Friday, May 30, 2014

Brazilian Christians: “Prophetic Destiny” with Israel


Brazilian Christians: “Prophetic Destiny” with Israel

Chris Mitchell
JERUSALEM, Israel — The Bible says many nations will come up to the city of Jerusalem to worship the Lord.
That very thing took place recently when a group of Brazilians came to the Tower of David in Jerusalem's Old City to worship.

From late afternoon and throughout the evening, Brazilians gathered to celebrate the God of Israel.
Ana Paula Bessa led the worship. In her home country, she's led concerts with as many as a million people attending. She believes Brazil has a special destiny with Israel.
"I believe the Brazilian nation is arising to pray for the peace of Jerusalem," Bessa told CBN News.
Her husband, Gustaf, said many of their countrymen are coming to Israel for that very purpose.
"Many Brazilians from all over Brazil, they are coming to Israel in order to pray -- to pray for Israel and pray for Brazil in this place, in this nation," he said.
Today, the Holy Spirit is raising up prayer warriors.
"We have a big role in this because Brazil is in revival," Ana said. "And the Holy Spirit is raising up intercession on behalf of the end times."
She believes revival is changing her nation.
"Today we have almost 40 percent of the population declaring they are born again Christians, and the churches are full," she said. "The people are open to receive Jesus even on the streets."
Brazilians bring exuberance to their worship.
"The redemptive gift of Brazil, this joy, this celebration for Jesus -- and that's why we bring it to Israel because it's our redemptive gift," Gustaf said.
"We believe we have a destiny, a prophetic destiny to bless and bring the Second Coming of the Lord," Ana said.
Recommended Reading:

Monday, May 26, 2014

Did Russians in L.A. “found” Pentecostalism?


Did Russians in L.A. “found” Pentecostalism?

The editors of Leben discover history of the Molokan immigrants

By Lillian Sokoloff, A.B.
Commentary by Julio Severo: WND, or WorldNetDaily, has recently reported on the founding of Pentecostalism in America and, based on a 1918 report, probably written by a non-Pentecostal writer unfamiliar with the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit, makes the case that Russian immigrants may have been the founders of Pentecostalism in America. This is interesting for me, because today Brazil is the most Pentecostal nation in the world. The WND article begins: “American Christianity has influenced, and been influenced by, a stunning panoply of non-conformist groups, separatist enclaves and, in some cases, self-styled prophets and messiahs… We begin… with a fascinating report we’ve recently discovered, written in 1918, about a group known as the ‘Jumpers,’ or ‘Molokans,’ the former name referring specifically to an 1830s offshoot of the Molokans. Impelled by the utterances of a prophet-child, they left their native Russia by the thousands and headed for the ‘City of the Angels,’ Los Angeles, California.” The prophetic messages of a prophet-child saved them from the impending World War I and the Communist Revolution in Russia one century ago. Now read the 1918 report:
The first group of Molokans, who came here in 1905 [some date this as 1904, Ed.], settled around Bethlehem Institute on Vignes Street. When others came, a few bought homes along Clarence and Utah Streets. Then the settlement grew in the district situated between Boyle Avenue on the east and the Los Angeles River on the west, and between Aliso Street on the north and Seventh Street on the south. Recently there has been a new settlement made along what is known as Salt Lake Terrace several blocks east of the larger colony. On that street are located many of the somewhat better homes. In a hollow south of Stephenson Avenue and east of Mott Street, there is a group of about 60 houses occupied by Russians only.
To understand the Russians in Los Angeles, it is necessary to consider briefly their historical backgrounds. During the reign of Alexis Michaelovitch, second ruler of the Romanoff family – 1645-1676 – Nicon, at that time patriarch of the Russian Greek-Catholic Church, investigated and decided to change the liturgy. While the ruling house accepted these changes and formally adopted his type of worship as the state religion, there were many dissenters who would not submit to the dictates of the government in matters of religion. The dissenters were continually persecuted or banished and were greatly dissatisfied with the bureaucratic institutions, with the hypocrisy of the priesthood and with the forms of their worship. The numbers who sought other types of religion that would satisfy their deep religious feelings constantly grew.
Molokans in Russia
Prominent among the religious sects that developed were the Dukhobors, the Molokans and the Subotniks. The last-mentioned are Russians who have embraced the Jewish faith. This result was not through influence exerted on the part of Jews, however, because the Jews do not have any form of mission work for the purpose of conversion to Judaism; nor were there any Jews living in that part of Russia where these religious sects developed. The Subotniks embraced Judaism as a result of reading the Old Testament.
The essence of the Dukhobor religion is a belief in the divinity of Christ [this is contrary to modern sources, Ed.] and the brotherhood of man. The Dukhobors do not believe in any earthly representative of God; they have no church leaders and no icons or images. They do not have church ceremonies nor do they believe in saints as do the Greek Catholics. They are opposed to war and therefore to military service. Their religion forbids their indulging in the use of intoxicating liquors and in smoking.
The name “Molokan,” derived from the word “moloko,” which means milk, was first applied to them in 1765 by a religious sect in the Government of Tambov. This name was applied because of the fact that the Molokans drink milk every day in the week, while the Greek Catholics abstain from it on Wednesdays and Fridays, which are fast days for them.
The Molokans had no definite form of religion for many years. During the last years of the 17th century, two highly educated men, Skovoroda and Tveritinoff, had come under the influence of the teachings of Luther, Calvin and other European reformers. These men then preached reform among the dissenters of the Russian Greek-Catholic Church. They thus paved the way for other reformers. For about 100 years, the Molokans were unmolested by the governmental authorities.
It was not long, however, before the Russian government again began to oppress the sectarians in various ways. The heavy taxation of their land proved to be a greater burden than they could possibly bear. They were again compelled to serve in the army. Some of the more educated among them foresaw disastrous times because of inevitable wars in which Russia was to engage. They therefore began to consider the advisability of emigrating from their country.
It is well known that of the emigrants from Russia up to the end of the last century, the greatest number were Jews and a smaller percent were Poles, but scarcely any Russians proper. In the last two years of the 19th century, many of the Dukhobors left the Caucasus region and went to Western Canada, where several thousands now live. [There remains a large community in the Grand Junction area, Ed.]
The beginning of the Russo-Japanese War inaugurated a new era of persecutions for the sectarians in southeastern Russia. They were compelled to go to war. Though many were capable of occupying high military positions, they were prevented from so doing and were put to the most menial work. They also suffered all kinds of insults at the instigation of government officials. They were not permitted to go anywhere without passports – and passports were not granted them. It is therefore not surprising that these people became disgusted with conditions such as they experienced and longed to leave the country.
Of all the Russians in Los Angeles, about 75 percent of the working men were employed in lumber yards up to the outbreak of the war. Then the majority entered the ship-building industry. About 10 percent own and drive their own teams and work by the day in hauling produce and other commodities. About 2 percent are engaged in running little grocery stores and butcher shops, which are patronized by their own people. The remainder – about 13 per cent – are employed in various ways, e. g., in the metal trades, automobile shops, planing mills, fruit canneries. The last-mentioned occupations are followed by the younger men of the community, who have had some schooling but who left school as soon as the law permitted them to do so.
It is the usual thing among the Russians for the married women to work. The young women are employed chiefly in laundries. Girls who have attended school and have learned the English language work in the biscuit factories in the neighborhood. A small number of girls work in a candy factory on Utah Street. The older women work in fruit canneries or do housework by the day. Though many of the girls who have been to school for several years could do other work and perhaps earn more money, the parents are anxious to have them work near home and among their own people. Clerking or office work might cause the girls to become “Americanized” quickly, and to this the older people object.
The religion of the Molokans sprang from that of the Dukhobors. Both these sects are opposed to war. They believe in no earthly representatives of God. The Molokans have no ministers or church dignitaries of any kind. They have no rules or traditions as to who shall be their religious advisers. Their pastors are not ordained, do not receive compensation and are not dependent upon the approval of the community. Their authority prevails only at prayer meetings, marriage ceremonies and funeral services. It may be said that the Molokan religion has little definite form. It is systemless. Many of its phases are exceedingly crude. It is incoherent and inconsistent. Like the orthodox Jews, the Molokans abstain from eating pork and are supposed to slaughter their beef in a certain manner.
Molokan church in Los Angeles
There are at present seven churches in the Russian settlement. These are simply very large rooms in which church services are conducted. During holidays, some private homes are also used for religious services. The Priguni conduct their prayers in a unique manner. All pray aloud for some time, until one feels that the “spirit” has entered into him, when in a trance-like manner he comes to the center of the place of worship. The praying goes on in a sing-song loud tone of voice until one by one, every person feels the “spirit” within him.
While there are still numerous groups in the U.S. and in Canada that are direct descendants of the Molokan, Jumper and Doukhabor sects, their influence may well have been enormous on what is today generally referred to as Pentecostalism.
The Molokans, especially of the “Jumper” variety, had a long history of laying claim to modern-day manifestations of the apostolic gifts, including healings, tongues, etc. When they moved to Los Angeles, California, most settled near the lumberyard that employed many of the men, a lumberyard situated in close proximity to Azusa Street. A year after the Jumpers arrived, the “Azusa Street Revival,” considered by many to be the birthplace of American Pentecostalism, burst forth onto the American church scene. The “revival” continued with three services a day for nearly three years.
It is an established fact that many of the Russian Jumpers became a part of the Azusa Street Revival, but it remains a mystery as to whether they were converts or, after a fashion, the founders.
Recommended Reading:

Saturday, May 24, 2014

World Cup warning over child prostitution with girls as young as 11 forced to walk the streets of Brazil targeting foreign tourists for sex


World Cup warning over child prostitution with girls as young as 11 forced to walk the streets of Brazil targeting foreign tourists for sex

By Hugo Gye
Brazil faces a new epidemic of child prostitution and sex tourism in the run-up to this summer's World Cup, politicians and activists have warned.
Traffickers are reportedly recruiting young girls to work as prostitutes in the areas around the football stadiums in anticipation of a booming trade over the next few months.
Up to half a million children as young as 11 are abused with the consent of their families, and pimped out to tourists or lorry drivers.
The country's government has launched a new drive to remind visitors that child prostitution is illegal - but tourists are in fact rarely prosecuting for having sex with minors.
Fears: The World Cup is set to bring an epidemic of child prostitution to the streets of Brazil (file photo)
This week, a parliamentary commission found that child prostitution had soared in the areas around the Corinthians stadium in Sao Paulo, where the first game of the World Cup will take place on June 12.
One 13-year-old girl told the inquiry that she had been abused by a construction worker at the stadium who impregnated her, according to The Times.
'After a while he said he would take me,' she said. 'My father did not care much. It seems that for him it was good, because it was one less mouth to feed.'
Other young girls sell their bodies along one of Brazil's main highways, the BR-116, where truckers stop for sex while transporting goods on journeys which can last days.
Industry: The government is trying to crack down on prostitution but with mixed success (file photo)
Matt Roper, a British journalist, has set up a charity to help victims of trafficking on the road - many of whom are sold into prostitution by their own relatives.
'Mothers or family members have no problem taking their daughters to a roadside brothel,' he told The Times. 'It's just seen as completely normal.'
The government is attempting to crack down on the practice, with child prostitution even featuring as a major storyline in a popular soap opera.
'Every tourist who arrives in Brazil will know that the exploitation of children and juveniles is a crime,' a spokesman said earlier this month. 'He'll see it in airplanes, airports, bus and train stations and hotels.'
Threat: A report this week revealed that child prostitutes were common in the area around the Corinthians stadium in Sao Paulo, pictured
But charities are still worried that the World Cup will set the campaign backwards by increasing the number of potential customers for underage prostitutes.
'While the World Cup is a joyful time, it also exposes vulnerable young children and adolescents to violence and sexual exploitation,' said Anette Trompeter of Plan International.
'Unfortunately tourism is often linked with the sexual exploitation of children, due to an increasingly permissive atmosphere and the use of hotels at this time.'
Adriana de Morais, an activist who patrols the bars of Natal - a north-eastern city which will host four World Cup games - trying to help child prostitutes is also concerned about the effect the competition will have.
'It's a singular event that brings many people from outside, and we really worry about sexual tourism,' she told AFP.
Recommended Reading:
Traffickers Offering Flight, Hotel, World Cup — and Sex Slave — for $12,000

Monday, May 19, 2014

Exposing the Global Population Control Agenda


Exposing the Global Population Control Agenda

By Brian Clowes, Ph.D.
Comment by Julio Severo: I met Dr. Clowes some 15 years ago at a special pro-life training in Brasília, Brazil. During some days, I was able to learn from him and know his superb pro-life knowledge, which all of us need. So I am bringing you a little of his pro-life wisdom in his article on NSSM 200. If you do not know this document, you should know it, because, as says Dr. Clowes, “NSSM-200 is critically important to pro-life workers all over the world, because it completely exposes the unsavory and unethical motivations and methods of the population control movement.” Every pro-life leader in the world needs to be acquainted with it, because it is impossible to understand the current obsessive pro-abortion efforts without grasping the influence of NSSM 200. This is a must-read article. For international readers, what is striking in this heinous document is that it was issued by a Republican administration. All of us know that Democrats are pro-abortion and unrealiable when they are in power. See the example of pro-abortion Barack Obama. But are Republicans unsuspicious? Do they never collaborate in population-control schemes? Sadly, NSSM 200 shows otherwise. So whether under Democrats or Republicans, the population-control machine in the U.S. government advances. Ronald Reagan, of course, was a marvelous exception. In 1992 I was asked by a pro-life consultant in the Brazilian Senate to translate crucial portions, which were then distributed among Brazilian senators. Here is the article by Dr. Clowes:
The United States National Security Council is the highest decision-making body on foreign policy in the United States. On December 10, 1974, it promulgated a top secret document entitled National Security Study Memorandum 200, also called The Kissinger Report. Its subject was “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” This document, published shortly after the first major international population conference in Bucharest, was the result of collaboration among the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Departments of State, Defense and Agriculture.
NSSM-200 was made public when it was declassified and was transferred to the U.S. National Archives in 1990.
Although the United States government has issued hundreds of policy papers dealing with various aspects of American national security since 1974, NSSM-200 continues to be the foundational document on population control issued by the United States government. It therefore continues to represent official United States policy on population control.
NSSM-200 is critically important to pro-life workers all over the world, because it completely exposes the unsavory and unethical motivations and methods of the population control movement.

The Purpose of NSSM-200

The primary purpose of U.S.-funded population control efforts is to maintain access to the mineral resources of less-developed countries, or LDCs. NSSM-200 says that the U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries… That fact gives the U.S. enhanced interest in the political, economic, and social stability of the supplying countries. Wherever a lessening of population pressures through reduced birth rates can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resource supplies and to the economic interests of the United States.
In order to protect U.S. commercial interests, NSSM-200 cited a number of factors that could interrupt the smooth flow of materials from LDCs to the United States, including a large population of anti-imperialist youth, whose numbers must be limited by population control. The document identified 13 nations by name that would be the primary targets of U.S.-funded population control efforts.
According to NSSM-200, elements of the implementation of population control programs could include:
* the legalization of abortion;
* financial incentives for countries to increase their abortion, sterilization and contraception-use rates;
* indoctrination of children; and
* mandatory population control and coercion of other forms, such as withholding disaster and food aid unless an LDC implements population control programs.
NSSM-200 also specifically declared that the United States was to cover up its population control activities and avoid charges of imperialism by inducing the United Nations and various non-governmental organizations—specifically the Pathfinder Fund, the International Planned Parenthood Foundation (IPPF) and the Population Council—to do its dirty work.
This document, which is completely devoid of morality or ethics, has directly and inevitably encouraged atrocities and massive human rights violations in dozens of the nations of the world. Just three examples are shown below.
Peru. During the years 1995 to 1997, nearly a quarter of a million Peruvian women were sterilized as part of a program to fulfill then-president Alberto Fujimori’s family planning goals. Although this campaign was called the “Voluntary Surgical Contraception Campaign,” many of these procedures were obviously coerced. In fact, women whose underweight children were on government food programs were threatened with the withholding of this food if they refused to be sterilized, and others were kidnapped from their families and forcibly sterilized.
China. For many years, the United States government has funded the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). One of the main targets of UNFPA money is the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and its widely-criticized forced-abortion and family planning program. According to its own documents, the UNFPA has donated more than $100 million to China’s population control program; has bought and custom-designed a $12 million IBM computer complex specifically to monitor the population program; provided the technical expertise and personnel that trained thousands of Chinese population control officials; and presented China with a United Nations award for the “most outstanding population control program.”
Uganda. Uganda became the first African country to roll back its adult HIV infection rate, from 21 percent in 1991 to about six percent in 2004, a 70 percent decrease. The nation accomplished this amazing feat by discouraging condom use and by changing the behavior of the people. The population control groups could not allow this success to interfere with their inflexible template, so they aggressively undermined President Yoweri Museveni’s program. Timothy Wirth, president of the United Nations Foundation, called this highly effective program “gross negligence toward humanity.” The United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Population Services International, CARE International, and others are pushing condoms as hard as they can in Uganda, and the HIV infection rate is creeping up once again. This is perhaps the most egregious example of population control ideology trumping the science of proven HIV prevention programs.

Outline of the Population Control Strategy in NSSM-200

NSSM-200 explicitly lays out the detailed strategy by which the United States government aggressively promotes population control in developing nations in order to regulate (or have better access to) the natural resources of these countries.
The following outline shows the elements of this plan, with actual supporting quotes from NSSM-200:
The United States needs widespread access to the mineral resources of less-developed nations (quote shown above).
The smooth flow of resources to the United States could be jeopardized by LDC government action, labor conflicts, sabotage, or civil disturbances, which are much more likely if population pressure is a factor: “These types of frustrations are much less likely under conditions of slow or zero population growth.”
Young people are much more likely to challenge imperialism and the world’s power structures, so their numbers should be kept down as much as possible: “These young people can more readily be persuaded to attack the legal institutions of the government or real property of the ‘establishment,’ ‘imperialists,’ multinational corporations, or other—often foreign—influences blamed for their troubles.”
Therefore, the United States must develop a commitment to population control among key LDC leaders, while bypassing the will of their people: “The U.S. should encourage LDC leaders to take the lead in advancing family planning and population stabilization both within multilateral organizations and through bilateral contacts with other LDCs.”
The critical elements of population control implementation include:
Identifying the primary targets: “Those countries are: India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, the Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia and Colombia.”
Enlisting the aid of as many multilateral population control organizations as possible in this worldwide project, in order to deflect criticism and charges of imperialism: “The U.S. will look to the multilateral agencies, especially the U.N. Fund for Population Activities which already has projects in over 80 countries to increase population assistance on a broader basis with increased U.S. contributions.”
Recognizing that “No country has reduced its population growth without resorting to abortion.”
Designing programs with financial incentives for countries to increase their abortion, sterilization and contraception-use rates: “Pay women in the LDCs to have abortions as a method of family planning. … Similarly, there have been some controversial, but remarkably successful, experiments in India in which financial incentives, along with other motivational devices, were used to get large numbers of men to accept vasectomies.”
Concentrating on “indoctrinating” [NSSM-200’s language] the children of LDCs with anti-natalist propaganda: “Without diminishing in any way the effort to reach these adults, the obvious increased focus of attention should be to change the attitudes of the next generation, those who are now in elementary school or younger.”
Designing and instigating propaganda programs and sex-education curricula intended to convince couples to have smaller families, regardless of social or cultural considerations: “The following areas appear to contain significant promise in effecting fertility declines, and are discussed in subsequent sections … concentrating on the education and indoctrination of the rising generation of children regarding the desirability of smaller family size.”
Investigating the desirability of mandatory [NSSM-200’s language] population control programs: “The conclusion of this view is that mandatory programs may be needed and that we should be considering these possibilities now.”
Considering using coercion in other forms, such as withholding disaster and food aid unless a targeted LDC implements population control programs: “On what basis should such food resources then be provided? Would food be considered an instrument of national power? Will we be forced to make choices as to whom we can reasonably assist, and if so, should population efforts be a criterion for such assistance?”
Throughout the implementation process, the United States must hide its tracks and disguise its programs as altruistic: “There is also the danger that some LDC leaders will see developed country pressures for family planning as a form of economic or racial imperialism; this could well create a serious backlash. … The U.S. can help to minimize charges of an imperialist motivation behind its support of population activities by repeatedly asserting that such support derives from a concern with:
The right of the individual couple to determine freely and responsibly the number and spacing of children and to have information, education, and means to do so; and
The fundamental social and economic development of poor countries in which rapid population growth is both a contributing cause and a consequence of widespread poverty.”
Point (6) above cannot be emphasized enough. The motivation for population control is purely selfish. Therefore, the organizations promoting population control must engage in a massive program of deception. They must present their programs as supporting personal freedom, or as concern for the welfare of poor nations.

The Basic Question: Is Population Control Necessary?

There is growing awareness that the world “population explosion” is over or, indeed, that it never actually materialized. When the population scare began in the late 1960s, the world population was increasing at a rate of more than two percent per year. It is now increasing at less than one percent per year, and is expected to stop growing in about the year 2040, barely a generation from now.
NSSM-200 predicted that the population of the world would stabilize at about 10 to 13 billion, with some demographers predicting that the world population would balloon to as high as 22 billion people. Now we know that the population of the world will reach about eight billion, and then will begin to decline.
The worldwide application of the strategies recommended in NSSM-200 has resulted in regional population growth rates decelerating so fast that they are already causing severe economic and social problems in Europe, the former Soviet Union, Japan, Singapore and Hong Kong. Many developing nations are now aging even more rapidly than the developed world, which foretells of even more severe problems for their relatively underdeveloped economies. The developed nations had the opportunity to become rich before they became old; if a nation becomes old first, it will never become rich.
From the very beginning, the concept of a “population explosion” was an ideologically motivated false alarm specifically designed to allow rich nations to pillage the resources of the poorer nations. The resulting push for population control in LDCs has borne absolutely no positive fruit in its decades of implementation. In fact, population control ideologies and programs make it even more difficult to respond to the impending grave crisis looming in the form of a disastrous worldwide “population implosion.” It is time to begin urging families to have more children, not less, if we are to avoid a worldwide demographic catastrophe.
The first step in such a massive change in policy is, of course, to change our vision and our values. In order to do this, we must repudiate old ways of thinking and outmoded ways of accomplishing our objectives.
NSSM-200 represents the worst aspect of the “advanced” nations meddling in the most intimate affairs of lesser developed nations. It symbolizes as no other document does the face of the “ugly American.” It advocates violating the most precious freedoms and autonomy of the individual through coercive family planning programs.
NSSM-200 does not emphasize the rights or welfare of individuals or of nations, just the “right” of the United States to have unfettered access to the natural resources of developing nations. The United States and the other nations of the developed world, as well as ideologically motivated population control NGOs, should be supporting and guiding authentic economic development that allows the people of each nation to use their resources for their own benefit, thereby leading to an enhancement of human rights worldwide and healthier economies for all.
No human relationships are closer or more intimate than those found in the family. Yet the “developed” world has spent more than 45 billion dollars just since 1990 attempting to control the number of children born to families in developing nations through the widespread imposition of abortion, sterilization and birth control under the umbrella terms “family planning services” and “reproductive health.”
All that the tens of billions of dollars of population control expenditures have accomplished is to make hundreds of millions of large poor families into small poor families. If this massive amount of money had instead been put to the service of authentic economic development—better schools, drinking water, roads, health care—hundreds of millions of people would be living much better lives now.
Recommended Reading:

Tuesday, May 13, 2014

Washington Intends Russia’s Demise


Washington Intends Russia’s Demise

Comment by Don Hank: Most conservative Americans are double minded. We call that cognitive dissonance. On the one hand they understand to some extent that the NWO is evil and that its spirit has imbued Washington.
But at the same time, they see Russia as even more evil, not because they see any evidence of evil in its actions but because
1. They have long been mesmerized to regard war as sacred, something we wage because it is who we are. Freedom is not free, therefore we MUST kill people any time our government says we should. Invasion is as American as apple pie. But at the same time we often catch a glimpse of the government as our enemy. Where is reason?
2. They have been taught from their infancy that Russia is bad. NOT the Soviet Union, not communism, but Russia. In fact these same people with their blinders on 24-7 can plainly see an America becoming more and more communist every day, but for them there is comfort in that this is OUR communism. Where is reason?
3. They have seen Rocky and Rocky II and similar films depicting Russia as beady eyed monsters and part of their consciousness has been completely taken over by this Hollywood image. The NWO, which demands allegiance to American hegemony, exploits this infantile mental and emotional deficiency to the hilt, suggesting that international law is only written for others, not for us. Thus, what we did in Kosovo was righteous, but when Russia does the same thing in Crimea, it is evil. Where is reason?
Law professionals have a saying: You can’t have it both ways.
What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Lady Justice is blindfolded. All true enough, but does not apply to Russia. Fortunately, American conservatives are dealing with a campus radical in Washington and they are vaguely aware of it. If this president were a self proclaimed ‘conservative’ many of these same people who doubt US foreign policy would support any war under any circumstances, just or unjust, and would be tranquil in their consciences. McCain could lead us into war. Romney could lead us into war. Obama? Not as likely. Seen from that angle, a radical leftist president has his merits.
God has a funny way of working. These are the best of times and the worst of times.
And if the public ever wakes up, the NWO could be put to rout once and for all.
Unless, perhaps, it is perceived as the AMERICAN New World Order or the AMERICAN evil.
Don Hank

Washington Intends Russia’s Demise

By Paul Craig Roberts
Washington has no intention of allowing the crisis in Ukraine to be resolved. Having failed to seize the country and evict Russia from its Black Sea naval base, Washington sees new opportunities in the crisis.
One is to restart the Cold War by forcing the Russian government to occupy the Russian-speaking areas of present day Ukraine where protesters are objecting to the stooge anti-Russian government installed in Kiev by the American coup. These areas of Ukraine are former constituent parts of Russia herself. They were attached to Ukraine by Soviet leaders in the 20th century when both Ukraine and Russia were part of the same country, the USSR.
Essentially, the protesters have established independent governments in the cities. The police and military units sent to suppress the protesters, called “terrorists” in the American fashion, for the most part have until now defected to the protesters.
With Obama’s incompetent White House and State Department having botched Washington’s takeover of Ukraine, Washington has been at work shifting the blame to Russia. According to Washington and its presstitute media, the protests are orchestrated by the Russian government and have no sincere basis. If Russia sends in military units to protect the Russian citizens in the former Russian territories, the act will be used by Washington to confirm Washington’s propaganda of a Russian invasion (as in the case of Georgia), and Russia will be further demonized.
The Russian government is in a predicament. Moscow does not want financial responsibility for these territories but cannot stand aside and permit Russians to be put down by force. The Russian government has attempted to keep Ukraine intact, relying on the forthcoming elections in Ukraine to bring to office more realistic leaders than the stooges installed by Washington.
However, Washington does not want an election that might replace its stooges and return to cooperating with Russia to resolve the situation. There is a good chance that Washington will tell its stooges in Kiev to declare that the crisis brought to Ukraine by Russia prevents an election. Washington’s NATO puppet states would back up this claim.
It is almost certain that despite the Russian government’s hopes, the Russian government is faced with the continuation of both the crisis and the Washington puppet government in Ukraine.
On May 1 Washington’s former ambassador to Russia, now NATO’s “second-in-command” but the person who, being American, calls the shots, has declared Russia to no longer be a partner but an enemy. The American, Alexander Vershbow, told journalists that NATO has given up on “drawing Moscow closer” and soon will deploy a large number of combat forces in Eastern Europe. Vershbow called this aggressive policy deployment of “defensive assets to the region.”
In other words, here we have again the lie that the Russian government is going to forget all about its difficulties in Ukraine and launch attacks on Poland, the Baltic States, Romania., Moldova, and on the central Asian states of Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. The dissembler Vershbow wants to modernize the militaries of these American puppet states and “seize the opportunity to create the reality on the ground by accepting membership of aspirant countries into NATO.”
What Vershbow has told the Russian government is that you just keep on relying on Western good will and reasonableness while we set up sufficient military forces to prevent Russia from coming to the aid of its oppressed citizens in Ukraine. Our demonization of Russia is working. It has made you hesitant to act during the short period when you could preempt us and seize your former territories. By waiting you give us time to mass forces on your borders from the Baltic Sea to Central Asia. That will distract you and keep you from the Ukraine. The oppression we will inflict on your Russians in Ukraine will discredit you, and the NGOs we finance in the Russian Federation will appeal to nationalist sentiments and overthrow your government for failing to come to the aid of Russians and failing to protect Russia’s strategic interests.
Washington is licking its chops, seeing an opportunity to gain Russia as a puppet state.
Will Putin sit there with his hopes awaiting the West’s good will to work out a solution while Washington attempts to engineer his fall?
The time is approaching when Russia will either have to act to terminate the crisis or accept an ongoing crisis and distraction in its backyard. Kiev has launched military airstrikes on protesters in Slavyansk. On May 2 Russian government spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Kiev’s resort to violence had destroyed the hope for the Geneva agreement on de-escalating the crisis. Yet, the Russian government spokesman again expressed the hope of the Russian government that European governments and Washington will put a stop to the military strikes and pressure the Kiev government to accommodate the protesters in a way that keeps Ukraine together and restores friendly relations with Russia.
This is a false hope. It assumes that the Wolfowitz doctrine is just words, but it is not. The Wolfowitz doctrine is the basis of US policy toward Russia (and China). The doctrine regards any power sufficiently strong to remain independent of Washington’s influence to be “hostile.” The doctrine states:
“Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.”
The Wolfowitz doctrine justifies Washington’s dominance of all regions. It is consistent with the neoconservative ideology of the US as the “indispensable” and “exceptional” country entitled to world hegemony.
Russia and China are in the way of US world hegemony. Unless the Wolfowitz doctrine is abandoned, nuclear war is the likely outcome.
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts' latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West and How America Was Lost.
Recommended Reading:
Putin Doesn’t Threaten Our National Security, Obama Does

Saturday, May 10, 2014

Russia Bans Profanity — Why Don’t We?


Russia Bans Profanity — Why Don’t We?

Bryan Fischer
Vladimir Putin is making news again, this time by banning foul language in Russia. According to CNN, he signed off this week on a new law that “bans swearing at arts, cultural and entertainment events” in the country. In the Kremlin’s words, the new measure “bans the use of obscene language.” While Putin is wrong on Ukraine, he’s right on profanity.
You make a film with obscene language in Russia, you won’t even be able to show it in a theater. Books, CDs and DVDs that contain profanity will have to be distributed in a sealed package with a visible warning label.
Violators are subject to fine of $70, while potty-mouthed officials can be dinged to the tune of $40 and businesses that are guilty can face fines of up to $1400.
The new law, scheduled to go into effect on July 1, echoes the prohibition against blasphemy found in the Ten Commandments (“You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain”) and will provide another example in which Russia’s public policy conforms more closely to biblical standards than Christian America.
Could a similar ban be instituted in the United States without violating the First Amendment? Of course. The free speech plank of the First Amendment was intended by the Founders to protect political speech, not profanity, vulgarity, obscenity or pornography.
The Founders were eager to ensure that the new republic would be characterized by robust political dialogue on all matters of public policy. All would be free to inject their ideas and convictions into public debate without fear that they would be censored and silenced by a draconian central government.
But the Founders would be aghast at the thought that anyone, anywhere, at any time would think they were crafting a document intended to allow the unlimited use of the F-bomb in polite society. If states want to ban foul language in public, under the Constitution as written (not as mangled by the courts) they are perfectly free to do so.
George Washington was known for prohibiting the use of profanity in his military. Said our first commander-in-chief and father of our country, “The foolish and wicked practice of profane cursing and swearing is a vice so mean and low that every person of sense and character detests and despises it.”
As General George Washington, he issued the following general order (not a recommendation, you will note):
The General is sorry to be informed that the foolish and wicked practice of profane cursing and swearing, a vice hitherto little known in our American Army is growing into fashion. He hopes that the officers will, by example as well as influence, endeavor to check it and that both they and the men will reflect that we can little hope of the blessing of Heaven on our army if we insult it by our impiety and folly. Added to this it is a vice so mean and low without any temptation that every man of sense and character detests and despises it. (Emphasis mine.)
At the time the First Amendment was enacted, there were laws against public profanity and blasphemy in every one of the original states, either by statute or common law. The Founders quite obviously saw no contradiction between the First Amendment and laws against profanity, for the simple reason that the Amendment was about protecting political speech, not gutter talk.
Massachusetts still has a law on its books – you could look it up – that prohibits blasphemy against God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit and the Scriptures.
It reads:
Section 36. Whoever wilfully blasphemes the holy name of God by denying, cursing or contumeliously reproaching God, his creation, government or final judging of the world, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching or exposing to contempt and ridicule, the holy word of God contained in the holy scriptures shall be punished by imprisonment in jail for not more than one year or by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars, and may also be bound to good behavior.
To give another example, Pennsylvania’s law against profanity was drawn up by James Wilson, a signer of the Constitution and one of the original justices of the Supreme Court.
And in 1811, while the ink was barely dry on the First Amendment, the New York Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a man who had publicly proclaimed that “Jesus Christ was a bastard, and his mother must be a whore.”
Such laws were rarely enforced because they were rarely needed. But they were there because there are occasions in which public eruptions of vulgarity need to be restrained for the public good.
There are de facto prohibitions against swearing that governments enforce all the time. Profanity is will be punished in the classrooms of our government schools, for instance, and decorum does not allow profanity in legislative assemblies without severe repercussions. Try cussing out a cop and see what happens.
Few would doubt that a profanity-free culture would be better than the one we have now. As AFA’s president Tim Wildmon has pointed out, nobody walks out of a movie saying, “You know, that movie would have been so much better if they’d only thrown more cussing in there.”
The point here is not to advocate for any particular expression of this principle. The point here is that if want to ban profanity, we can. In the name of free speech, let the discussion begin.
Recommended Reading: