rid of him, get rid of the guy.”
“Can’t you impeach him?” she asked.
It’s not the first time Steinem has criticized Perry — in 2011, she referred to him, Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann all as “people our founders came to this country to escape.”
HOW DO YOU LIKE YOUR PRESIDENT NOW? I warned all the people I know and they would not listen! Obama's Not Through Raising Taxes: 'No Doubt We Need Additional Revenue'!
End Of Days News
(CNSNews.com) - President Obama has said all along he isn't done raising taxes on wealthy Americans, and he said it again in an interview that aired on CBS during the Super Bowl.
A month after signing a bill that raised tax rates on families making $450,000 or more (and individuals making $400,000-plus), the president said he now wants to close "loopholes."
'I don't think the issue right now is raising rates," Obama said. The goal now is to find "smart spending cuts," "reduce health care costs," and "close loopholes and deductions."
"If you combine those things together, then we can not only reduce our deficit, but we can continue to invest in things like education and reserach and development that are going to help us grow," Obama told CBS's Scott Pelley.
"There is no dobut we need additional revenue coupled with smart spending reductions in order to bring down our deficit. And we can do it in a gradual way so that it doesn't have a huge impact," he added.
Obama twice drew distinctions between "average Americans" and rich people who "take advantage" of perfectly legal tax rules.
The president said he wants to close loopholes for "folks who are well connected and have a lot of accountants and lawyers...so they end up paying lower rates than, you know, a bus driver or a cop."
A short time later, Obama again set the "average person" against those who are "able to take advantage."
"When you look at some of these deductions that certain folks are able to take advantage of, the average person can't take advantage of. The average person doesn't have access to Cayman Island accounts, the average person doesn't have access to carried interest income, where they end up paying a much lower rate on billions of dollars that they earned. So we just want to make sure that the whole system is fair, that it's transparent, that we're reducing our deficit in a way that doesn't hamper growth...."
In closing "loopholes" and raising revenue, Obama has the support of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
Reid told ABC's "This Week" that any deal to avoid the sequester (deep, automatic spending cuts to defense and non-defense budgets) "without question" would have to include new revenue (more taxes).
Host George Stephanopoulos pressed Reid on that point: "So your position on lifting the sequester, on avoiding a government shutdown, on extending the debt limit beyond August is any one of those deals must include new revenues?"
"Yes," Reid replied. "The answer is definitely yes. And I've got a pretty good fan base for that, the American people: Republicans, Democrats and independents."
A month after signing a bill that raised tax rates on families making $450,000 or more (and individuals making $400,000-plus), the president said he now wants to close "loopholes."
'I don't think the issue right now is raising rates," Obama said. The goal now is to find "smart spending cuts," "reduce health care costs," and "close loopholes and deductions."
"If you combine those things together, then we can not only reduce our deficit, but we can continue to invest in things like education and reserach and development that are going to help us grow," Obama told CBS's Scott Pelley.
"There is no dobut we need additional revenue coupled with smart spending reductions in order to bring down our deficit. And we can do it in a gradual way so that it doesn't have a huge impact," he added.
Obama twice drew distinctions between "average Americans" and rich people who "take advantage" of perfectly legal tax rules.
The president said he wants to close loopholes for "folks who are well connected and have a lot of accountants and lawyers...so they end up paying lower rates than, you know, a bus driver or a cop."
A short time later, Obama again set the "average person" against those who are "able to take advantage."
"When you look at some of these deductions that certain folks are able to take advantage of, the average person can't take advantage of. The average person doesn't have access to Cayman Island accounts, the average person doesn't have access to carried interest income, where they end up paying a much lower rate on billions of dollars that they earned. So we just want to make sure that the whole system is fair, that it's transparent, that we're reducing our deficit in a way that doesn't hamper growth...."
In closing "loopholes" and raising revenue, Obama has the support of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
Reid told ABC's "This Week" that any deal to avoid the sequester (deep, automatic spending cuts to defense and non-defense budgets) "without question" would have to include new revenue (more taxes).
Host George Stephanopoulos pressed Reid on that point: "So your position on lifting the sequester, on avoiding a government shutdown, on extending the debt limit beyond August is any one of those deals must include new revenues?"
"Yes," Reid replied. "The answer is definitely yes. And I've got a pretty good fan base for that, the American people: Republicans, Democrats and independents."
Obama Administration: We Will Still Force Christians to Act Against Their Faith
End Of Days News
(CNSNews.com) - The Department of Health and Human Services on Friday set the stage for a massive showdown between the federal government of the United States and American Christians who believe the government has no right to force them to act against their faith by mandating that they buy, provide or facilitate health-care coverage that includes sterilizations, contraception, or abortion-inducing drugs.
HHS released a new proposed regulation under the Obamacare law that the department presented as an accommodation to religious “organizations” that object to providing sterilizations, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs in their health care plans. However, the proposal does not truly expand the exceedingly narrow religious exemption presented in the initial regulation, which was finalized last year, and continues to offer no exemption at all to Christian individuals or business owners.
“There really is no expansion of the religious exemption,” said Leonard Leo, a Washington attorney, who is a board member of The Catholic Association, a group of Catholic lay persons dedicated to applying the teachings and principles of the church to the issues of the day.
"The HHS mandate announcement today changes nothing, it is just another accounting gimmick and the HHS mandate continues to be a violation of civil rights, religious freedom and First Amendment rights,” said Maureen Ferguson, senior policy advisor to The Catholic Association. “Catholic institutions and other faith based organizations, including hospitals and universities and private employers, still do not get their First Amendment rights back and are still being forced to either violate their faith or pay crippling government fines for practicing their faith."
The original regulation, finalized by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in January 2012, said virtually all health care plans in the United States must provide all women of child-bearing age with cost-free coverage for sterilizations, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs.
The Catholic Church holds that all three of these things are intrinsically immoral and that Catholics cannot be involved in them. Many Christians of other denominations object to the fact that the regulation requires coverage for abortion-inducing drugs.
The original regulation provided an exemption that applied only to houses of worship themselves and their immediate auxiliaries. To qualify, an institution needed to meet four criteria:1) It needed to be organized under the section of the Internal Revenue Code used by churches per se, 2) be primarily employed in the inculcation of religious tenets, 3) employ primarily people of its own faith, and 4) serve primarily people of its own faith.
This exemption did not extend to Catholic charities, hospitals and schools.
The original regulation also offered no conscience exemption at all to individual employees or business owners. Thus, Catholics and other Christians who objected to sterilizations, artificial contraception and abortion would be forced by the government to buy and/or provide health care plans that covered these things, paid for these things, and facilitated these things.
On June 13, the Catholic bishops of the United States unanimously adopted a statement calling the regulation an “unjust and illegal mandate.” The unanimous Catholic bishops said that the regulation not only would violate the free exercise of religion of Catholic institutions by forcing these institutions to act against the teachings of the Catholic faith, but also would violate the rights of individual Catholic workers and business owners.
“The HHS mandate creates still a third class, those with no conscience protection at all: individuals who, in their daily lives, strive constantly to act in accordance with their faith and moral values,” said the unanimous Catholic bishops. “They, too, face a government mandate to aid in providing ‘services’ contrary to those values—whether in their sponsoring of, and payment for, insurance as employers; their payment of insurance premiums as employees; or as insurers themselves—without even the semblance of an exemption.”
Around the country, more than 40 lawsuits were filed against the regulations. Plaintiffs ranged from the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C.; to the EWTN television channel; to Hercules Industries, a heating and air-conditioning company owned by a Catholic family; to Hobby Lobby, a retail chain owned by a Christian family.
The new proposed regulation redefines a “religious employer” to mean only those institutions organized under the Internal Revenue Code section used by houses of worship. “The Department believes that this proposal would not expand the universe of employer plans that would qualify for the exemption beyond that which was intended in the 2012 final rules,” said a statement HHS released Friday.
Additionally, the regulation says that when a non-profit that “holds itself out as a religious organization” buys a health-care plan for its employees, the insurance company would have to set up a separate plan that it provides to those employees free of charge and that gives the employees free sterilizations, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs.
When a non-profit that “holds itself out as a religious organization” is self-insured, the third-party administrator would be required to work with a health insurance provider to have that provider create a free policy that gives the covered employees free sterilizations, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs.
When providing their employees with a health-care plan, these religious non-profits would be required by the government to trigger the provision of free abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives and sterilizations to their employees and an insurance provider who would be forced by the government to provide those things for free.
After HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius finalized the original regulation in January 2012, many of the Catholic bishops of the United States had the priests of their diocese read a letter to their parishoners from the pulpit. In this letter, the bishops said: "We cannot--we will not--comply with this unjust law."
HHS released a new proposed regulation under the Obamacare law that the department presented as an accommodation to religious “organizations” that object to providing sterilizations, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs in their health care plans. However, the proposal does not truly expand the exceedingly narrow religious exemption presented in the initial regulation, which was finalized last year, and continues to offer no exemption at all to Christian individuals or business owners.
“There really is no expansion of the religious exemption,” said Leonard Leo, a Washington attorney, who is a board member of The Catholic Association, a group of Catholic lay persons dedicated to applying the teachings and principles of the church to the issues of the day.
"The HHS mandate announcement today changes nothing, it is just another accounting gimmick and the HHS mandate continues to be a violation of civil rights, religious freedom and First Amendment rights,” said Maureen Ferguson, senior policy advisor to The Catholic Association. “Catholic institutions and other faith based organizations, including hospitals and universities and private employers, still do not get their First Amendment rights back and are still being forced to either violate their faith or pay crippling government fines for practicing their faith."
The original regulation, finalized by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in January 2012, said virtually all health care plans in the United States must provide all women of child-bearing age with cost-free coverage for sterilizations, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs.
The Catholic Church holds that all three of these things are intrinsically immoral and that Catholics cannot be involved in them. Many Christians of other denominations object to the fact that the regulation requires coverage for abortion-inducing drugs.
The original regulation provided an exemption that applied only to houses of worship themselves and their immediate auxiliaries. To qualify, an institution needed to meet four criteria:1) It needed to be organized under the section of the Internal Revenue Code used by churches per se, 2) be primarily employed in the inculcation of religious tenets, 3) employ primarily people of its own faith, and 4) serve primarily people of its own faith.
This exemption did not extend to Catholic charities, hospitals and schools.
The original regulation also offered no conscience exemption at all to individual employees or business owners. Thus, Catholics and other Christians who objected to sterilizations, artificial contraception and abortion would be forced by the government to buy and/or provide health care plans that covered these things, paid for these things, and facilitated these things.
On June 13, the Catholic bishops of the United States unanimously adopted a statement calling the regulation an “unjust and illegal mandate.” The unanimous Catholic bishops said that the regulation not only would violate the free exercise of religion of Catholic institutions by forcing these institutions to act against the teachings of the Catholic faith, but also would violate the rights of individual Catholic workers and business owners.
“The HHS mandate creates still a third class, those with no conscience protection at all: individuals who, in their daily lives, strive constantly to act in accordance with their faith and moral values,” said the unanimous Catholic bishops. “They, too, face a government mandate to aid in providing ‘services’ contrary to those values—whether in their sponsoring of, and payment for, insurance as employers; their payment of insurance premiums as employees; or as insurers themselves—without even the semblance of an exemption.”
Around the country, more than 40 lawsuits were filed against the regulations. Plaintiffs ranged from the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C.; to the EWTN television channel; to Hercules Industries, a heating and air-conditioning company owned by a Catholic family; to Hobby Lobby, a retail chain owned by a Christian family.
The new proposed regulation redefines a “religious employer” to mean only those institutions organized under the Internal Revenue Code section used by houses of worship. “The Department believes that this proposal would not expand the universe of employer plans that would qualify for the exemption beyond that which was intended in the 2012 final rules,” said a statement HHS released Friday.
Additionally, the regulation says that when a non-profit that “holds itself out as a religious organization” buys a health-care plan for its employees, the insurance company would have to set up a separate plan that it provides to those employees free of charge and that gives the employees free sterilizations, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs.
When a non-profit that “holds itself out as a religious organization” is self-insured, the third-party administrator would be required to work with a health insurance provider to have that provider create a free policy that gives the covered employees free sterilizations, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs.
When providing their employees with a health-care plan, these religious non-profits would be required by the government to trigger the provision of free abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives and sterilizations to their employees and an insurance provider who would be forced by the government to provide those things for free.
After HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius finalized the original regulation in January 2012, many of the Catholic bishops of the United States had the priests of their diocese read a letter to their parishoners from the pulpit. In this letter, the bishops said: "We cannot--we will not--comply with this unjust law."
Big Brother — I Mean Google — Is Watching You
End Of Days News
A few months ago, the Federal Communications Commission fined Google $25,000 for taking its sweet time to give information to the FCC about an interesting project Google had been working on.
Most of you are probably familiar with Google Maps, where you can search for directions to wherever you need to go and even get a street view of the area. Google literally paid for trucks to go around with cameras on them in order to record this information. Not a big deal, right?
Well it wouldn’t be a big deal if those trucks didn’t include technology on them that could swipe all of your personal information off unsecured Wi-Fi connections.
Just in case you don’t know what that means, if you have Wi-Fi in your house and it didn’t have a password on it to protect it, odds are that Google has all of your personal information.
What do I mean by personal information? Everything. Passwords, websites you’ve visited, financial records, absolutely anything that you have ever done on your home computer, Google now has.
Think about it this way: If you can’t live without the Internet, odds are that Google has your life.
The FCC Did Nothing
Apparently, according to the FCC, Google did nothing wrong. That’s right. According to the government (which, by the way, has millions of dollars’ worth of contracts with Google), the company had a right to spy on you.
Actually, that’s not quite right. Google did do something wrong, according to the FCC, it delayed the information it gave to the FCC.
The world’s leading search engine said that searching its own employees’ emails and getting statements from them “would be a time-consuing and burdensome task.”
The company can gather all of your personal information in a nanosecond from the air outside of your house, yet it said it would take too long to get the information about why it did it.
For delaying a Federal investigation, Google, of course, was fined heavily and people were sent to jail, right? Wrong. For all of that, the company was fined $25,000.
What does that “hefty” fine mean to Google?
Take all the money you have out of your pocket. Now take the lint out of the bottom of that pocket. That lint has the same value to you as a $25,000 fine does to Google. It’s not even a slap on the wrist; it’s more like an endorsement.
When contacted, Google’s employees refused to make statements as to why they were recording this information. That sounds like they have something to hide, doesn’t it?
Oh, and don’t think Google has pulled this trick off just in America. It did the exact same thing in 29 other major countries. Google doesn’t just spy on U.S. citizens; it spies on the world.
No one has rights in a Google-run world. And our government (which, let me remind you again, contracts Google to supply it data) is doing nothing to stop it.
It Isn’t Just Google
In 2002, an AT&T employee couldn’t understand why National Security Agency representatives were suddenly visiting his office in San Francisco on a regular basis. He had never seen them in the office before and couldn’t figure out why they would have anything to do with the phone and Internet provider.
His curiosity got the best of him, so he followed a few people around his office building, which led him to discover that the sixth floor of his building was under considerable construction and security.
This made no sense to the man, who kept poking around until he found documents describing what was in the room. What he found should shock you.
The NSA had contracted AT&T to build this secret room and collect all of the data from 16 major phone and Internet companies.
That’s right: all of the data. Every phone call, every Internet site, every password, every financial record. You get the idea.
Basically, any piece of information that came from you, AT&T collected and sent off to the government.
The NSA says it doesn’t read through information that has been given to it. It says that a computer sorts through this information and that it is never really looked at by human eyes unless it’s linked to a terrorist organization. If the data weren’t linked to anything criminal like that, it was deleted; or so the NSA says.
Fast-forward to a directive from President Barack Obama in 2012. As was reported a few weeks ago on Absolute Rights, the President signed an executive order that allowed the NSA to keep non-terror linked information for up to five years.
That’s an interesting number, isn’t it?
The data that has been stored from AT&T since that mysterious room was built has most likely been sitting on a shelf all that time.
But who needs that old data anyway when Google is updating it daily?
What Can You Do?
You need to protect your privacy. Sure, that’s easy to say; but there are things that can be done to help secure your data.
First, know your rights or the lack thereof.
Know that people are out there ripping off your information. So protect your Internet with a password. Don’t keep connections open. Clearly, the government isn’t going to stop companies from spying on you; what makes you think it doesn’t already do the same thing?
You should know that you have little to no privacy over everything transmitted over the Internet. That means emails, data and even phone calls.
Yes, phone calls on the Internet on what is called Voice Over Internet Protocol, or VOIP, are up for grabs to whomever would like to listen to them.
The only phone calls protected now are those on land lines and some cellphones.
The next thing you can do is to not put personal information on the Internet. If you don’t need to bank online, don’t.
Sure, things seem convenient when you are sitting at home ordering whatever you need off of the Internet; but how convenient is it when you’re being tracked by everyone and everything who has the technology to do so?
Finally, base your life in the real world and not online.
That may sound silly; but if you can’t live without the Internet, you’re in trouble.
Make sure that you can really function without the Internet. Don’t rely on it for everything. It should be common sense that if a luxury like electricity goes away, so do things like the Internet. If you can’t make it without the Web, not only will you not survive a major disaster, but you may not be able to survive even a minor thunderstorm.
It’s important to know that your information is out there. With the recent discoveries about how Google and AT&T operate, odds are that all of your information is already out there. Make sure you take the proper precautions to protect yourself from all of the eyes that may be looking over you.
It isn’t a safe world out there, and knowing that your private lives have been spied on by Google and other companies doesn’t feel good; but it is good to know.
If you know what is going on around you in the world, you can prepare for it.
Be smarter than they think you are.
–Tim Young
Most of you are probably familiar with Google Maps, where you can search for directions to wherever you need to go and even get a street view of the area. Google literally paid for trucks to go around with cameras on them in order to record this information. Not a big deal, right?
Well it wouldn’t be a big deal if those trucks didn’t include technology on them that could swipe all of your personal information off unsecured Wi-Fi connections.
Just in case you don’t know what that means, if you have Wi-Fi in your house and it didn’t have a password on it to protect it, odds are that Google has all of your personal information.
What do I mean by personal information? Everything. Passwords, websites you’ve visited, financial records, absolutely anything that you have ever done on your home computer, Google now has.
Think about it this way: If you can’t live without the Internet, odds are that Google has your life.
The FCC Did Nothing
Apparently, according to the FCC, Google did nothing wrong. That’s right. According to the government (which, by the way, has millions of dollars’ worth of contracts with Google), the company had a right to spy on you.
Actually, that’s not quite right. Google did do something wrong, according to the FCC, it delayed the information it gave to the FCC.
The world’s leading search engine said that searching its own employees’ emails and getting statements from them “would be a time-consuing and burdensome task.”
The company can gather all of your personal information in a nanosecond from the air outside of your house, yet it said it would take too long to get the information about why it did it.
For delaying a Federal investigation, Google, of course, was fined heavily and people were sent to jail, right? Wrong. For all of that, the company was fined $25,000.
What does that “hefty” fine mean to Google?
Take all the money you have out of your pocket. Now take the lint out of the bottom of that pocket. That lint has the same value to you as a $25,000 fine does to Google. It’s not even a slap on the wrist; it’s more like an endorsement.
When contacted, Google’s employees refused to make statements as to why they were recording this information. That sounds like they have something to hide, doesn’t it?
Oh, and don’t think Google has pulled this trick off just in America. It did the exact same thing in 29 other major countries. Google doesn’t just spy on U.S. citizens; it spies on the world.
No one has rights in a Google-run world. And our government (which, let me remind you again, contracts Google to supply it data) is doing nothing to stop it.
It Isn’t Just Google
In 2002, an AT&T employee couldn’t understand why National Security Agency representatives were suddenly visiting his office in San Francisco on a regular basis. He had never seen them in the office before and couldn’t figure out why they would have anything to do with the phone and Internet provider.
His curiosity got the best of him, so he followed a few people around his office building, which led him to discover that the sixth floor of his building was under considerable construction and security.
This made no sense to the man, who kept poking around until he found documents describing what was in the room. What he found should shock you.
The NSA had contracted AT&T to build this secret room and collect all of the data from 16 major phone and Internet companies.
That’s right: all of the data. Every phone call, every Internet site, every password, every financial record. You get the idea.
Basically, any piece of information that came from you, AT&T collected and sent off to the government.
The NSA says it doesn’t read through information that has been given to it. It says that a computer sorts through this information and that it is never really looked at by human eyes unless it’s linked to a terrorist organization. If the data weren’t linked to anything criminal like that, it was deleted; or so the NSA says.
Fast-forward to a directive from President Barack Obama in 2012. As was reported a few weeks ago on Absolute Rights, the President signed an executive order that allowed the NSA to keep non-terror linked information for up to five years.
That’s an interesting number, isn’t it?
The data that has been stored from AT&T since that mysterious room was built has most likely been sitting on a shelf all that time.
But who needs that old data anyway when Google is updating it daily?
What Can You Do?
You need to protect your privacy. Sure, that’s easy to say; but there are things that can be done to help secure your data.
First, know your rights or the lack thereof.
Know that people are out there ripping off your information. So protect your Internet with a password. Don’t keep connections open. Clearly, the government isn’t going to stop companies from spying on you; what makes you think it doesn’t already do the same thing?
You should know that you have little to no privacy over everything transmitted over the Internet. That means emails, data and even phone calls.
Yes, phone calls on the Internet on what is called Voice Over Internet Protocol, or VOIP, are up for grabs to whomever would like to listen to them.
The only phone calls protected now are those on land lines and some cellphones.
The next thing you can do is to not put personal information on the Internet. If you don’t need to bank online, don’t.
Sure, things seem convenient when you are sitting at home ordering whatever you need off of the Internet; but how convenient is it when you’re being tracked by everyone and everything who has the technology to do so?
Finally, base your life in the real world and not online.
That may sound silly; but if you can’t live without the Internet, you’re in trouble.
Make sure that you can really function without the Internet. Don’t rely on it for everything. It should be common sense that if a luxury like electricity goes away, so do things like the Internet. If you can’t make it without the Web, not only will you not survive a major disaster, but you may not be able to survive even a minor thunderstorm.
It’s important to know that your information is out there. With the recent discoveries about how Google and AT&T operate, odds are that all of your information is already out there. Make sure you take the proper precautions to protect yourself from all of the eyes that may be looking over you.
It isn’t a safe world out there, and knowing that your private lives have been spied on by Google and other companies doesn’t feel good; but it is good to know.
If you know what is going on around you in the world, you can prepare for it.
Be smarter than they think you are.
–Tim Young
By Printing Money Central Banks Have Already Begun the Next Stage of Warfare
End Of Days News
Since the Financial Crisis erupted in 2007, the US Federal Reserve has engaged in dozens of interventions/ bailouts to try and prop up the financial system. Now, I realize that everyone knows the Fed is “printing money.” However, when you look at the list of bailouts/ money pumps it’s absolutely staggering how much money the Fed has thrown around.
Here’s a recap of some of the larger Fed moves during the Crisis:
The Fed is not the only one. Collectively, the world’s Central Banks have pumped over $10 trillion into the financial system since 2007. This money printing has resulted in a massive expansion of Central Bank balance sheets, spread inflation into the system, and done nothing to address the key solvency issues that lead up to the great crisis.
This competitive debasement has lead to increased tension between the world’s Central Banks. You will never hear their stated outright for the simple reason that the single most important responsibility of the Central Banks is to maintain confidence in the system.
However, underneath the veneer of goodwill and the occasional necessary coordinated intervention, tensions are rising between Central Banks. When the US debases the US Dollar it pushes the Euro higher. This hurts German exports which in turn angers the Bundesbank.
The Bundesbank fired a warning shot at the Fed last autumn when it announced it wanted to have its Gold reserves at the Fed audited. To be clear here: no one of major financial import has ever questioned the Fed’s trustworthiness before. However, at the time of this announcement Germany stated it had no intentions of actually moving its reserves.
Fast-forward to today and Germany has not only audited and checked its Gold reserves at the Fed but it is now moving them. In plain terms, Germany has told the world that A) it does not trust the Fed and B) it is through playing around.
This situation will likely be getting worse going forward. The fact that Germany will be removing all of its Gold reserves from France certainly doesn’t bode well for future German French relations if push ever comes to shove (it’s not as though Europe has a history of getting along well).
Look for increased tension to grow between the world’s Central Banks in the coming months and years. This tension will likely result in:
Given that the financial system and economic “recovery” have been built on a house of cards, these political developments will have major impacts on the financial markets.
Outside of internal dissent, the power players in the global economy (the US, China, Japan, and Germany) are showing increasing signs of tension both internal (China and the US) as well as external (China vs. Japan, Germany vs. the US, the US vs. China).
These tensions will lead to economic warfare and very likely physical warfare in the coming years.
Since the Financial Crisis erupted in 2007, the US Federal Reserve has engaged in dozens of interventions/ bailouts to try and prop up the financial system. Now, I realize that everyone knows the Fed is “printing money.” However, when you look at the list of bailouts/ money pumps it’s absolutely staggering how much money the Fed has thrown around.
Here’s a recap of some of the larger Fed moves during the Crisis:
- Cutting interest rates from 5.25-0.25% (Sept ’07-today).
- The Bear Stearns deal/ taking on $30 billion in junk mortgages (Mar ’08).
- Opening various lending windows to investment banks (Mar ’08).
- Hank Paulson spends $400 billion on Fannie/ Freddie (Sept ’08).
- The Fed takes over insurance company AIG for $85 billion (Sept ’08).
- The Fed doles out $25 billion for the automakers (Sept ’08)
- The Fed kicks off the $700 billion TARP program (Oct ’08)
- The Fed buys commercial paper from non-financial firms (Oct ’08)
- The Fed offers $540 billion to backstop money market funds (Oct ’08)
- The Fed agrees to back up to $280 billion of Citigroup’s liabilities (Oct ’08).
- $40 billion more to AIG (Nov ’08)
- The Fed backstops $140 billion of Bank of America’s liabilities (Jan ’09)
- Obama’s $787 Billion Stimulus (Jan ’09)
- QE 1 buys $1.25 trillion in Treasuries and mortgage debt (March ’09)
- QE lite buys $200-300 billion of Treasuries and mortgage debt (Aug ’10)
- QE 2 buys $600 billion in Treasuries (Nov ’10)
- Operation Twist reshuffles $400 billion of the Fed’s portfolio (Oct ’11)
- QE 3 buys $40 billion of Mortgage Backed Securities monthly (Sept ‘12)
- QE 4 buys $45 billion worth of Treasuries monthly (Dec ’12)
The Fed is not the only one. Collectively, the world’s Central Banks have pumped over $10 trillion into the financial system since 2007. This money printing has resulted in a massive expansion of Central Bank balance sheets, spread inflation into the system, and done nothing to address the key solvency issues that lead up to the great crisis.
This competitive debasement has lead to increased tension between the world’s Central Banks. You will never hear their stated outright for the simple reason that the single most important responsibility of the Central Banks is to maintain confidence in the system.
However, underneath the veneer of goodwill and the occasional necessary coordinated intervention, tensions are rising between Central Banks. When the US debases the US Dollar it pushes the Euro higher. This hurts German exports which in turn angers the Bundesbank.
The Bundesbank fired a warning shot at the Fed last autumn when it announced it wanted to have its Gold reserves at the Fed audited. To be clear here: no one of major financial import has ever questioned the Fed’s trustworthiness before. However, at the time of this announcement Germany stated it had no intentions of actually moving its reserves.
Fast-forward to today and Germany has not only audited and checked its Gold reserves at the Fed but it is now moving them. In plain terms, Germany has told the world that A) it does not trust the Fed and B) it is through playing around.
This situation will likely be getting worse going forward. The fact that Germany will be removing all of its Gold reserves from France certainly doesn’t bode well for future German French relations if push ever comes to shove (it’s not as though Europe has a history of getting along well).
Look for increased tension to grow between the world’s Central Banks in the coming months and years. This tension will likely result in:
- Economic warfare (see the recent situation in Iran)
- Political infighting
- Key players being sacrificed
Given that the financial system and economic “recovery” have been built on a house of cards, these political developments will have major impacts on the financial markets.
Outside of internal dissent, the power players in the global economy (the US, China, Japan, and Germany) are showing increasing signs of tension both internal (China and the US) as well as external (China vs. Japan, Germany vs. the US, the US vs. China).
These tensions will lead to economic warfare and very likely physical warfare in the coming years.
“I’m ready to be the first Iranian to sacrifice myself for our country’s scientists,” Ahmadinejad was quoted saying by the state-sponsored IRNA news agency.
End Of Days News
Doubtless enthused by his country’s recent success in simian orbital technology, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Monday he was ready to be the second primate his country would send into orbit.
“I’m ready to be the first Iranian to sacrifice myself for our country’s scientists,” Ahmadinejad was quoted saying by the state-sponsored IRNA news agency.
Ahmadinejad is set to retire from politics later this year after his second term in office is up.
“Sending living things to space is the result of Iranian efforts and the dedication of thousands of Iranian professional scientists,” he said, adding that “we should admit that some [powers] do not tolerate Iranian greatness and growth. Iranians have incited the devils’ hatred [because of] Iranian idealism, perfectionism, and being human.”
Iran sent a monkey into space last Monday, describing the launch a successful step toward Tehran’s plan to send an astronaut into space within the next five to six years. The monkey reportedly traveled 120 kilometers and safely returned to Earth, though there have been questions raised as to the success of the mission.
Iran’s space officials say Iran will launch a bigger rocket carrying a larger animal to obtain greater safety assurances before sending a man into space.
If Ahmadinejad is successful in his quest to be the first human astronaut sent up by Iran, he will join illustrious company: In addition to Iran’s monkey launch, which took place last Monday, in 2010 the Islamic Republic reportedly launched a rocket into space carrying a mouse, a turtle and worms.
Space tourist Anousheh Ansari was the first Iranian to make a journey into space aboard a Soyuz TMA-9 capsule from Baikonur, Kazakhastan, in September 2006. The 40-year-old telecommunications entrepreneur paid a reported $20 million for a space station visit. Her journey became an inspiration to women in male-dominated Iran.
Erdogan enlists history for another venomous attack on Israel
End Of Days News
“Those who treated the Israeli government like a spoiled child should know that
history will not forgive Israel’s state structure," said Turkish Prime Minister
Reccep Erdogan. Asked about Israeli attacks on Syrian targets, he said Iran
should first of all reconsider its attitude on Syria. Saturday, the Turkish
foreign minister “found” a secret deal between… Israel and Syria to explain why
Assad’s army did not hit back at Israeli warplanes. DEBKAfile: The Ankara
government is facing embarrassing questions about why it was left to Israel to
strike a military facility of the Assad regime, not Turkey.
NO JALILI! YOU WILL REGRET MESSING WITH GOD'S PEOPLE! Iranian security chief: Israel will regret its aggression against Syria
End Of Days News
Iran's security chief Saeed Jalili told reporters during a visit to Damascus on Monday: "Just like it regretted all its wars... the Zionist entity will regret its aggression against Syria." He was referring to the reported Israeli air strike on a military complex and vehicles near Damascus last Wednesday.
"The Syrian people and government are serious about this, and the Muslim world supports Syria," Jalili said. "Syria is at the forefront of the Muslim world's confrontation with the Zionist entity,"
Iran's security chief Saeed Jalili told reporters during a visit to Damascus on Monday: "Just like it regretted all its wars... the Zionist entity will regret its aggression against Syria." He was referring to the reported Israeli air strike on a military complex and vehicles near Damascus last Wednesday.
"The Syrian people and government are serious about this, and the Muslim world supports Syria," Jalili said. "Syria is at the forefront of the Muslim world's confrontation with the Zionist entity,"
Assad set on arms transfers to Lebanon. Israel responds with no-fly zone
End Of Days News
The Syrian ruler assured the Iranian official that he would not be deterred by what he called acts of “aggression.” It was up to Syria and Iran to put their heads together to find a safe method of getting the hardware across to Hizballah without exposing it to Israeli attack in truck convoys on the open road.
Jalilee is still in Damascus. He arrived Saturday to discuss with Syrian and Hizballah how to activate against Israel the secret mutual defense pact binding Iran, Syria, Hizballah and Hamas.
According to our sources, Israeli military tacticians believe that as winter weather starts clearing up, Syria and Iran will devise crafty methods for outwitting Israel and getting the weapons to Lebanon – for example, disassembling the missiles and launchers and disguising them as non-lethal merchandize. They could then be spirited across from Syria to Lebanon in small packages by the smuggling rings regularly operating on their common border.
Syrian ruler Bashar Assad has ordered the resumption of weapons transfers to
the Lebanese Hizballah, debkafile’s exclusive military and intelligence sources report.
This was agreed with Iran’s
National Security Director Saeed Jalilee, who arrived in Damascus after
Israel’s reported air strike last Wednesday, Jan. 30, inter alia, on Syrian
trucks preparing to ferry to Lebanon for Hizballah the sophisticated
Iran-supplied arms stored at the Jamraya military complex north of
Damascus.
The Syrian ruler assured the Iranian official that he would not be deterred by what he called acts of “aggression.” It was up to Syria and Iran to put their heads together to find a safe method of getting the hardware across to Hizballah without exposing it to Israeli attack in truck convoys on the open road.
Jalilee is still in Damascus. He arrived Saturday to discuss with Syrian and Hizballah how to activate against Israel the secret mutual defense pact binding Iran, Syria, Hizballah and Hamas.
According to our sources, Israeli military tacticians believe that as winter weather starts clearing up, Syria and Iran will devise crafty methods for outwitting Israel and getting the weapons to Lebanon – for example, disassembling the missiles and launchers and disguising them as non-lethal merchandize. They could then be spirited across from Syria to Lebanon in small packages by the smuggling rings regularly operating on their common border.
In anticipation of such tricks, the Israeli Air Force has in recent days
thrown a round-the-clock blanket over the border area. It is constantly
monitoring the traffic moving across and is ready to prevent any arms traffic.
Without going through any formalities, Israel has thus effectively imposed a
no-fly regime over a buffer zone straddling the Syrian-Lebanese border and
placed it under the control of its air force.
Israeli officials have been warning for months that the IDF will not allow
the transfer of advanced Syrian weapons – including chemical and biological
weapons – to terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda affiliated Al-Nusra Front and
Hezbollah.
Without directly confirming the Israel attack on the Jamraya
military compound, defense minister Ehud Barak told the Munich security
conference Sunday “…what happened in Syria several days ago… that’s proof that
when we said something we mean it… and we say that we don’t think it should be
allowed to bring advanced weapons systems into Lebanon.”
Israel’s actions to
this end, including over flights by its air force which are widely reported by
the Lebanese media, were undertaken after Assad was seen to be bent on testing
Israel’s resolve to prevent arms transfers to Hizballah. These transfers were
expressly prohibited under UN Security Council Resolution 1701 which ended the
Israeli-Hizballah war in 2006.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)