View allAll Photos Tagged US.GOV
Actually a hilarious line from a prank conspiracy theory, that birds are part of a US gov surveillance operation - if it flies it spies 😂
Greenwood Cemetery
Montgomery, AL
The Wallace Legacy
www.archives.state.al.us/govs_list/g_walllu.html
Little know facts about George Wallace
San Francisco et le Bay Bridge depuis Yerba Buena Island.
S'il y a bien une chose à savoir sur ce point de vue, c'est qu'il est un peu difficile d'accès et qu'il n'est pas possible de se garer sur Yerba Buena Island.
Globalement, pour m'y rendre, je me suis garé sur Treasure Island (pas de difficulté pour trouver de la place) et me suis rendu ensuite à pieds jusqu'au dessus du spot. Attention, il n'y a pas de trottoir et les gens roulent assez vite. Après une vingtaine de minutes de marche, je commence à apercevoir ce point de vue mais depuis la route, il m'est impossible de faire la moindre photo : il y a des arbres partout et il faut donc envisager de descendre.
Les choses sérieuses commencent : ça descend à pic et des panneaux "US Gov. No trepassing" sont visibles un peu partout... Je suis finalement descendu par un chemin sans aucun panneau d'interdiction visible, histoire de pouvoir me justifier au cas où. Je n'étais pas tranquille pour autant et à chaque passage des gardes-côtes ou d'un hélicoptère, je me cachais sous les arbres afin d'éviter tout problème. Après une demi-heure de recherche pour descendre en évitant les falaises, j'ai finalement réussi à trouver une petite plage avec un point de vue satisfaisant.
J'aurais préféré être un peu plus haut pour ma photo, mais je n'ai rien trouvé d'autre sans végétation. Le coucher du soleil approchant, je n'avais plus le choix, il fallait m'installer pour ma prise de vue. Une heure plus tard (et quelques frayeurs plus tard à chaque passage de bateau près de ma petite plage), j'avais enfin terminé mes prises de vue et je pouvais repartir.
La nuit était tombée mais heureusement, j'ai toujours une lampe de poche et une gourde sur moi. Sans ça, je pense qu'il m'aurait été impossible de remonter. J'ai bien mis 45 minutes à retrouver la route, parfois en rampant et m'accrochant aux plantes. C'était difficile... En sortant des buissons vers la route, j'ai même un peu effrayé quelques photographes, j'étais couvert de terre et à bout de souffle.
Mon conseil pour aller sur ce point de vue : prendre de l'eau, une lampe torche et surtout, ne pas y aller seul. :)
Read more at ReannaLily Designs
This is the inside of my new Military Monster bag. *It can hold everything for your little monster!*
Fabrics by Heather Bailey and the US Gov't. =)
A closer shot of the same fence and flowers seen in my "zee corner" photo from a few weeks ago. Posted for Smile on Saturday - flowers in a vertical photo theme.
I'll be mostly off flickr for the next several weeks. Heading to the 53rd reunion of our Peace Corps group [PC is a US gov volunteer program]. We've decided to drive so that we can visit some family and friends on the way there and back. And, hubby just might be doing some fishing too. Stay safe and well - see you when I get back.
Read more at ReannaLily Designs
This is the outside of my new Military Monster bag. *It can hold everything for your little monster!*
Fabrics by Heather Bailey and the US Gov't. =)
Found in a large group of US Gov't photos I just purchased. Official photo on a brand new truck, 1964 model.
The shot you see here is the shot that almost didn’t happen. Having to travel to California for work I decided, to take a few days vacation and enjoy the California landscapes. After my work was completed I rented a car and spent the next 5 days wandering the high deserts and Death Valley National Park. What you see here is the Trona Pinnacles. Similar to the tufa formations of Mono Lake only these rise out of the dry Searles Lake and stretch a bit further into the sky. I arrived at the site a mere minutes before sunset and I’ll explain why:
On my way in the late afternoon, I had plugged the coordinates into the GPS from my last trip to Cali. In a fashion that only GPS can do, I tried to find the shortest route to the site. Realizing I had turned a bit to early than I remember on my last trip I decided to go with it and see if there really was a shorter route, which there wasn’t. Enamored by the rugged desert landscape I was paying minimal attention to the state of my driving. I really shouldn’t have been a big problem there was nobody on the road, it was the middle of the desert… not a house, nor a person, was to be seen for at least 15 miles in either direction. Well, once again as luck would have it, I saw a white truck heading toward me on this lonesome desert road. No big deal I think to myself.
Once the truck passed I decided it was time to turn around as I wasn’t going to find that shortcut. So I do a U-turn and make my way back up to the highway but, wait a minute, there’s that truck again behind me. Odd… he did a U-turn and is now following me. So now I’m a little concerned and when I finally reach the highway I make my way in the original direction I traveled before. The truck behind me paused for many seconds then turned the other way. What happened next still befuddles me because 2 minutes down the highway the wrath of the US Navy fell upon me. First, I see a white SUV screaming up behind me, lights blazing, and sirens blasting. Then as if out of nowhere I see at in front of me yet another. By this time I’m pulled over and the second SUV whips up right across the front of my rental. OH CRAP!!! I didn’t have a clue what was happening…do they really send this many for a speeder. I was going 70 in a 55…like the others on that highway, I admit it. The first officer asks for my license, registration, and insurance and briskly returns to his vehicle. Almost as soon as he walks away two more SUV’s pull up, completely boxing me in. So now there are a total of four vehicle loads of “police” surrounding me.
When the officer returns with my identification he asks for a field sobriety test to which I immediately oblige. “Follow my finger with your eyes but don’t turn your head,” the officer states. This was then followed by a myriad of questions concerning drug use, prescription medications, drinking (again) to which he then leaves for his vehicle again. In the mean time I gather my composure enough to realize he’s not a police officer per say, the SUV parked across my hood had US Gov’t license plates and a big logo saying “US Dept. Navy, Security Forces”. At this point I was shaking like a leaf, he clearly said he was a "police officer". Previously in the day I was at March Air Reserve Base working on some engineering issues they had with, of all things, security. At this point I’m now paranoid. Did they know I was on base earlier and were they going to hall me in for questioning? I never mentioned my location previously in the day to the officer so I still don’t know what would have happened. Finally satisfied I wasn’t high as a kite or drunk the officer explained to me that I was traveling on a federally restricted road and the area I was in was China Lake. If you folks don’t know China Lake is a bombing run and home to the Navy’s only electronic combat simulation range. Of all the miles of road leading up to this site there wasn't a single sign noting it's significance or of the impending area I was approaching. The officer then finally left me to go on my own free will after a chuckle and friendly statement of, “We’re just glad you’re safe”
It’s been awhile since I’ve posted my last shot. As some of you may remember I forgot my tripod along a park road several weeks back and it subsequently was stolen. As luck would have it I also needed to travel to California for work. Usually, when I get the opportunity to travel I try and spend a few days wandering to see what the landscape has to offer. Bummed I would have no tripod at all I bit the bullet and bought the new gear. OUCH! After some fast and furious research I decided to go with Really Right Stuff, a BH-55 Ballhead with lever release, the TVC-34L Carbon Fiber Tripod, a new camera L-bracket, and lens plates. Let me tell you this is a serious tripod that is built like a Sherman tank and the ballhead is like silk. I just hope I don't forget this one somewhere!
Brand new truck purchased by the US Gov't and used to transport light bulldozers. Note the Buick Skylark in back.
"Chinese socialism is founded upon Darwin and the theory of evolution." Mao Tse-tung (1893 – 1976). Kampf um Mao's Erbe (1977.)
Some of the famous atheists in the atheist Hall of Shame.
Stalin, Marx, Lenin, Kim Jong IL, Mao, Kim Jong Un, Pol Pot, Kruschev, Brezhnev, Honecker, Ceaușescu
Atheism proved itself, in the 20th century, to be the most horrendous, barbaric, murderous and criminal ideology the world has ever experienced. Countless millions suffered and died at the hands of this hideous ideology, they must never be forgotten.
The promised atheist/socialist utopia ... the idea of an atheist Heaven on Earth resulted in a diabolical Hell on Earth.
Who, but a complete idiot would want to resurrect such a monstrous, no-hope philosophy?
Present day, so-called 'new' (improved?) atheists (and communists) try to disassociate themselves from the disastrous record of the world's, first ever, official, atheist states, established in the great, atheist experiment of the 20th century.
But all the examples we have of official, atheist rule are horrendous. And, the tyranny still continues, wherever atheism is the dominant, ruling ideology, as in North Korea.
The ‘new’ atheists try to blame the 20th century’s persecution and brutality completely on communism. They claim it had nothing to do with atheism.
But, although communism is a disastrous economic system, there is no intrinsic reason why it should be brutal, or why it should hate religion, or why it should destroy churches and persecute and murder millions of Christians and people of other faiths.
That is the hallmark of atheist ideology, not of an economic system.
Communism is fatally flawed as an economic system. And, as it thrives on envy, class hatred and division, it is a an anathema to Christianity, and any other religion which preaches love for everyone. Consequently, it is the ideal bedfellow for atheism, but that is different from requiring an intrinsic hatred of God and religion as a matter of state, endorsed policy. That is essentially an atheist ideal.
If communists weren't atheists, why would they outlaw and attack all religion? Karl Marx, the founder of communism, hated religion, because he was also an atheist. He understood that communist, dialectic materialism, class war etc. is incompatible with most religions, so, it could be argued, that to be a bona fide communist, he also had be an atheist.
Lenin was a self-declared atheist who, together with his Soviet Bloc, atheist successors, tried to eliminate religion with brutal repression and wholesale murder.
Thus, history tells us that the atheist experiment has been tried and, from beginning to end, was a brutal and diabolical failure. The new atheists may say: “it's nothing to do with us gov.”
But who wants to risk such devastation again, by giving the atheist ideology another chance? Only a complete idiot would want to take that gamble.
However, it was only to be expected and it could easily have been predicted beforehand, that the inevitable result of atheism's lack of an absolute ethical or moral yardstick would be to wreak havoc on the world - and that is exactly what it did. .
Atheism hasn't changed at all in that respect, because it can't.
Atheism and secular humanism categorically reject the concept of intrinsic right and wrong. Therefore, the ephemeral values, moral relativism and situational ethics of atheism are the ideal recipe for abuse.
We can see from the belligerent, intolerant, rabble rousing rhetoric and anti-religious ranting of today's militant, new atheist zealots, that the leopard hasn't really changed its spots. Let no one doubt it - atheism has an horrendous and hideously, barbaric record... we must never let it happen again.
Moreover, it is a singularly perverse ideology that motivates its adherents to waste so much time of the only life they believe they have, trying to convince everyone else that they are doomed to eternal oblivion. The ultimate reward for atheists is to never know if they got it right, only if they got it wrong.
There is certainly no moral or rational defence for the atheist cult, past or present.
But what do atheists themselves say about their ethical and moral values?
They claim that they DO have an ethical and moral yardstick, and cite the Humanist Manifesto as representing the ethics and moral code of atheism.
So is it really true?
The Humanist Manifesto looks good at first glance, but like most proposals atheists have come up with, when examined closely, it is full of holes.
Problems, problems ....
1. You don’t have to sign up to the Humanist Manifesto to be an atheist.
2. Even if you do sign up to it, there is no incentive to follow it. No reward for following it, and no penalty for not following it. You are not going to be barred from being an atheist because you reject or break the rules of the Humanist Manifesto. It is not enforced in any way.
3. It borrows any desirable ethics, it may have, from Judeo-Christian values, there is no atheist, moral code per se.
Atheism is the ideology of naturalism. Genuine, naturalist, ethical values are basically the Darwinian, ‘law of the jungle’. Progressive evolution and improvement through the survival of the fittest/strongest, and the elimination of any who are weaker or unable to adapt - nature red in tooth and claw, In societal terms - the most powerful, wealthiest, most influential, most cunning, dominate and rule for their own benefit. Anything else in the Humanist Manifesto is actually a contradiction of social Darwinism and naturalism. Any socially desirable or compassionate ethics, which may be included in the H.M, are wholly inconsistent with atheist, materialist, naturalist, and evolutionist ideology.
4. By far the biggest flaw in the Humanist Manifesto is the fact that it is entirely ephemeral. It advocates 'situational ethics' and 'moral relativism'. And that major flaw makes it a worthless scrap of paper.
Why?
Because .....
Situational ethics is based on what people want or find desirable, not on any adherence to what is intrinsically right or wrong.
A good, example of humanist style, situational ethics in practice, is the gender selection abortions now being blatantly carried out in abortion clinics in Britain. It primarily discriminates against female babies, who are especially targeted for killing, because most of the parents who want it, prefer to have boys for cultural reasons.
The abortion clinics openly admit to it happening, and claim it is legal.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pro-choice-aborti...
The abortion act of 1967 certainly did not intend that, and the Government admits it was not intended.
So we have a Government that knows it is going on, it also knows it is not what the abortion law intended, yet it is still reluctant to do anything about it.
Why?
Because it is wedded to the secularist concept of situational ethics, i.e. whatever people want, people get. Any concept of intrinsic right and wrong has to take a back seat, to whatever is the spirit of the times. And that is an example happening right now, in a so-called democracy.
The Nazi persecution of the Jews and other races they considered ‘inferior’ became popular through brainwashing of the public, and was eventually supported by a good proportion of the public.
Hitler cleverly used situational ethics to do what he had persuaded people was right and good.
So, all in all, the Humanist Manifesto and its purported ethical values, is a very dangerous document.
It gives carte blanche to any so-called ethical values, as long they become the fashionable or consensus opinion. Whatever people want, people get, or what a government can claim people want, they are justified in giving to them.
And for that reason it would not stop; a Lenin, a Stalin, a Hitler, a Mao, or a Pol Pot, even if they had signed up 100% to abide by the Humanist Manifesto.
In fact, the 20th century, atheist tyrants even called their regimes ... Democratic People's Republics. They claimed they were representing people's wishes, and thus carried out their 'situational ethics' on behalf of the people.
What about the common, atheist tactic of highlighting alleged crimes and wrongdoing committed by Christians?
The point is ....
Christians who do wrong, go against the teachings of Christianity. It is recognised as ‘sin’. If they blatantly and deliberately go against the intrinsic moral values and teaching of Christianity, they forfeit the right to continue to call themselves Christian. And they can even be excommunicated by the Church, if they fail to admit their actions are wrong.
And, without sincere sorrow and repentance, they don't get to go to the Christian Heaven.
End of story!
Atheists who do wrong, go against nothing, unless it is against the law of the land.
You cannot be chucked out of atheism for doing wrong, you cannot even be censored by atheism for doing wrong, it is a complete free for all, you can simply act with impunity according to your own desires and opinion. Atheists don’t recognise sin, right and wrong is not intrinsic or absolute. Atheism has no, unchanging, moral code. Right and wrong is, ultimately, just a matter of opinion
The atheist 'heaven' is right here on earth, and far from being a 'heaven' it is an horrendous nightmare. Anyone with any sense would call it a hell.
And even the law of the land need not stop atheists .....
Whenever, atheists get into a position of power they change the law to suit their situational ethics. Then they can do whatever they want.
That is what Stalin and all the other atheist tyrants did in their people's DEMOCRATIC republics.
And the atheist thirst for blood does not cease when they live in the so-called 'real' democracies, it is simply sanitised by atheist inspired, situational ethics.
They use their 'humanist' ethics to change the law, accompanied by 'newspeak' and propaganda.
So that what was once considered evil, is not only made legal, it is actually turned around so it is considered a virtue.
The wholesale and brutal slaughter, of the most vulnerable in society ... millions of unborn babies, is callously shrugged off as necessary, for 'free choice'.
Of course murder is always a free choice for the killer, only the dangerous, warped, atheist style, situational ethics could value a killer's free choice to kill, above the victim's right not to be killed, and make murder legal.
The callous slaughter of the unborn, which in most cases, was not even put to the people democratically (it was imposed on them by a handful of secularist politicians, lawyers and bureaucrats), is accompanied by the usual atheist lies and devious propaganda.
Doctors acting illegally over abortions get off scot-free ....
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2609950/Scandal-doctors-...
So the secularists simply laugh off democracy, it doesn't stop them, if it gets in the way of their ideology, they just ignore it, like they do with science.
"Democratic societies" how do they impact on situational ethics?
We see, in practice, that democracy is treated with utter contempt .....
Why ask the people? They are apparently not qualified to consider such difficult matters of right and wrong, like whether babies should live or die? You can't give those ignorant peasants, plebs and rednecks a vote on it, ... leave it to the secularist EXPERTS and their wonderful, situational ethics based on 'reason' and 'science'.
We are told by atheist moralists that the unborn baby is not fully human, it is only a blob of jelly, which has, and deserves, NO rights. As usual, they deliberately ignore, or twist, the scientific facts.
And we are also told, anyone who supports the rights of the unborn babies not to be brutally ripped limb from limb is evil and a ‘far right’ fanatic, because they are interfering with free CHOICE.
So the atheist leopard certainly hasn't changed its deceitful, devious, brutal and murderous spots, even in so-called 'real' democratic societies. It simply legalises and sanitises evil and murder and makes it appear good.
Then it can claim atheism is extremely ethical and virtuous, with its own, beautiful, humanist code of morals and conduct .... Yeah Right!
Remind you of anyone?
Always remember ....
Atheist/humanist so-called ethics and morals depend entirely on OPINION, and that is why they are so extremely dangerous.
Atheism has no moral or ethical yardstick, no concept of God-given, human rights ... only OPINION.
But WHOSE opinion?
My opinion?
Your opinion?
Or maybe Richard Dawkins opinion?
Or Sam Harris's opinion?
Or how about Barrack Obama's opinion?
Or why not STALIN'S or POL POT'S opinion?
So don't be fooled by the relentless chorus from the 'new' atheists and humanists, that atheism has its own code of ethics and morals, their code of ethics is based on the OPINION of one or more of the following ... whoever is: the most vociferous, the most charismatic, the most cunning, the most influential, the most powerful, the wealthiest, the most successful propagandist, the most persuasive, the most repressive, or the most brutal.
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/14797003191
_________________________________.
Unjust laws/evil laws (such as legalised abortion) are effectively null and void. They should not be accepted by any right-thinking person. In any just society, the legalisation of abortion has to be regarded as a crime against humanity, and those guilty will surely be held to account by a more enlightened society.
“civil law cannot contradict right reason without losing its binding force on conscience. Every humanly-created law is legitimate insofar as it is consistent with the natural moral law, recognized by right reason, and insofar as it respects the inalienable rights of every person”. —St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I-II, q. 95, a. 2.w
Why satanism is now on the center stage in the culture war.
www.crisismagazine.com/2019/why-satanism-is-now-on-the-ce...
EUbabel. The shocking occult symbolism of the European Union.
peuplesobservateursblog.wordpress.com/2017/09/23/togo-all...
I have added an Apollo translation controller (left) and rotation controllers (Block I center and Block II on right) to the Command Module couch. They easily snapped into place.
This Block II design was manufactured in May 1968, and carries Serial Numbers 1 and 2 (marking plates in photos below).
From the NASA Technical Note: "The Block II couch consisted of three individual body supports that were attached by pip pins and clamps to a supporting framework. The body supports could be folded at the hip joint and knee joint, had provisions for locking the seat pan at two angles other than that of the folded position, were capable of being folded at approximately the shoulder position, and could be detached from the framework for storage. The body supports also could be detached and folded in flight by a crewman in a pressurized space suit. As in the case of side-hatch EVA, the center body support is detached and stowed under the couch of the spacecraft commander. The headrest was adjustable in flight for any size crewman and for any pressure-suit condition. The backpan portion of the body support was constructed of Teflon-coated fiber glass, which would conform to the crewman for comfortable support. Restraint of the crewman was the same as in the Apollo 7 couch with the six-point harness and the passive heel restraint."
"Chinese socialism is founded upon Darwin and the theory of evolution." Mao Tse-tung (1893 – 1976). Kampf um Mao's Erbe (1977.)
To people who hate the truth, the truth looks like hate...
Atheism and its humanist ethics.
Atheism proved itself, in the 20th century, to be the most horrendous, barbaric, murderous and criminal ideology the world has ever experienced. Many millions suffered and died at the hands of this hideous ideology, they must never be forgotten.
The promised atheist/socialist utopia ... the idea of an atheist Heaven on Earth resulted in a diabolical Hell on Earth.
Who, but a complete idiot would want to resurrect such a monstrous, no-hope philosophy?
The so-called 'new' (improved?) atheists try to disassociate themselves from the disastrous record of the world's first ever, official, atheist states of the 20th century's, great, atheist experiment.
But there is no other example to go by.
They even try to blame the persecution and brutality on communism, and claim it had nothing to do with atheism.
But communism, per se, is an economic system, there is no compelling reason why it should be brutal, or why it should hate religion, or why it should destroy churches and persecute and murder millions of Christians and people of other faiths.
That is the hallmark of atheism, not communism.
Of course communism is a fatally flawed, economic system which thrives on envy and class hatred, but that is not the same as specifically hating God and religion. That is the unique trait of atheism.
If the communists weren't also atheists, why would they have outlawed and attacked all religion?
Lenin was a self-declared atheist who, together with his Soviet Bloc, atheist successors, tried to eliminate religion with brutal repression and wholesale murder.
Thus, history tells us that the atheist experiment has been tried and, from beginning to end, was a brutal and diabolical failure. The new atheists may say: “it's nothing to do with us gov.”
But who wants to risk such devastation again, by giving the atheist ideology another chance? Only a complete fool would want to take that gamble.
However, it was only to be expected and it could easily have been predicted beforehand, that the inevitable result of atheism's lack of an absolute ethical or moral yardstick would be to wreak havoc on the world - and that is exactly what it did. .
Atheism hasn't changed at all in that respect, because it can't.
Atheism and secular humanism categorically reject the concept of intrinsic right and wrong. Therefore, the ephemeral values, moral relativism and situational ethics of atheism are the ideal recipe for abuse.
We can see from the belligerent, intolerant, rabble rousing rhetoric and anti-religious ranting of today's militant, new atheist zealots, that the leopard hasn't really changed its spots. Let no one doubt it - atheism has an horrendous and hideously, barbaric record... we must never let it happen again.
Moreover, it is a singularly perverse ideology that motivates its adherents to waste so much time of the only life they believe they have, trying to convince everyone else that they are doomed to eternal oblivion. The ultimate reward for atheists is to never know if they got it right, only if they got it wrong.
There is certainly no moral, rational or scientific defence for the atheist cult, past or present.
But what do atheists themselves say about their ethical and moral values?
They claim that they DO have an ethical and moral yardstick, and cite the Humanist Manifesto as representing the ethics and moral code of atheism.
So is it really true?
The Humanist Manifesto may look good at first glance, but like most proposals atheists have come up with, when examined closely, it is full of holes.
Problems, problems ....
1. You don’t have to sign up to the Humanist Manifesto to be an atheist.
2. Even if you do sign up to it, there is no incentive to follow it. No reward for following it, and no penalty for not following it. You are not going to be barred from being an atheist because you reject or break the rules of the Humanist Manifesto. It is not enforced in any way.
3. It borrows any desirable ethics, it may appear to have, from Judeo-Christian values, there is no atheist, moral code per se.
Atheism is the ideology of naturalism. Genuine, naturalist, ethical values are basically the Darwinian, ‘law of the jungle’. Progressive evolution and improvement through the survival of the fittest/strongest, and the elimination of any who are weaker or unable to adapt - nature red in tooth and claw, In societal terms - the most powerful, wealthiest, most influential, most cunning, dominate and rule for their own benefit. Anything else in the Humanist Manifesto is actually a contradiction of social Darwinism and naturalism. Any socially desirable or compassionate ethics, which may be included in the H.M, are wholly inconsistent with atheist, materialist, naturalist, and evolutionist ideology.
4. By far the biggest flaw in the Humanist Manifesto is the fact that it is entirely ephemeral. It advocates 'situational ethics' and 'moral relativism'. And that major flaw makes it a worthless scrap of paper.
Why?
Because .....
Situational ethics is based on what people want or find desirable, not on any adherence to what is intrinsically right or wrong.
A good, example of humanist style, situational ethics in practice, is the gender selection abortions now being blatantly carried out in abortion clinics in Britain. It primarily discriminates against female babies, who are especially targeted for killing, because most of the parents who want it, prefer to have boys for cultural reasons.
The abortion clinics openly admit to it happening, and claim it is legal.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pro-choice-aborti...
The abortion act of 1967 certainly did not intend that, and the Government admits it was not intended.
So we have a Government that knows it is going on, it also knows it is not what the abortion law intended, yet it is still reluctant to do anything about it.
Why?
Because it is wedded to the secularist concept of situational ethics, i.e. whatever people want, people get. Any concept of intrinsic right and wrong takes a back seat, to whatever is the spirit of the times. And that is an example happening right now, in a so-called democracy.
The Nazi persecution of the Jews and other races they considered ‘inferior’ became popular through brainwashing of the public, and was eventually supported by a good proportion of the public.
So, Hitler cleverly used situational ethics to do what he had persuaded people was right and good.
All in all, the Humanist Manifesto and its purported ethical values, is a very dangerous document.
It gives carte blanche to any so-called, ethical values, if they become the fashionable or consensus opinion. Whatever people want, people get, or even worse, what a government decides the people want, they can claim they are justified in giving them.
And for that reason it would not stop; a Lenin, a Stalin, a Hitler, a Mao, or a Pol Pot, even if they had signed up 100% to abide by the Humanist Manifesto.
In fact, the 20th century, atheist tyrants even called their regimes ... Democratic People's Republics. They claimed they were representing people's wishes, and were carrying out their 'situational ethics' on behalf of the people.
What about the common, atheist tactic of highlighting alleged crimes and wrongdoing committed by Christians?
The point is ....
Christians who do wrong, go against the teachings of Christianity. If they blatantly and deliberately go against the intrinsic moral values and teaching of Christianity, they have no right to continue to call themselves Christian. And they can even be excommunicated by the Church, if they fail to admit their actions are wrong.
And, without sincere repentance, they don't get to go to the Christian Heaven.
End of story!
Atheists who do wrong, go against nothing, unless it is against the law of the land.
You cannot be chucked out of atheism for doing wrong, you cannot even be censored by atheism for doing wrong, it is a complete free for all, you can simply act with impunity according to your own desires and opinion.
The atheist 'heaven' is right here on earth, and far from being a 'heaven' it is an horrendous nightmare. Anyone with any sense would call it a hell.
And even the law of the land need not stop atheists .....
Whenever, atheists get into a position of power they change the law to suit their situational ethics. Then they can do whatever they want.
That is what Stalin and all the other atheist tyrants did in their people's DEMOCRATIC republics.
And the atheist thirst for blood does not cease when they live in the so-called 'real' democracies, it is simply sanitised by atheist inspired, situational ethics.
They use their 'humanist' ethics to change the law, accompanied by 'newspeak' and propaganda.
So that what was once considered evil, is not only made legal, it is actually turned around so it is considered a virtue.
The wholesale and brutal slaughter, of the most vulnerable in society ... millions of unborn babies, is callously shrugged off as necessary, for 'free choice'.
Of course murder is always a free choice for the killer, only the dangerous, warped, atheist style, situational ethics could value a killer's free choice to kill, above the victim's right not to be killed, and make murder legal.
The callous slaughter of the unborn, which in most cases, was not even put to the people democratically (it was imposed on them by a handful of secularist politicians, lawyers and bureaucrats), is accompanied by the usual atheist lies and devious propaganda.
Doctors acting illegally over abortions get off scot-free ....
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2609950/Scandal-doctors-...
So the secularists simply laugh off democracy, it doesn't stop them, if it gets in the way of their ideology, they just ignore it, like they do with science.
"Democratic societies" how do they impact on situational ethics?
We see, in practice, that democracy is treated with utter contempt .....
Why ask the people? They are apparently not qualified to consider such difficult matters of right and wrong, like whether babies should live or die? You can't give those ignorant peasants, plebs and rednecks a vote on it, ... leave it to the secularist EXPERTS and their wonderful, situational ethics based on 'reason' and 'science'.
Contrary to the scientific facts, we are told by atheist moralists that the unborn baby is not fully human, it is only a blob of jelly, which has, and deserves, NO rights.
And we are also told, anyone who supports the rights of the unborn babies not to be brutally ripped limb from limb is evil, because they are interfering with free CHOICE.
So the atheist leopard certainly hasn't changed its lying, devious, brutal and murderous spots, even in so-called 'real' democratic societies. It simply legalises and sanitises evil and murder and makes it appear good.
Then it can claim atheism is extremely ethical and virtuous, with its own, beautiful, humanist code of morals and conduct .... Yeah Right!
Remind you of anyone?
Some even have the barefaced audacity to describe their situational ethics with the slogan “Good without God”.
Always remember ....
Atheist/humanist so-called ethics and morals depend entirely on OPINION, and that is why they are so extremely dangerous.
Atheism has no moral or ethical yardstick, no concept of God-given, human rights ... only OPINION.
But WHOSE opinion?
My opinion?
Your opinion?
Maybe Richard Dawkins’ opinion?
Or Christopher Hitchens’ opinion?
Or Sam Harris's opinion?
Or how about Barrack Obama's opinion?
Or why not STALIN'S or POL POT'S opinion?
So don't be fooled by the relentless chorus from the 'new' atheists and humanists, that atheism has its own code of ethics and morals, their code of ethics is based on the OPINION of one or more of the following ... whoever (singly, or as a pressure group or lobby) is: the most vociferous, the most charismatic, the most cunning, the most influential, the most powerful, the most devious, the wealthiest, the most successful propagandist, the most persuasive, or the most brutal.
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/14797003191
_________________________________________
…civil law cannot contradict right reason without losing its binding force on conscience. Every humanly-created law is legitimate insofar as it is consistent with the natural moral law, recognized by right reason, and insofar as it respects the inalienable rights of every person. —St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I-II, q. 95, a. 2.
EUbabel. The shocking occult symbolism of the European Union.
peuplesobservateursblog.wordpress.com/2017/09/23/togo-all...
Whether Edward Snowden is a “hero” is up for debate, but what the NSA PRISM whistleblower did achieve is providing evidence which many have suspected—that the US government is mining valuable data on the Internet.
Big data analysis is nothing new—companies who provide free internet services have been doing this for years. Why did you think that Twitter has no advertising but manage to get so much venture capital investments? It is because it is very easy to decipher trending opinions on the web.
Google’s company tagline has always been “Don’t be evil”—mostly because the same technology that can be used for good can be used for evil. Mint.com uses big data to track consumer spending and financial status. Biomedical researchers can use big data to track virus outbreaks. United State government certainly can use big data to track anti-terrorism activities — but the real question is if they would not mine the data for other purposes also.
The other claims which Snowden made and enraged many Hong Kong citizens are evidence which points to US Government’s active hacking of local universities and businesses. Hacking for personal gain is definitely criminal. When the US pointed at China for cyber attacks, they have utilised the media on the side to paint an ugly picture of China, but pointing fingers first simply shows hypocrisy on the country’s own politics. And this fact provided ample ammunition for political activists world wide.
# SML Data
+ Date: 2013-06-15T15:42:31+0800
+ Dimensions: 5184 x 3456
+ Exposure: 1/250 sec at f/5.0
+ Focal Length: 190 mm
+ ISO: 800
+ Camera: Canon EOS 7D
+ Lens: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM
+ GPS: 22°16'43" N 114°9'39" E
+ Location: 香港中環花園道 Garden Road, Central, Hong Kong
+ Workflow: Lightroom 4
+ Serial: SML.20130615.7D.42298
+ Series: SnowdenHK: 香港聲援斯諾登遊行 Hong Kong Rally to Support Snowden, 新聞攝影 Photojournalism
# Media Licensing
Creative Commons (CCBY) See-ming Lee 李思明 / SML Photography / SML Universe Limited
Is Snowden a Hero? / SnowdenHK: 香港聲援斯諾登遊行 Hong Kong Rally to Support Snowden / SML.20130615.7D.42298
/ #SnowdenHK #新聞攝影 #Photojournalism #CreativeCommons #CCBY #SMLPhotography #SMLUniverse #SMLPublicMedia #SMLOpinions
/ #中國 #中国 #China #香港 #HongKong #攝影 #摄影 #photography #Rally #Snowden #EdwardSnowden #events #people #Banner #street #Hero #US #Gov #opinions #bigdata
(Under the ownership of anti-war activist, musician & actor Tim Robbins & The Rogues Gallery Band. In the same group of combined art works & literature- they also own Robin Cracknell's 'JOY' & Michael Stevens' first edition of The Road to Interzone - Reading William Burroughs Reading..: www.flickr.com/photos/denesamy/4501519283/in/photostream )
IV. - Title - Why Does The Unknown Soldier, Remain Forever- The Unknown Soldier ? { la douleur d'être réel } NO MORE WAR -
18" x 24.5" acid free paper, ebony pencil, black ink, white acrylic & white charcoal.
"For these cultures, getting rid of the pain without addressing the deeper cause would be like shutting off a fire alarm while the fire's still going." -
David Foster Wallace
( Obama's War: www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/obamaswar/view/#morelink )
"The report, released Thursday at the Pentagon, found that it was not only the stress of repeated deployments over nearly a decade in Iraq and Afghanistan that has driven the Army suicide rate above the civilian rate for the first time since the Vietnam War. Significantly, the report said that 79 percent of the soldiers who committed suicide had had only one deployment, or had not deployed at all. "
- www.nytimes.com/2010/07/30/us/30suicide.html?src=mv
Treating Soldier Stress: www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,2008931_2172992,00...
British war dead in Afghanistan- www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/onthefrontline/582734...
British war dead in Iraq- www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/onthefrontline/439875...
"Women always disproportionately suffer the effects of war, and to think that women's rights can be won with bullets and bloodshed is a position dangerous in its naïveté." www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/30/is-the-war-in-afghanist...
Samantha Power - Development and Democracy - "Samantha Power discusses the political challenges facing democracy promotion and the practical needs of effective democratization." www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUUOO5cCNVg
"The facts revealed by WikiLeaks are indeed shocking: wide-scale killing of civilians by US and NATO forces; torture of prisoners handed over to the Communist-dominated Afghan secret police; American death squads; endemic corruption and theft; double-dealing and demoralization of Western occupation forces facing ever fiercer Taliban resistance. " - "Politicians are petrified to oppose this nine-year war lest they be accused of being anti-patriotic, the kiss of death in hyperpatriotic America where flag-wavers root for foreign wars so long as their kids don't have to serve and they don't have to pay taxes to finance them. "
www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-margolis/wikigate---the-truth...
( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_ecology )
"I still feel sick to my stomach when I think of my friends who died in Vietnam and whose families are still suffering from their pointless deaths." - www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/terrible-consequenc...
"JA: We have to be careful there. Remember, this is a civil war. Everyone says Taliban, but in fact, the Taliban are Afghans. This is a civil war that is going on. And Taliban are a part of the will of the Afghan people. They are also part, probably, of the Pakistani secret intelligence service, and maybe, of course, part of the will of Saudi Arabia, who is giving some money to this. But in terms of the bodies on the ground, people are actually doing their work. The Taliban is part of the will of the Afghan people. And the United States and the allied forces need to recognize and understand that it’s part of the Afghan people and if you are shooting Taliban, you are shooting the Afghan people.
That does not mean they do not have blood on their hands.
This material does not paint the behaviors of any military groups in a nice light – there is blood on all sides."
rt.com/Politics/2010-08-01/taliban-wikileaks-afghan-assan...
"This is but one isolated example, but it is a symptom of the main reason these leaks are important: in order to form an opinion on the war, we need to be able to trust the official information coming from the field. The leaks suggest that we cannot always do so. This in turn erodes populations' trust in what their military establishments tell them. "
www.huffingtonpost.com/azeem-ibrahim/dont-let-anyone-fool...
"the aim of those who had created these techniques was not to liberate people but to control them" From: The Century of Self, by Adam Curtis part 4: video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1122532358497501036#
“To a personal injury plaintiffs lawyer, those are all potential clients in a tort suit against a contractor,” she said.
”So, for the ambulance chasers of the battlefield, the WikiLeaks database is a goldmine.” blog.washingtonpost.com/spy-talk/2010/07/lawyer_wikileaks...
( & - www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/05/vietnam_35_years_later.... )
Noam Chomsky's recorded address to the United National Peace Conference, 7/24/2010 : www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcIVNzcMucU
Innocence Lost: Ethan McCord recounts aftermath of Iraqi civilian massacre | UNPC 7/24/2010 : www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ihPGtcHjNk
"Afghan life, like Iraqi life, must be almost invisible, like raindrops compared to ours."- www.americablog.com/2010/07/ellsberg-obama-has-indicted-m...
"War has become a luxury that only small nations can afford." -
Hannah Arendt
"Instead, many eyes will now pore over this data from many different directions, looking for patterns and attempting to eliminate the noise, disinformation and fog of war.
Many will look to it to criticise and condemn the US presence in Afghanistan, but if those on the other side – those who support such military incursions – have any sense, they too will use it to understand better the war in which they find themselves and adapt their counsel to fit more accurately the facts on the ground.
That’s the benefit, usually, of an open society. We get to triangulate on the truth by gathering facts in the public space, then providing them to all sides to chew over. We use this against our own illusions and those of more closed societies who can only view the world through one narrow perspective.": www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2010/0730/1224275801...
-
"Capable, generous men do not create victims, they nurture them." - Julian Assange, editor & founder of Wikileaks
"WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange on the 'War Logs- ; ''I Enjoy Crushing Bastards" www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,708518,00.html
- ( !! Yessssssssssssss.. Enough of bastards... )
-
"Wikileaks confirmed: A plan to kill American geologist with poison beer
The Wikileaks documents contain a claim that Pakistan and Afghanistan insurgents were working to poison alcoholic drinks in Afghanistan. While that's unproven, one US adviser in Afghanistan tells the Monitor he was almost poisoned that way in 2007." : www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2010/0728/Wiki...
"We journalists should be delighted that WikiLeaks exists because our central task has always been one of disclosure, of revealing public interest material that others believe wish to be kept secret.The website deserves our praise and needs to be defended against the reactionary forces that seek to avoid exposure."
edition.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/07/29/wikileaks.roy.greensla...
"The leak of tens of thousands of Afghanistan war-related documents tells us more than the sum total of many official communiqués about the war. On balance, more disclosure is a good thing, but the leaking of raw military intelligence is a special case that requires a careful, rather than a cavalier, approach.
There is not enough information about the war, and much official information is misleading. In Canada, the federal government's quarterly reports contain a few updates based on its goals in Kandahar, but little else that informs. The government has already shown itself to be an unreliable source on issues relating to Afghan detainees.
The situation is now too dangerous for the most trustworthy chroniclers – journalists, UN personnel – to go outside NATO-protected areas.
So reliable, independent information is lacking. The circumstances in this war make such information even more necessary."
www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/we-neede...
"The first phase was chilling, in part because the banter of the soldiers was so far beyond the boundaries of civilian discourse. “Just fuckin’, once you get on ’em, just open ’em up,” one of them said. The crew members of the Apache came upon about a dozen men ambling down a street, a block or so from American troops, and reported that five or six of the men were armed with AK-47s; as the Apache maneuvered into position to fire at them, the crew saw one of the Reuters journalists, who were mixed in among the other men, and mistook a long-lensed camera for an RPG. The Apaches fired on the men for twenty-five seconds, killing nearly all of them instantly."
Read more www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khat...
"With the release of the WikiLeaks documents, Arab media may finally feel vindicated, as Western media finally start to give greater prominence to civilian casualties." newamericamedia.org/2010/07/wikileaks-documents-validate-...
"How to read the Afghanistan war logs: video tutorial
David Leigh, the Guardian's investigations editor, explains the online tools we have created to help you understand the secret US military files on the war in Afghanistan": www.guardian.co.uk/world/datablog/video/2010/jul/25/afgha...
"Jonathan Foreman, writing for the right of center National Review's Corner blog, hopes the documents will force America to deal with the possible deceptions being made by ally Pakistan. "It is possible that the publication of documents that provide actual evidence — rather than rumors — of the role of ISI personnel in Taliban planning, logistics, and strategy will give the West greater leverage in dealing with Islamabad and might force Pakistan’s political elite to confront the reality of the ISI’s secret activities. If so, that would be a silver lining to what is otherwise a military disaster abetted by the U.S. and British media."
www.nbclosangeles.com/news/politics/NATL-The-Importance-o...
"This is duplicitous only if you close your eyes to the Pakistani reality, which the Americans never did. There was ample evidence, as the WikiLeaks show, of covert ISI ties to the Taliban. The Americans knew they couldn't break those ties. They settled for what support Pakistan could give them while constantly pressing them harder and harder until genuine fears in Washington emerged that Pakistan could destabilize altogether. Since a stable Pakistan is more important to the United States than a victory in Afghanistan—which it wasn't going to get anyway—the United States released pressure and increased aid. If Pakistan collapsed, then India would be the sole regional power, not something the United States wants."
www.billoreilly.com/site/rd?satype=13&said=12&url...
"The real significance of the Afghan war diaries lies in what Wikileaks represents as a movement, as an evolution in journalism. One analyst has called it the emergence of open source journalism. Julian Assange makes it possible for anybody anywhere in the world to submit secret documents for publication." www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/Sevanti_Ninan/article541...
A War Without End: www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,708314,00.html
"Julian Assange on the Afghanistan war logs: 'They show the true nature of this war'
Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, explains why he decided to publish thousands of secret US military files on the war in Afghanistan Afghanistan war logs expose truth of occupation": www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2010/jul/25/julian-assange...
The history of US leaks: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10769495
Freedom of Information Act: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_(United_...
"A long-delayed Afghanistan war funding bill, stripped of billions for teachers and black farmers, is back before the House and walking now into the storm over the Internet leak of battlefield reports stirring old doubts about U.S. policy and relations with Pakistan.": www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40254.html & www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40251.html
This ongoing series is dedicated to everyone who has needlessly had their lives destroyed, been injured or die in this almost past decade of war. For the sources, journalists & average citizens who risk their lives to inform us.
Reuters reporters Namir Eldeen, Saeed Chmagh & the good samaritan ( father ) who died trying to save them & of course his two surviving small children who will forever be impacted by the brutality of war for decades to come.
Please help Private Bradley Manning- www.bradleymanning.org/
"One surprising consequence of the war in Iraq is the surrender of postmodernism to a victorious modernism. This has been largely overlooked in North America.
In reaction to the U.S. intervention in Iraq, Jacques Derrida, a famous postmodernist, signed on as co-author of an article drafted by the German philosopher Jürgen Habermas, previously an opponent of his, in an unmistakable endorsement of modernist Enlightenment principles. Derrida, the apostle of deconstructionism, is now advocating some decidedly constructive and Eurocentric activism.
The article appeared simultaneously in two newspapers on May 31, in German in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung as "After the War: The Rebirth of Europe," and in French in Libération, less triumphantly, as "A Plea for a Common Foreign Policy: The demonstrations of Feb. 15 against the war in Iraq designed a new European public space."
Other famous intellectuals joined in with supportive newspaper articles of their own: Umberto Eco (of The Name of the Rose) and Gianni Vattimo in Italy and an American philosopher, Richard Rorty. This provoked much discussion in Europe, but only a few comments so far in North America, the Boston Globe and the Village Voice being rare exceptions.
This week in Montreal, there was an anti-globalization riot in which windows were broken in protest against a World Trade Organization (WTO) meeting. But the Habermas-Derrida declaration praises the WTO and even the International Monetary Fund as part of Weltinnenpolitik: maddeningly hard to translate, but something like "global domestic policy" or "external internal policy."
Yet it is not much of a stretch to claim the young anti-globalists as disciples of postmodernism and Derrida, who has hitherto been a foe of "logocentrism" (putting reason at the centre), "phallologocentrism" (reason is an erect male organ and, as such, damnably central) and Eurocentrism (the old, old West is the homeland of all of the above).
Derrida added a note to the article, observing most people would recognize Habermas's style and thinking in the piece, and that he hadn't had time to write a separate piece. But notwithstanding his "past confrontations" with Habermas (Derrida had objected to being called a "Judaistic mystic," for one thing), he agreed with the article he had signed, which calls for new European responsibilities "beyond all Eurocentrism" and the strengthening of international law and international institutions."
More: www.16beavergroup.org/mtarchive/archives/000361.php
"In early 2003, both Habermas and Derrida were very active in opposing the coming Iraq War, and called for in a manifesto that later became the book Old Europe, New Europe, Core Europe for a tighter union of the states of the European Union in order to provide a power capable of opposing American foreign policy. Derrida wrote a foreword expressing his unqualified subscription to Habermas's declaration of February 2003, "February 15, or, What Binds Europeans Together: Plea for a Common Foreign Policy, Beginning in Core Europe,” in Old Europe, New Europe, Core Europe which was a reaction to the Bush administration demands upon European nations for support for the coming Iraq War[25]. Habermas has offered further context for this declaration in an interview."
More: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%c3%bcrgen_Habermas#Habermas_and_D...
Habermas: ”The asymmetry between the concentrated destructive power of the electronically controlled clusters of elegant and versatile missiles in the air and the archaic ferocity of the swarms of bearded warriors outfitted with Kalashnikovs on the ground remains a morally obscene sight
I consider Bush' s decision to call for a "war against terrorism" a serious mistake, both normatively and pragmatically. Normatively, he is elevating these criminals to the status of war enemies; and pragmatically, one cannot lead a war against a "network" if the term "war" is to retain any definite meaning.”
Derrida: “To say it all too quickly and in passing, to amplify and clarify just a bit what I said earlier about an absolute threat whose origin is anonymous and not related to any state, such "terrorist" attacks already no longer need planes, bombs, or kamikazes: it is enough to infiltrate a strategically important computer system and introduce a virus or some other disruptive element to paralyze the economic, military, and political resources of an entire country or continent. And this can be attempted from just about anywhere on earth, at very little expense and with minimal means. The relationship between earth, terra territory, and terror has changed, and it is necessary to know that this is because of knowledge, that is, because of technoscience.
It is technoscience that blurs the distinction between war and terrorism. In this regard, when compared to the possibilities for destruction and chaotic disorder that are in reserve, for the future, in the computerized networks of the world, "September 11" is still part of the archaic theater of violence aimed at striking the imagination. One will be able to do even worse tomorrow, invisibly, in silence, more quickly and without any bloodshed, by attacking the computer and informational networks on which the entire life (social, economic, military, and so on) of a "great nation," of the greatest power on earth, depends.”
www.16beavergroup.org/mtarchive/archives/000361.php
I am incredibly- delighted at all the vital discussions about the war & US gov that are FINALLY taking place- & on a mass scale- as a result of this leak .. Simply miraculous..
FREEDOM & PEACE ( transparency, diplomacy & the evolution of such ) FOR ALL WAR NATIONS.
-
( WARNING - links ( after excerpt ) are NOT for sensitive viewers- ) "Wikileaks have released over 150 supressed images. This is the tip of the iceberg, keep looking, keep publishing.In the last week Wikileaks has released over 150 censored photos and videos of the Tibet uprising and has called on bloggers around the world to help drive the footage through the Chinese internet censorship regime — the so called “Great Firewall of China”The transparency group’s move comes as a response to the the Chinese Public Security Bureau’s carte-blanche censorship of youtube, the BBC, CNN, the Guardian and other sites carrying video footage of the Tibetan people’s recent heroic stand against the inhumane Chinese occupation of Tibet."
fortuzero.wordpress.com/2008/03/31/tibet-western-media-sa...
file.wikileaks.org/file/tibet-protest-photos/index.html
FREE TIBET!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also other dire & serious issues ( out of countless ) - that expose corruption by corporations & gov's:
"A documentary about intensive pig farming due to be screened at the Guardian Hay festival on Sunday is facing a legal threat from one of the companies it investigates. Pig Business criticises the practices of the world's largest pork processor, Smithfield Foods, claiming it is responsible for environmental pollution and health problems among residents near its factories."
www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/may/29/pig-business-document...
"In an investigation broadcast on BBC Radio 5 on November 14, 2004,[79] it was reported that the site is still contaminated with 'thousands' of metric tons of toxic chemicals, including benzene hexachloride and mercury, held in open containers or loose on the ground. A sample of drinking water from a well near the site had levels of contamination 500 times higher than the maximum limits recommended by the World Health Organization.[80]
In 2009, a day before the 25th anniversary of the disaster, Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), a Delhi based pollution monitoring lab, released latest tests from a study showing that groundwater in areas even three km from the factory up to 38.6 times more pesticides than Indian standards."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster
-
The Blue Mask - Lou Reed - www.goear.com/listen/9960779/the-blue-mask-lou-reed ( & O Superman ) www.goear.com/listen/02cf55d/o-superman-(for-massenet)-la...
Lou Reed The Blue Mask
Lyrics:
They tied his arms behind
his back to teach him how to
swim They put
blood in his coffee and milk
in his gin They stood over the
soldier in
the midst of the squalor
There was war in his body and
it caused his
brain to holler
Make the sacrifice
mutilate my face
If you need someone to kill
I'm a man without a will
Wash the razor in the rain
Let me luxuriate in pain
Please don't set me free
Death means a lot to me
The pain was lean and it made
him scream he knew he was alive
They put a
pin through the nipples on his chest
He thought he was a saint
I've made love to my mother,
killed my father and my brother
What am I
to do
When a sin goes too far, it's
like a runaway car It cannot
be controlled
Spit upon his face and scream
There's no Oedipus today
This is no play you're thinking you
are in What will you say
Take the blue mask down from my face and
look me in the eye I get a
thrill from punishment
I've always been that way
I loathe and despise repentance
You are permanently stained
Your weakness buys indifference
and indiscretion in the streets
Dirty's what you are and clean is what
you're not You deserve to be
soundly beat
Make the sacrifice
Take it all the way
There's no won't high enough
To stop this desperate day
Don't take death away
Cut the finger at the joint
Cut the stallion at his mount
And stuff it in his mouth
---
-
"It looks like you can write a minimalist piece without much bleeding. And you can. But not a good one.
It seems important to find ways of reminding ourselves that most "familiarity" is meditated and delusive.
Nuclear weapons and TV have simply intensified the consequences of our tendencies, upped the stakes.
One of the things that makes Wittgenstein a real artist to me is that he realized that no conclusion could be more horrible than solipsism.
Pleasure becomes a value, a teleological end in itself. It's probably more Western than U.S. per se. "
"And I'm not saying that television is vulgar and dumb because the people who compose the Audience are vulgar and dumb. Television is the way it is simply because people tend to be extremely similar.. in their vulgar and prurient and dumb interests and wildly different in their refined and aesthetic and noble interests." - All by David Foster Wallace
www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQ-oq-u2rKM
STOP CENSORSHIP IN THAILAND! - ( & Egypt, China, Australia- & in the US- etc & etc!! )
"Chinese socialism is founded upon Darwin and the theory of evolution." Mao Tse-tung (1893 – 1976). Kampf um Mao's Erbe (1977)
(Apart from the last remaining, atheist regime in North Korea) we could say that global atheism died with the demise of the brutal, atheist regimes of the 20th century.
But its ghosts still haunt us.
Incredibly, while the horrendous crimes of the hideous, atheist ideology are still within living memory, attempts are being made to resurrect it and make it seem respectable, under the guise of 'new' atheism.
The atheist beast of the East which had died, is now raising its ugly head in the West.
"And I saw one of his heads as if it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world marvelled after the beast." Revelation 13:3
Will the atheist monster live again? Who knows?
What we do know - is what history tells us about atheism, and it is not at all pleasant.
The promised atheist/communist utopia ... the idea of an atheist Heaven on Earth resulted in a diabolical Hell on Earth.
Atheism proved to be the most horrendous, barbaric, murderous and criminal ideology the world has ever experienced. Countless millions suffered and died at the hands of this hideous ideology, they must never be forgotten.
Who, but a complete idiot would want to resurrect such a monstrous, no-hope philosophy?
The so-called 'new' (improved?) atheists try to disassociate themselves from the disastrous record of the world's first ever, official, atheist states of the 20th century's, great, atheist experiment. But there is no other example to go by.
The atheist experiment has been tried and, from beginning to end, was a diabolical failure. The new atheists may say: it's nothing to do with us gov.
But who wants to risk such devastation again, by giving atheism another chance? Only an idiot would want to take that gamble.
However, it was only to be expected and it could easily have been predicted beforehand, that the inevitable result of atheism's lack of an absolute ethical or moral yardstick would be to wreak havoc on the world - and that is exactly what it did.
Atheism hasn't changed at all in that respect, because it can't. The ephemeral values, moral relativism and situational ethics of atheism is the ideal recipe for abuse.
We can see from the aggressive, intolerant, rabble rousing rhetoric and ranting of today's militant, new atheist zealots, that the leopard hasn't really changed its spots. Let no one doubt it - atheism has a hideous, barbaric history, ... we must never let it happen again.
Moreover, it is a singularly perverse ideology that motivates its adherents to waste so much time of the only life they believe they have, trying to convince everyone else that they are doomed to eternal oblivion. The ultimate reward for atheists is to never know if they got it right, only if they got it wrong.
There is no moral or rational defence for the atheist cult, past or present.
But what do atheists themselves say about their ethical and moral values?
They claim that they DO have an ethical and moral yardstick, and cite the Humanist Manifesto as representing the ethics and moral code of atheism.
So is it really true?
The Humanist Manifesto looks good at first glance, but like most proposals atheists come up with, when examined closely, it is full of holes.
Problems ....
1. You don’t have to sign up to the Humanist Manifesto to be an atheist.
2. Even if you do sign up to it, there is no incentive to follow it. No reward for following it, and no penalty for not following it. You are not going to be barred from being an atheist because you reject or break the rules of the Humanist Manifesto. It is not enforced in any way.
3. It borrows its desirable ethics from Judeo-Christian values, there is no atheist, moral code per se.
Genuine, naturalist ethics is basically the Darwinian law of the jungle, the ethics of the Humanist Manifesto are actually a contradiction of social Darwinism. The ethics of the H.M. are not consistant with atheist materialist and evolutionist beliefs.
4. By far the biggest flaw in the Humanist Manifesto is the fact that it is entirely ephemeral. It advocates 'situational ethics' and 'moral relativism'. And that major flaw makes it a worthless scrap of paper.
Why?
Because .....
Situational ethics is based on what people want or find desirable, not on any adherence to what is intrinsically right or wrong.
A good, example of humanist style, situational ethics in practice, is the gender selection abortions now being blatantly carried out in abortion clinics in Britain. It primarily discriminates against female babies, who are especially targeted for killing, because most of the parents who want it, prefer to have boys for cultural reasons.
The abortion clinics openly admit to it happening, and claim it is legal.
The abortion act of 1967 certainly did not intend that, and the Government admits it was not intended.
So we have a Government that knows it is going on, it also knows it is not what the abortion law intended, yet it is still reluctant to do anything about it.
Why? Because it is wedded to the secularist concept of situational ethics, i.e. whatever people want, people get. Any concept of intrinsic right and wrong has to take a back seat, to whatever is the spirit of the times. And that is an example happening right now, in a so-called democracy.
The Nazi persecution of the Jews became popular through brainwashing of the public, and was eventually supported by a good proportion of the public.
So Hitler cleverly used situational ethics to do what he had persuaded people was right and good.
So, all in all, the Humanist Manifesto is a very dangerous document.
It gives carte blanche to any so-called ethical values, as long they become the fashionable or consensus opinion. Whatever people want, people get, or what a government can claim people want, they are justified in giving to them.
And for that reason it would not stop; a Lenin, a Stalin, a Hitler, or a Pol Pot, even if they had signed up 100% to abide by the Humanist Manifesto.
In fact, the 20th century, atheist tyrants even called their regimes ... Democratic People's Republics. They claimed they were representing people's wishes, and thus carried out their 'situational ethics' on behalf of the people.
What about the common, atheist tactic of highlighting alleged crimes and wrongdoing committed by Christians?
The point is ....
Christians who do wrong, go against the teachings of Christianity.
And, without sincere repentance, they don't get to go to the Christian Heaven.
End of story!
Atheists who do wrong, go against nothing, unless it is against the law of the land.
The atheist 'heaven' is right here on earth, and far from being a 'heaven' it is an horrendous nightmare. Anyone with any sense would call it a hell.
And even the law of the land need not stop them .....
Whenever, atheists get into a position of power they change the law to suit their situational ethics. Then they can do whatever they want.
That is what Stalin and all the other atheist tyrants did in their people's DEMOCRATIC republics.
And the atheist thirst for blood does not cease when they live in the so-called 'real' democracies, it is simply sanitised by atheist inspired, situational ethics.
They use their 'humanist' ethics to change the law, accompanied by 'newspeak' and propaganda.
So that what was once considered evil, is not only made legal, it is actually turned around so it is considered a virtue.
The wholesale and brutal slaughter, of the most vulnerable in society ... millions of unborn babies, is callously shrugged off as necessary, for 'free choice'.
Of course murder is always a free choice for the killer, only the dangerous, warped, atheist style, situational ethics could value a killer's free choice to kill, above the victim's right not to be killed, and make murder legal.
The callous slaughter of the unborn, which in most cases, was not even put to the people democratically (it was imposed on them by a handful of secularist politicians, lawyers and bureaucrats), is accompanied by the usual atheist lies and devious propaganda.
So the secularists simply laugh off democracy, it doesn't stop them, if it gets in the way of their ideology, they just ignore it, like they do with science.
"Democratic societies" what are they?
Why ask the people? They are apparently not qualified to consider such difficult matters of right and wrong, like whether babies should live or die? You can't give those ignorant peasants, plebs and rednecks a vote on it, ... leave it to the secularist EXPERTS and their wonderful, situational ethics based on 'reason' and 'science'.
We are told by atheist moralists that the unborn baby is not fully human, it is only a blob of jelly, which has, and deserves, NO rights.
And we are also told, anyone who supports the rights of the unborn babies not to be brutally ripped limb from limb is evil, because they are interfering with free CHOICE.
So the atheist leopard certainly hasn't changed its lying, devious, brutal and murderous spots, even in so-called 'real' democratic societies. It simply legalises and sanitises evil and murder and makes it appear good.
Then it can claim atheism is extremely ethical and virtuous, with its own, beautiful code of morals and conduct .... Yeah Right!
Remind you of anyone?
That, then ... is the atheist Heaven on earth, and images in the picture are of the atheist tyrants of the last century, who exemplified atheist, situational ethics.
Is atheism credible, logically or scientifically?
..If people would only think for themselves - there would be no atheists.
Atheism is anti-logic ......
Atheism = NOTHING created Everything - without a cause and - for NO REASON.
Makes perfect sense .... NOT!
www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existen...
Atheism is the rejection of one of the only 2 origins options.
The only two options are:
1. An uncaused, supernatural first cause.
2. An uncaused, natural first cause.
Atheists categorically reject option one, therefore they believe in option two - by default.
Option two (an uncaused, natural first cause) is impossible according to logic, natural laws and the scientific method.
Every natural event/effect/entity has to have an adequate cause.
All material/natural entities/events are contingent, they rely on preceding causes.
A natural first cause, cannot be a very FIRST cause because something (which didn't need a cause) must have caused it.
A natural first cause also cannot be the very first cause of the universe because it is woefully inadequate for the effect. An effect cannot be greater than its cause.
So atheism is a set of beliefs which violate the scientific method, ignore logic and defy natural laws.
In addition, the fact that there are natural laws and an ordered structure to atoms is not conducive to the idea of a purposeless universe.
Also, the Second Law of Thermodynamics rules out the unguided development of order of its own accord. The application of raw energy, without a directive agent, results in entropy, not increasing complexity and order, which atheists propose.
And the First Law of Thermodynamics tells us that there is no 'natural' mechanism for the creation of matter/energy. Yet atheists insist that matter (along with natural law and information) arose naturally of its own accord.
It is evident that, while pretending to be scientific, the atheist dogma is actually anti-science, it manipulates science to fit its own agenda, regardless of the violation of natural laws, logic and the scientific method.
Atheism is akin to a religion because it credits matter/energy with similar creative powers and attributes as those applied to a creator God. It is really just a more sophisticated version of pagan naturalism, which imbued natural entities such as Mother Nature, The Sun or Moon god etc. with creative and magical powers.
To clarify further:
If there are only 2 options and one is ruled out as 'impossible' by logic, natural law and the scientific method, then it is safe, indeed sensible, to deduce that the other option is the only possible, and likely one.
Anyone who believes in science should know - that the basis of the scientific method is looking for adequate causes for every natural event/effect.
An 'uncaused' natural event is an anathema to science, it cannot even contemplate such a prospect.
If someone was to propose a natural first cause of everything, science would have to ask - what caused it? You cannot claim it was uncaused - that defies the scientific method.
However, if it was caused - if it had a preceding cause, ... then it cannot be the FIRST cause. Because FIRST means FIRST, not second or third.
So the very first cause of everything must be UNCAUSED ... which means, according to science, it CANNOT be a NATURAL cause.
In other words ... it cannot be a contingent entity, it can only be an eternally self-existent, self-reliant, autonomous, infinite, omnipotent entity which is entirely independent of causes, and the limitations that causes impose.
Furthermore, the first cause also has to be completely adequate for the effect, the effect cannot be greater than the cause ... so the first cause has to have adequate powers, properties and potentiality to create the entirety of the universe, i.e. nothing in the universe can be superior in any respect to the first cause.
That means the first cause must embody, or be able to create, every property and quality that exists, which includes: natural laws, information, life, intelligence, consciousness, self-awareness, design, skill, moral values, sense of beauty, justice etc.
All proposed, natural first causes - Big Bang's, Singularities, quantum mechanics etc. are not only ruled out because, as contingent events, they cannot be uncaused, they are also grossly inferior to the effect, which definitively rules them all out as credible first causes.
To put it more simply ... all effects/events/entities are the result of a combination of numerous, preceding causes, but the very first cause is unique, inasmuch as it is a lone cause of everything.
Everything can be traced back to that single cause, it is responsible for every other cause, entity and effect that follows it. Unlike other lesser or subsequent causes it has to account for the totality of everything that exists. So it cannot be inferior in any respect to any particular property, entity, event, effect, or to the totality of them all.
If we have intelligence then, that which ultimately caused us cannot be non-intelligent.
Atheists assume that we are greater in that respect than that which caused us .... that is ridiculous and it defies logic and natural law.
What about infinite time?
Time is simply a chronology of natural events. Time began with the origin of the material realm. No natural events ...means - no time. All natural entities, events/effects are contingent, they cannot be self-existent, they rely on causes and the limitations that causes impose. they are not autonomous entities, to propose that is anti-science.
Atheists often say: you can’t fill gaps in knowledge with a supernatural first cause.
But we are not talking about filling gaps, we are talking about a fundamental issue ... the origin of everything in the material realm.
The first cause is not a gap, it is the beginning - and many of the greatest scientists in the history of science had no problem whatsoever with the logic that - a natural, first cause was impossible, and the only possible option was a supernatural creator.
Why do atheists have such a problem with it?
Atheists seem to think that to explain the origin of the universe without a God, simply involves explaining what triggered it, as though its formation from that point on, just happens automatically.
This has been compared by some as similar to lighting the blue touch paper of a firework. They think that if they can propose such a naturalistic trigger, then God is made redundant.
That may sound plausible to some members of the public, who take such pronouncements at face value, and are somewhat in awe of anything that is claimed to be 'scientific'.
But it is obvious to anyone who thinks seriously about it, that a mere trigger is not necessarily an adequate cause.
A trigger presupposes that there is some sort of a mechanism/blueprint/plan already existing which is ready to spring into action if it is provided with an appropriate trigger. There has to be an existing, inherent potential for future development and everything else that follows the trigger. So a trigger is not a sole cause, or a first cause, it is merely one contributing cause.
Natural things do only what they are programmed to do, i.e. they obey natural laws and behave only within the limits dictated by the potential of their pre-ordained properties, composition or structure. Those pre-ordained properties are determined by the ability, powers and adequacy of the first cause, which brought them into being.
Lighting blue touch paper achieves absolutely nothing, unless there is a carefully designed and manufactured firework already attached to it. Chance or randomness is not an answer.
Atheists invent all sorts of bizarre myths to explain the origin of the universe and matter/energy.
Such as it arising from nothing of its own volition, for no reason.
Or even the utterly, ludicrous notion - of the universe creating itself from nothing. Obviously for something to create itself, it would need to pre-exist its own creation, in order to do the creating.
Incredible!
“When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.”
― G.K. Chesterton ..... HOW TRUE THAT IS PROVING TO BE!
This was first look at Annette Island, looked quite foreboding initially. The Tsmimshian people are originally from Canada and were not permitted to own land there. Father Wm. Duncan got permission from the US Gov to create Alaska's 1st and only reserve in the state for these people. They chose Annette Island for it's location, fishing and the fact they it has a fresh water source on the island.
I. Drawing/sketch- Title - Fire from the Source. - "One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Jung.
Dimensions- 18" x 24.5" acid free paper & ebony pencil.
I will try to upload a much better image soon, ebony pencil reflects light & this is a large- & very detailed drawing. I had to photograph it a bit dark so that the ebony would not make a sheen to completely wipe out detail.. When it's framed it will be much easier to photograph.
This is a large study/drawing, Assange/Wikileakers of the organization Wikileaks ( wikileaks.org ) uses 'matches from sources' to disclose US gov secrecy ( behind large black curtains ) & to also finally bring some much needed attention & closure to some of these revelations ( set ablaze ).
More Wikileaks Series studies, &* drawings/etc leading to other/more work soon. Ongoing.
"War has become a luxury that only small nations can afford." -
Hannah Arendt
War Diary - wardiary.wikileaks.org/ Timeline: wartimeline.haineault.com/
-
"Capable, generous men do not create victims, they nurture them." - Julian Assange, editor & founder of Wikileaks
-
"WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange on the 'War Logs- ; ''I Enjoy Crushing Bastards" www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,708518,00.html
- ( !! Yessssssssssssss.. Enough of bastards... )
( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_ecology )
"This is but one isolated example, but it is a symptom of the main reason these leaks are important: in order to form an opinion on the war, we need to be able to trust the official information coming from the field. The leaks suggest that we cannot always do so. This in turn erodes populations' trust in what their military establishments tell them. "
www.huffingtonpost.com/azeem-ibrahim/dont-let-anyone-fool...
-
"The leak of tens of thousands of Afghanistan war-related documents tells us more than the sum total of many official communiqués about the war. On balance, more disclosure is a good thing, but the leaking of raw military intelligence is a special case that requires a careful, rather than a cavalier, approach.
There is not enough information about the war, and much official information is misleading. In Canada, the federal government's quarterly reports contain a few updates based on its goals in Kandahar, but little else that informs. The government has already shown itself to be an unreliable source on issues relating to Afghan detainees.
The situation is now too dangerous for the most trustworthy chroniclers – journalists, UN personnel – to go outside NATO-protected areas.
So reliable, independent information is lacking. The circumstances in this war make such information even more necessary."
www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/we-neede...
"The first phase was chilling, in part because the banter of the soldiers was so far beyond the boundaries of civilian discourse. “Just fuckin’, once you get on ’em, just open ’em up,” one of them said. The crew members of the Apache came upon about a dozen men ambling down a street, a block or so from American troops, and reported that five or six of the men were armed with AK-47s; as the Apache maneuvered into position to fire at them, the crew saw one of the Reuters journalists, who were mixed in among the other men, and mistook a long-lensed camera for an RPG. The Apaches fired on the men for twenty-five seconds, killing nearly all of them instantly."
Read more www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khat...
"JA: We have to be careful there. Remember, this is a civil war. Everyone says Taliban, but in fact, the Taliban are Afghans. This is a civil war that is going on. And Taliban are a part of the will of the Afghan people. They are also part, probably, of the Pakistani secret intelligence service, and maybe, of course, part of the will of Saudi Arabia, who is giving some money to this. But in terms of the bodies on the ground, people are actually doing their work. The Taliban is part of the will of the Afghan people. And the United States and the allied forces need to recognize and understand that it’s part of the Afghan people and if you are shooting Taliban, you are shooting the Afghan people.
That does not mean they do not have blood on their hands.
This material does not paint the behaviors of any military groups in a nice light – there is blood on all sides."
rt.com/Politics/2010-08-01/taliban-wikileaks-afghan-assan...
Samantha Power - Development and Democracy - "Samantha Power discusses the political challenges facing democracy promotion and the practical needs of effective democratization." www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUUOO5cCNVg
"Instead, many eyes will now pore over this data from many different directions, looking for patterns and attempting to eliminate the noise, disinformation and fog of war.
Many will look to it to criticise and condemn the US presence in Afghanistan, but if those on the other side – those who support such military incursions – have any sense, they too will use it to understand better the war in which they find themselves and adapt their counsel to fit more accurately the facts on the ground.
That’s the benefit, usually, of an open society. We get to triangulate on the truth by gathering facts in the public space, then providing them to all sides to chew over. We use this against our own illusions and those of more closed societies who can only view the world through one narrow perspective.": www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2010/0730/1224275801...
"Women always disproportionately suffer the effects of war, and to think that women's rights can be won with bullets and bloodshed is a position dangerous in its naïveté." www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/30/is-the-war-in-afghanist...
“To a personal injury plaintiffs lawyer, those are all potential clients in a tort suit against a contractor,” she said.
”So, for the ambulance chasers of the battlefield, the WikiLeaks database is a goldmine.” blog.washingtonpost.com/spy-talk/2010/07/lawyer_wikileaks...
"We journalists should be delighted that WikiLeaks exists because our central task has always been one of disclosure, of revealing public interest material that others believe wish to be kept secret.The website deserves our praise and needs to be defended against the reactionary forces that seek to avoid exposure."
edition.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/07/29/wikileaks.roy.greensla...
"With the release of the WikiLeaks documents, Arab media may finally feel vindicated, as Western media finally start to give greater prominence to civilian casualties." newamericamedia.org/2010/07/wikileaks-documents-validate-...
"How to read the Afghanistan war logs: video tutorial
David Leigh, the Guardian's investigations editor, explains the online tools we have created to help you understand the secret US military files on the war in Afghanistan": www.guardian.co.uk/world/datablog/video/2010/jul/25/afgha...
"Jonathan Foreman, writing for the right of center National Review's Corner blog, hopes the documents will force America to deal with the possible deceptions being made by ally Pakistan. "It is possible that the publication of documents that provide actual evidence — rather than rumors — of the role of ISI personnel in Taliban planning, logistics, and strategy will give the West greater leverage in dealing with Islamabad and might force Pakistan’s political elite to confront the reality of the ISI’s secret activities. If so, that would be a silver lining to what is otherwise a military disaster abetted by the U.S. and British media."
www.nbclosangeles.com/news/politics/NATL-The-Importance-o...
"Wikileaks confirmed: A plan to kill American geologist with poison beer
The Wikileaks documents contain a claim that Pakistan and Afghanistan insurgents were working to poison alcoholic drinks in Afghanistan. While that's unproven, one US adviser in Afghanistan tells the Monitor he was almost poisoned that way in 2007." : www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2010/0728/Wiki...
"This is duplicitous only if you close your eyes to the Pakistani reality, which the Americans never did. There was ample evidence, as the WikiLeaks show, of covert ISI ties to the Taliban. The Americans knew they couldn't break those ties. They settled for what support Pakistan could give them while constantly pressing them harder and harder until genuine fears in Washington emerged that Pakistan could destabilize altogether. Since a stable Pakistan is more important to the United States than a victory in Afghanistan—which it wasn't going to get anyway—the United States released pressure and increased aid. If Pakistan collapsed, then India would be the sole regional power, not something the United States wants."
www.billoreilly.com/site/rd?satype=13&said=12&url...
A War Without End: www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,708314,00.html
"Julian Assange on the Afghanistan war logs: 'They show the true nature of this war'
Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, explains why he decided to publish thousands of secret US military files on the war in Afghanistan Afghanistan war logs expose truth of occupation": www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2010/jul/25/julian-assange...
The history of US leaks: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10769495
Freedom of Information Act: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_(United_...
"A long-delayed Afghanistan war funding bill, stripped of billions for teachers and black farmers, is back before the House and walking now into the storm over the Internet leak of battlefield reports stirring old doubts about U.S. policy and relations with Pakistan.": www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40254.html & www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40251.html
This ongoing series is dedicated to everyone who has needlessly had their lives destroyed, been injured or die in this almost past decade of war. For the sources, journalists & average citizens who risk their lives to inform us.
Reuters reporters Namir Eldeen, Saeed Chmagh & the good samaritan ( father ) who died trying to save them & of course his two surviving small children who will forever be impacted by the brutality of war for decades to come.
Please help Private Bradley Manning- www.bradleymanning.org/
"One surprising consequence of the war in Iraq is the surrender of postmodernism to a victorious modernism. This has been largely overlooked in North America.
In reaction to the U.S. intervention in Iraq, Jacques Derrida, a famous postmodernist, signed on as co-author of an article drafted by the German philosopher Jürgen Habermas, previously an opponent of his, in an unmistakable endorsement of modernist Enlightenment principles. Derrida, the apostle of deconstructionism, is now advocating some decidedly constructive and Eurocentric activism.
The article appeared simultaneously in two newspapers on May 31, in German in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung as "After the War: The Rebirth of Europe," and in French in Libération, less triumphantly, as "A Plea for a Common Foreign Policy: The demonstrations of Feb. 15 against the war in Iraq designed a new European public space."
Other famous intellectuals joined in with supportive newspaper articles of their own: Umberto Eco (of The Name of the Rose) and Gianni Vattimo in Italy and an American philosopher, Richard Rorty. This provoked much discussion in Europe, but only a few comments so far in North America, the Boston Globe and the Village Voice being rare exceptions.
This week in Montreal, there was an anti-globalization riot in which windows were broken in protest against a World Trade Organization (WTO) meeting. But the Habermas-Derrida declaration praises the WTO and even the International Monetary Fund as part of Weltinnenpolitik: maddeningly hard to translate, but something like "global domestic policy" or "external internal policy."
Yet it is not much of a stretch to claim the young anti-globalists as disciples of postmodernism and Derrida, who has hitherto been a foe of "logocentrism" (putting reason at the centre), "phallologocentrism" (reason is an erect male organ and, as such, damnably central) and Eurocentrism (the old, old West is the homeland of all of the above).
Derrida added a note to the article, observing most people would recognize Habermas's style and thinking in the piece, and that he hadn't had time to write a separate piece. But notwithstanding his "past confrontations" with Habermas (Derrida had objected to being called a "Judaistic mystic," for one thing), he agreed with the article he had signed, which calls for new European responsibilities "beyond all Eurocentrism" and the strengthening of international law and international institutions."
More: www.16beavergroup.org/mtarchive/archives/000361.php
"In early 2003, both Habermas and Derrida were very active in opposing the coming Iraq War, and called for in a manifesto that later became the book Old Europe, New Europe, Core Europe for a tighter union of the states of the European Union in order to provide a power capable of opposing American foreign policy. Derrida wrote a foreword expressing his unqualified subscription to Habermas's declaration of February 2003, "February 15, or, What Binds Europeans Together: Plea for a Common Foreign Policy, Beginning in Core Europe,” in Old Europe, New Europe, Core Europe which was a reaction to the Bush administration demands upon European nations for support for the coming Iraq War[25]. Habermas has offered further context for this declaration in an interview."
More: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%c3%bcrgen_Habermas#Habermas_and_D...
Habermas: ”The asymmetry between the concentrated destructive power of the electronically controlled clusters of elegant and versatile missiles in the air and the archaic ferocity of the swarms of bearded warriors outfitted with Kalashnikovs on the ground remains a morally obscene sight
I consider Bush' s decision to call for a "war against terrorism" a serious mistake, both normatively and pragmatically. Normatively, he is elevating these criminals to the status of war enemies; and pragmatically, one cannot lead a war against a "network" if the term "war" is to retain any definite meaning.”
Derrida: “To say it all too quickly and in passing, to amplify and clarify just a bit what I said earlier about an absolute threat whose origin is anonymous and not related to any state, such "terrorist" attacks already no longer need planes, bombs, or kamikazes: it is enough to infiltrate a strategically important computer system and introduce a virus or some other disruptive element to paralyze the economic, military, and political resources of an entire country or continent. And this can be attempted from just about anywhere on earth, at very little expense and with minimal means. The relationship between earth, terra territory, and terror has changed, and it is necessary to know that this is because of knowledge, that is, because of technoscience.
It is technoscience that blurs the distinction between war and terrorism. In this regard, when compared to the possibilities for destruction and chaotic disorder that are in reserve, for the future, in the computerized networks of the world, "September 11" is still part of the archaic theater of violence aimed at striking the imagination. One will be able to do even worse tomorrow, invisibly, in silence, more quickly and without any bloodshed, by attacking the computer and informational networks on which the entire life (social, economic, military, and so on) of a "great nation," of the greatest power on earth, depends.”
www.16beavergroup.org/mtarchive/archives/000361.php
I am incredibly- delighted at all the vital discussions about the war & US gov that are FINALLY taking place- & on a mass scale- as a result of this leak .. Simply miraculous..
FREEDOM & PEACE ( transparency, diplomacy & the evolution of such ) FOR ALL WAR NATIONS.
( WARNING - link ( after excerpt ) is NOT for sensitive viewers- ) "Wikileaks have released over 150 surpressed images. This is the tip of the iceberg, keep looking, keep publishing.In the last week Wikileaks has released over 150 censored photos and videos of the Tibet uprising and has called on bloggers around the world to help drive the footage through the Chinese internet censorship regime — the so called “Great Firewall of China”The transparency group’s move comes as a response to the the Chinese Public Security Bureau’s carte-blanche censorship of youtube, the BBC, CNN, the Guardian and other sites carrying video footage of the Tibetan people’s recent heroic stand against the inhumane Chinese occupation of Tibet."
fortuzero.wordpress.com/2008/03/31/tibet-western-media-sa...
-
The Blue Mask - Lou Reed - www.goear.com/listen/9960779/the-blue-mask-lou-reed ( & O Superman ) www.goear.com/listen/02cf55d/o-superman-(for-massenet)-la...
Lou Reed The Blue Mask
Lyrics:
They tied his arms behind
his back to teach him how to
swim They put
blood in his coffee and milk
in his gin They stood over the
soldier in
the midst of the squalor
There was war in his body and
it caused his
brain to holler
Make the sacrifice
mutilate my face
If you need someone to kill
I'm a man without a will
Wash the razor in the rain
Let me luxuriate in pain
Please don't set me free
Death means a lot to me
The pain was lean and it made
him scream he knew he was alive
They put a
pin through the nipples on his chest
He thought he was a saint
I've made love to my mother,
killed my father and my brother
What am I
to do
When a sin goes too far, it's
like a runaway car It cannot
be controlled
Spit upon his face and scream
There's no Oedipus today
This is no play you're thinking you
are in What will you say
Take the blue mask down from my face and
look me in the eye I get a
thrill from punishment
I've always been that way
I loathe and despise repentance
You are permanently stained
Your weakness buys indifference
and indiscretion in the streets
Dirty's what you are and clean is what
you're not You deserve to be
soundly beat
Make the sacrifice
Take it all the way
There's no won't high enough
To stop this desperate day
Don't take death away
Cut the finger at the joint
Cut the stallion at his mount
And stuff it in his mouth
---
-
* The little world of childhood with its familiar surroundings is a model of the greater world. The more intensively the family has stamped its character upon the child, the more it will tend to feel and see its earlier miniature world again in the bigger world of adult life. Naturally this is not a conscious, intellectual process.
The Theory of Psychoanalysis (1913)
* This whole creation is essentially subjective, and the dream is the theater where the dreamer is at once scene, actor, prompter, stage manager, author, audience, and critic.
General Aspects of Dream Psychology (1928)
* The dream is the small hidden door in the deepest and most intimate sanctum of the soul, which opens to that primeval cosmic night that was soul long before there was conscious ego and will be soul far beyond what a conscious ego could ever reach.
The Meaning of Psychology for Modern Man (1934)
* Emotion is the chief source of all becoming-conscious. There can be no transforming of darkness into light and of apathy into movement without emotion.
Psychological Aspects of the Modern Archetype (1938)
* No one can flatter himself that he is immune to the spirit of his own epoch, or even that he possesses a full understanding of it. Irrespective of our conscious convictions, each one of us, without exception, being a particle of the general mass, is somewhere attached to, colored by, or even undermined by the spirit which goes through the mass. Freedom stretches only as far as the limits of our consciousness.
Paracelsus the Physician (1942)
* The unconscious is not just evil by nature, it is also the source of the highest good: not only dark but also light, not only bestial, semihuman, and demonic but superhuman, spiritual, and, in the classical sense of the word, "divine."
The Practice of Psychotherapy, p. 364 (1953)
* Our blight is ideologies — they are the long-expected Antichrist!
The Tibetan Book of the Great Liberation (1954)
* Even if the whole world were to fall to pieces, the unity of the psyche would never be shattered. And the wider and more numerous the fissures on the surface, the more the unity is strengthened in the depths.
Civilization in Transition (1964)
* One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves.
Jung and the Story of Our Time, Laurens van der Post (1977)
* That higher and "complete" man is begotten by the "unknown" father and born from Wisdom, and it is he who, in the figure of the puer aeternus—"vultu mutabilis albus et ater"—represents our totality, which transcends consciousness. It was this boy into whom Faust had to change, abandoning his inflated onesidedness which saw the devil only outside. Christ's "Except ye become as little children" is a prefiguration of this, for in them the opposites lie close together; but what is meant is the boy who is born from the maturity of the adult man, and not the unconscious child we would like to remain.
Answer to Job, R. Hull, trans. (1984), pp. 157-158
-
But life is long. And it is the long run that balances the short flare of interest and passion. -
I am too pure for you or anyone. -
Is there no way out of the mind? -
all by, Sylvia Plath
Brian Eno - Golden Hours www.youtube.com/watch?v=lh9VdRQO2i4
"It looks like you can write a minimalist piece without much bleeding. And you can. But not a good one.
It seems important to find ways of reminding ourselves that most "familiarity" is meditated and delusive.
Nuclear weapons and TV have simply intensified the consequences of our tendencies, upped the stakes.
One of the things that makes Wittgenstein a real artist to me is that he realized that no conclusion could be more horrible than solipsism.
Pleasure becomes a value, a teleological end in itself. It's probably more Western than U.S. per se. "
"And I'm not saying that television is vulgar and dumb because the people who compose the Audience are vulgar and dumb. Television is the way it is simply because people tend to be extremely similar.. in their vulgar and prurient and dumb interests and wildly different in their refined and aesthetic and noble interests." - All by David Foster Wallace
-
"the aim of those who had created these techniques was not to liberate people but to control them" From: The Century of Self, by Adam Curtis part 4: video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1122532358497501036#
IMAGINE THE HAPPINESS & GREAT WORK AHEAD OF US WE COULD HAVE AT THE END OF THE WARS!!!!!!!!!
www.goear.com/listen/48d6016/hora-de-la-mehedinti-romania...
NO MORE WAR & FREEDOM FOR ALL WAR NATIONS!!!!!!!!!
Peace.
The owner of this car was a US Gov't employee-somehow, he was able to take his big Ford Galaxie 500 with him to Thailand. I'll bet Pattaya no longer looks like this!
"Chinese socialism is founded upon Darwin and the theory of evolution." Mao Tse-tung (1893 – 1976). Kampf um Mao's Erbe (1977).
(Apart from the last remaining, atheist regime in North Korea) we could say that global atheism died with the demise of the brutal, atheist regimes of the 20th century.
BUT - Incredibly, while the horrendous crimes of the hideous, atheist ideology are still within living memory, attempts are being made to resurrect it and make it seem respectable, under the guise of 'new' atheism.
Will the evil fruits of atheism be re-visited on us? Who knows?
What we do know - is what history tells us about atheism, and it is not at all pleasant.
The promised atheist/communist utopia ... the idea of an atheist Heaven on Earth resulted in an absolutely, diabolical Hell on Earth.
Atheism proved to be the most horrendous, barbaric, murderous and criminal ideology the world has ever experienced. There is nothing in the whole of human history to compare with it. Countless millions suffered and died at the hands of this hideous ideology, we must make sure they will never be forgotten.
Who, but a complete idiot would want to resurrect such a monstrous, no-hope philosophy?
The so-called 'new' (improved?) atheists try to disassociate themselves from the disastrous record of the world's first ever, official, atheist states of the 20th century's, great, atheist experiment. But there is no other example to go by.
The atheist experiment has been tried and, from beginning to end, was a diabolical failure. The new atheists may say: "it's nothing to do with us gov".
But who wants to risk such devastation again, by giving atheism another chance? Only an idiot would want to take that gamble. We rightly condemn and outlaw the brutal, Nazi, neo-pagan ideology. Why do we not regard the criminal, atheist ideology in a similar fashion?
However, it was only to be expected and it could easily have been predicted beforehand, that the inevitable result of atheism's lack of an absolute ethical or moral yardstick would be to wreak havoc on the world - and that is exactly what it did.
Atheism hasn't changed at all in that respect, because it can't. The ephemeral values, moral relativism and situational ethics of atheism is the ideal recipe for abuse.
We can see from the belligerent, intolerant, rabble rousing rhetoric and ranting of today's militant, new atheist zealots, that the leopard hasn't really changed its spots. Let no one doubt it - atheism has a hideous, barbaric history, ... we must not forget it - and we must never let it happen again.
Moreover, it is a singularly perverse ideology that motivates its adherents to waste so much time of the only life they believe they have, trying to convince everyone else that they are also doomed to eternal oblivion. The ultimate reward for atheists is to never know if they got it right, only if they got it wrong. It is the ultimate no-hope ideology.
In fact, there is no moral, logical or rational defence for the atheist cult, past or present.
But what do atheists themselves say about their ethical and moral values?
They claim that they DO have an ethical and moral yardstick, and cite the Humanist Manifesto as representing an ethical and moral code of atheism.
So is it really true?
The Humanist Manifesto looks good at first glance, but like most proposals atheists come up with, when examined closely, it is full of holes.
Problems ....
1. You don’t have to sign up to the Humanist Manifesto to be an atheist.
2. Even if you do sign up to it, there is no incentive to follow it. No reward for following it, and no penalty for not following it. You are not going to be barred from being an atheist because you reject or break the rules of the Humanist Manifesto. It is not enforced in any way.
3. It borrows its desirable ethics from Judeo-Christian values, there is no atheist, moral code per se.
Genuine, naturalist ethics is basically the Darwinian law of the jungle, the ethics of the Humanist Manifesto are actually a contradiction of social Darwinism. The ethics of the H.M. are not consistent with atheist materialist and evolutionist beliefs.
4. By far the biggest flaw in the Humanist Manifesto is the fact that it is entirely ephemeral. It advocates 'situational ethics' and 'moral relativism'. And that major flaw makes it a worthless scrap of paper.
Why?
Because .....
Situational ethics are based on what people want or find desirable, not on any adherence to what is intrinsically right or wrong.
A good, example of humanist style, situational ethics in practice, is the gender selection abortions now being blatantly carried out in abortion clinics in Britain. It primarily discriminates against female babies, who are especially targeted for killing, because most of the parents who want it, prefer to have boys for cultural reasons.
The abortion clinics openly admit to it happening, and claim it is legal.
The abortion act of 1967 certainly did not intend that, and the Government admits it was not intended.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pro-choice-aborti...
So we have a Government that knows it is going on, it also knows it is not what the abortion law intended, yet it is still reluctant to do anything about it.
Why? Because it is wedded to the secularist concept of situational ethics, i.e. whatever people want, people get. Any concept of intrinsic right and wrong has to take a back seat, to whatever is the spirit of the times. And that is an example happening right now, in a so-called democracy.
The Nazi persecution of the Jews became popular through brainwashing of the public, and was eventually supported by a good proportion of the public.
So Hitler cleverly used situational ethics to do what he had persuaded people was right and good.
So, all in all, the Humanist Manifesto is a very dangerous document.
It gives carte blanche to any so-called ethical values, as long they become the fashionable or consensus opinion. Whatever people want, people get, or what a government can claim people want, they are justified in giving to them.
And for that reason it would not stop; a Lenin, a Stalin, a Hitler, or a Pol Pot, even if they had signed up 100% to abide by the Humanist Manifesto.
In fact, the 20th century, atheist tyrants even called their regimes ... Democratic People's Republics. They claimed they were representing people's wishes, and thus carried out their 'situational ethics' on behalf of the people.
What about the common, atheist tactic of highlighting alleged crimes and wrongdoing committed by Christians?
The point is ....
Christians who do wrong, go against the teachings of Christianity. They have no right to continue to call themselves Christians, and if they stubbornly continue to do wrong without any remorse or repentance, they can be excommunicated by the Church.
And, without sincere repentance, they don't get to go to the Christian Heaven.
End of story!
Atheists who do wrong, go against nothing, unless it is against the law of the land.
The atheist 'heaven' is right here on earth, and far from being a 'heaven' it is an horrendous nightmare. Anyone with any sense would call it a hell.
And even the law of the land need not stop them .....
Whenever, atheists get into a position of power they change the law to suit their situational ethics. Then they can do whatever they want.
That is what Stalin and all the other atheist tyrants did in their people's DEMOCRATIC republics.
And the atheist thirst for blood does not cease when they live in the so-called 'real' democracies, it is simply sanitised by atheist inspired, situational ethics.
They use their 'humanist' ethics to change the law, accompanied by 'newspeak' and propaganda.
So that what was once considered evil, is not only made legal, it is actually turned around so it is considered a virtue.
The wholesale and brutal slaughter, of the most vulnerable in society ... millions of unborn babies, is callously shrugged off as necessary, for 'free choice'.
Of course murder is always a free choice for the killer, only the dangerous, warped, atheist style, situational ethics could value a killer's free choice to kill, above the victim's right not to be killed, and make murder legal.
The callous slaughter of the unborn, which in most cases, was not even put to the people democratically (it was imposed on them by a handful of secularist politicians, lawyers and bureaucrats), is accompanied by the usual atheist lies and devious propaganda.
So the secularists simply laugh off democracy, it doesn't stop them, if it gets in the way of their ideology, they just ignore it, like they do with science.
Doctors acting illegally over abortions get off scot-free ....
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2609950/Scandal-doctors-...
"Democratic societies" what are they?
Why ask the people? They are apparently not qualified to consider such difficult matters of right and wrong, like whether babies should live or die? You can't give those ignorant peasants, plebs and rednecks a vote on it, ... leave it to the secularist EXPERTS and their wonderful, situational ethics based on 'reason' and 'science'.
We are told by atheist moralists that the unborn baby is not fully human, it is only a blob of jelly, which has, and deserves, NO rights.
And we are also told, anyone who supports the rights of the unborn babies not to be brutally ripped limb from limb is evil, because they are interfering with free CHOICE.
So the atheist leopard certainly hasn't changed its lying, devious, brutal and murderous spots, even in so-called 'real' democratic societies. It simply legalises and sanitises evil and murder and makes it appear good.
Then it can claim atheism is extremely ethical and virtuous, with its own, beautiful code of morals and conduct .... Yeah Right!
Remind you of anyone?
That, then ... is the atheist Heaven on earth, and the evil, rotten fruits of atheism mentioned in the picture are the fruits of humanist, situational ethics and moral relativism personified by numerous atheist tyrants of the last century.
Is atheism even credible, logically or scientifically?
Undoubtedly not!
If people would only think for themselves - there would be no atheists.
Atheism is anti-logic ......
Atheism = NOTHING created Everything, for NO REASON.
Makes perfect sense .... NOT!
www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existen...
Atheism is the rejection of one of the only 2 origins options.
The only two options are:
1. An uncaused, supernatural first cause.
2. An uncaused, natural first cause.
Atheists categorically reject option one, therefore they believe in option two - by default.
Option two (an uncaused, natural first cause) is impossible according to logic, natural laws and the scientific method.
Every natural event/effect/entity has to have an adequate cause.
All material/natural entities/events are contingent, they rely on preceding causes.
A natural first cause, cannot be a very FIRST cause because something (which didn't need a cause) must have caused it.
A natural first cause also cannot be the very first cause of the universe because it is woefully inadequate for the effect. An effect cannot be greater than its cause.
So atheism is a set of beliefs which violate the scientific method, ignore logic and defy natural laws.
In addition, the fact that there are natural laws and an ordered structure to atoms is not conducive to the idea of a purposeless universe.
Also, the Second Law of Thermodynamics rules out the unguided development of order of its own accord. The application of raw energy, without a directive agent, results in entropy, not increasing complexity and order, which atheists propose.
And the First Law of Thermodynamics tells us that there is no 'natural' mechanism for the creation of matter/energy. Yet atheists insist that matter (along with natural law and information) arose naturally of its own accord.
It is evident that, while pretending to be scientific, the atheist dogma is actually anti-science, it manipulates science to fit its own agenda, regardless of the violation of natural laws, logic and the scientific method.
Atheism is akin to a religion because it credits matter/energy with similar creative powers and attributes as those applied to a creator God. It is really just a more sophisticated version of pagan naturalism, which imbued natural entities such as Mother Nature, The Sun or Moon god etc. with creative and magical powers.
To clarify further:
If there are only 2 options and one is ruled out as 'impossible' by logic, natural law and the scientific method, then it is safe, indeed sensible, to deduce that the other option is the only possible, and likely one.
Anyone who believes in science should know - that the basis of the scientific method is looking for adequate causes for every natural event/effect.
An 'uncaused' natural event is an anathema to science, it cannot even contemplate such a prospect.
If someone was to propose a natural first cause of everything, science would have to ask - what caused it? You cannot claim it was uncaused - that defies the scientific method.
However, if it was caused - if it had a preceding cause, ... then it cannot be the FIRST cause. Because FIRST means FIRST, not second or third.
So the very first cause of everything must be UNCAUSED ... which means, according to science, it CANNOT be a NATURAL cause.
In other words ... it cannot be a contingent entity, it can only be an eternally self-existent, self-reliant, autonomous, infinite, omnipotent entity which is entirely independent of causes, and the limitations that causes impose.
Furthermore, the first cause also has to be completely adequate for the effect, the effect cannot be greater than the cause ... so the first cause has to have adequate powers, properties and potentiality to create the entirety of the universe, i.e. nothing in the universe can be superior in any respect to the first cause.
That means the first cause must embody, or be able to create, every property and quality that exists, which includes: natural laws, information, life, intelligence, consciousness, self-awareness, design, skill, moral values, sense of beauty, justice etc.
All proposed, natural first causes - Big Bang's, Singularities, quantum mechanics etc. are not only ruled out because, as contingent events, they cannot be uncaused, they are also grossly inferior to the effect, which definitively rules them all out as credible first causes.
To put it more simply ... all effects/events/entities are the result of a combination of numerous, preceding causes, but the very first cause is unique, inasmuch as it is a lone cause of everything.
Everything can be traced back to that single cause, it is responsible for every other cause, entity and effect that follows it. Unlike other lesser or subsequent causes it has to account for the totality of everything that exists. So it cannot be inferior in any respect to any particular property, entity, event, effect, or to the totality of them all.
If we have intelligence then, that which ultimately caused us cannot be non-intelligent.
Atheists assume that we are greater in that respect than that which caused us .... that is ridiculous and it defies logic and natural law.
What about infinite time?
Time is simply a chronology of natural events. Time began with the origin of the material realm. No natural events ...means - no time. All natural entities, events/effects are contingent, they cannot be self-existent, they rely on causes and the limitations that causes impose. they are not autonomous entities, to propose that is anti-science.
Atheists often say: you can’t fill gaps in knowledge with a supernatural first cause.
But we are not talking about filling gaps, we are talking about a fundamental issue ... the origin of everything in the material realm.
The first cause is not a gap, it is the beginning - and many of the greatest scientists in the history of science had no problem whatsoever with the logic that - a natural, first cause was impossible, and the only possible option was a supernatural creator.
Why do atheists have such a problem with it?
Atheists seem to think that to explain the origin of the universe without a God, simply involves explaining what triggered it, as though its formation from that point on, just happens automatically.
This has been compared by some as similar to lighting the blue touch paper of a firework. They think that if they can propose such a naturalistic trigger, then God is made redundant.
That may sound plausible to some members of the public, who take such pronouncements at face value, and are somewhat in awe of anything that is claimed to be 'scientific'.
But it is obvious to anyone who thinks seriously about it, that a mere trigger is not necessarily an adequate cause.
A trigger presupposes that there is some sort of a mechanism/blueprint/plan already existing which is ready to spring into action if it is provided with an appropriate trigger. There has to be an existing, inherent potential for future development and everything else that follows the trigger. So a trigger is not a sole cause, or a first cause, it is merely one contributing cause.
Natural things do only what they are programmed to do, i.e. they obey natural laws and behave only within the limits dictated by the potential of their pre-ordained properties, composition or structure. Those pre-ordained properties are determined by the ability, powers and adequacy of the first cause, which brought them into being.
Lighting blue touch paper achieves absolutely nothing, unless there is a carefully designed and manufactured firework already attached to it. Chance or randomness is not an answer.
Atheists invent all sorts of bizarre myths to explain the origin of the universe and matter/energy.
Such as it arising from nothing of its own volition, for no reason.
Or even the utterly, ludicrous notion - of the universe creating itself from nothing. Obviously for something to create itself, it would need to pre-exist its own creation, in order to do the creating.
Incredible!
“When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.”
― G.K. Chesterton ..... HOW TRUE THAT IS PROVING TO BE!
I. 'Political Cartoon' - THE TRUTH is not an amalgam of fantasies & possibilities- the truth is FACT. - "Wikileaks takes a big bite out of gov secrecy". Wikileaks Series- first set of studies/sketches ( more to come )
18" x 24.5" acid free paper, sumi ink & ebony pencil
"War has become a luxury that only small nations can afford." -
Hannah Arendt
-Samantha Power - Development and Democracy - "Samantha Power discusses the political challenges facing democracy promotion and the practical needs of effective democratization." www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUUOO5cCNVg
"Capable, generous men do not create victims, they nurture them." - Julian Assange, editor & founder of Wikileaks
( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_ecology )
"WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange on the 'War Logs- ; ''I Enjoy Crushing Bastards" www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,708518,00.html
- ( !! Yessssssssssssss.. Enough of bastards... )
-
"The leak of tens of thousands of Afghanistan war-related documents tells us more than the sum total of many official communiqués about the war. On balance, more disclosure is a good thing, but the leaking of raw military intelligence is a special case that requires a careful, rather than a cavalier, approach.
There is not enough information about the war, and much official information is misleading. In Canada, the federal government's quarterly reports contain a few updates based on its goals in Kandahar, but little else that informs. The government has already shown itself to be an unreliable source on issues relating to Afghan detainees.
The situation is now too dangerous for the most trustworthy chroniclers – journalists, UN personnel – to go outside NATO-protected areas.
So reliable, independent information is lacking. The circumstances in this war make such information even more necessary."
www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/we-neede...
"The first phase was chilling, in part because the banter of the soldiers was so far beyond the boundaries of civilian discourse. “Just fuckin’, once you get on ’em, just open ’em up,” one of them said. The crew members of the Apache came upon about a dozen men ambling down a street, a block or so from American troops, and reported that five or six of the men were armed with AK-47s; as the Apache maneuvered into position to fire at them, the crew saw one of the Reuters journalists, who were mixed in among the other men, and mistook a long-lensed camera for an RPG. The Apaches fired on the men for twenty-five seconds, killing nearly all of them instantly."
Read more www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khat...
"Women always disproportionately suffer the effects of war, and to think that women's rights can be won with bullets and bloodshed is a position dangerous in its naïveté." www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/30/is-the-war-in-afghanist...
"Instead, many eyes will now pore over this data from many different directions, looking for patterns and attempting to eliminate the noise, disinformation and fog of war.
Many will look to it to criticise and condemn the US presence in Afghanistan, but if those on the other side – those who support such military incursions – have any sense, they too will use it to understand better the war in which they find themselves and adapt their counsel to fit more accurately the facts on the ground.
That’s the benefit, usually, of an open society. We get to triangulate on the truth by gathering facts in the public space, then providing them to all sides to chew over. We use this against our own illusions and those of more closed societies who can only view the world through one narrow perspective.": www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2010/0730/1224275801...
"We journalists should be delighted that WikiLeaks exists because our central task has always been one of disclosure, of revealing public interest material that others believe wish to be kept secret.The website deserves our praise and needs to be defended against the reactionary forces that seek to avoid exposure."
edition.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/07/29/wikileaks.roy.greensla...
"With the release of the WikiLeaks documents, Arab media may finally feel vindicated, as Western media finally start to give greater prominence to civilian casualties." newamericamedia.org/2010/07/wikileaks-documents-validate-...
"Wikileaks confirmed: A plan to kill American geologist with poison beer
The Wikileaks documents contain a claim that Pakistan and Afghanistan insurgents were working to poison alcoholic drinks in Afghanistan. While that's unproven, one US adviser in Afghanistan tells the Monitor he was almost poisoned that way in 2007." : www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2010/0728/Wiki...
"This is duplicitous only if you close your eyes to the Pakistani reality, which the Americans never did. There was ample evidence, as the WikiLeaks show, of covert ISI ties to the Taliban. The Americans knew they couldn't break those ties. They settled for what support Pakistan could give them while constantly pressing them harder and harder until genuine fears in Washington emerged that Pakistan could destabilize altogether. Since a stable Pakistan is more important to the United States than a victory in Afghanistan—which it wasn't going to get anyway—the United States released pressure and increased aid. If Pakistan collapsed, then India would be the sole regional power, not something the United States wants."
www.billoreilly.com/site/rd?satype=13&said=12&url...
"How to read the Afghanistan war logs: video tutorial
David Leigh, the Guardian's investigations editor, explains the online tools we have created to help you understand the secret US military files on the war in Afghanistan": www.guardian.co.uk/world/datablog/video/2010/jul/25/afgha...
"Jonathan Foreman, writing for the right of center National Review's Corner blog, hopes the documents will force America to deal with the possible deceptions being made by ally Pakistan. "It is possible that the publication of documents that provide actual evidence — rather than rumors — of the role of ISI personnel in Taliban planning, logistics, and strategy will give the West greater leverage in dealing with Islamabad and might force Pakistan’s political elite to confront the reality of the ISI’s secret activities. If so, that would be a silver lining to what is otherwise a military disaster abetted by the U.S. and British media."
www.nbclosangeles.com/news/politics/NATL-The-Importance-o...
A War Without End: www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,708314,00.html
"Julian Assange on the Afghanistan war logs: 'They show the true nature of this war'
Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, explains why he decided to publish thousands of secret US military files on the war in Afghanistan Afghanistan war logs expose truth of occupation": www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2010/jul/25/julian-assange...
The history of US leaks: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10769495
Freedom of Information Act: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_(United_...
"A long-delayed Afghanistan war funding bill, stripped of billions for teachers and black farmers, is back before the House and walking now into the storm over the Internet leak of battlefield reports stirring old doubts about U.S. policy and relations with Pakistan.": www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40254.html & www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40251.html
This ongoing series is dedicated to everyone who has needlessly had their lives destroyed, been injured or die in this almost past decade of war. For the sources, journalists & average citizens who risk their lives to inform us.
Reuters reporters Namir Eldeen, Saeed Chmagh & the good samaritan ( father ) who died trying to save them & of course his two surviving small children who will forever be impacted by the brutality of war for decades to come.
Please help Private Bradley Manning- www.bradleymanning.org/
"One surprising consequence of the war in Iraq is the surrender of postmodernism to a victorious modernism. This has been largely overlooked in North America.
In reaction to the U.S. intervention in Iraq, Jacques Derrida, a famous postmodernist, signed on as co-author of an article drafted by the German philosopher Jürgen Habermas, previously an opponent of his, in an unmistakable endorsement of modernist Enlightenment principles. Derrida, the apostle of deconstructionism, is now advocating some decidedly constructive and Eurocentric activism.
The article appeared simultaneously in two newspapers on May 31, in German in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung as "After the War: The Rebirth of Europe," and in French in Libération, less triumphantly, as "A Plea for a Common Foreign Policy: The demonstrations of Feb. 15 against the war in Iraq designed a new European public space."
Other famous intellectuals joined in with supportive newspaper articles of their own: Umberto Eco (of The Name of the Rose) and Gianni Vattimo in Italy and an American philosopher, Richard Rorty. This provoked much discussion in Europe, but only a few comments so far in North America, the Boston Globe and the Village Voice being rare exceptions.
This week in Montreal, there was an anti-globalization riot in which windows were broken in protest against a World Trade Organization (WTO) meeting. But the Habermas-Derrida declaration praises the WTO and even the International Monetary Fund as part of Weltinnenpolitik: maddeningly hard to translate, but something like "global domestic policy" or "external internal policy."
Yet it is not much of a stretch to claim the young anti-globalists as disciples of postmodernism and Derrida, who has hitherto been a foe of "logocentrism" (putting reason at the centre), "phallologocentrism" (reason is an erect male organ and, as such, damnably central) and Eurocentrism (the old, old West is the homeland of all of the above).
Derrida added a note to the article, observing most people would recognize Habermas's style and thinking in the piece, and that he hadn't had time to write a separate piece. But notwithstanding his "past confrontations" with Habermas (Derrida had objected to being called a "Judaistic mystic," for one thing), he agreed with the article he had signed, which calls for new European responsibilities "beyond all Eurocentrism" and the strengthening of international law and international institutions."
More: www.16beavergroup.org/mtarchive/archives/000361.php
"In early 2003, both Habermas and Derrida were very active in opposing the coming Iraq War, and called for in a manifesto that later became the book Old Europe, New Europe, Core Europe for a tighter union of the states of the European Union in order to provide a power capable of opposing American foreign policy. Derrida wrote a foreword expressing his unqualified subscription to Habermas's declaration of February 2003, "February 15, or, What Binds Europeans Together: Plea for a Common Foreign Policy, Beginning in Core Europe,” in Old Europe, New Europe, Core Europe which was a reaction to the Bush administration demands upon European nations for support for the coming Iraq War[25]. Habermas has offered further context for this declaration in an interview."
More: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%c3%bcrgen_Habermas#Habermas_and_D...
Habermas: ”The asymmetry between the concentrated destructive power of the electronically controlled clusters of elegant and versatile missiles in the air and the archaic ferocity of the swarms of bearded warriors outfitted with Kalashnikovs on the ground remains a morally obscene sight
I consider Bush' s decision to call for a "war against terrorism" a serious mistake, both normatively and pragmatically. Normatively, he is elevating these criminals to the status of war enemies; and pragmatically, one cannot lead a war against a "network" if the term "war" is to retain any definite meaning.”
Derrida: “To say it all too quickly and in passing, to amplify and clarify just a bit what I said earlier about an absolute threat whose origin is anonymous and not related to any state, such "terrorist" attacks already no longer need planes, bombs, or kamikazes: it is enough to infiltrate a strategically important computer system and introduce a virus or some other disruptive element to paralyze the economic, military, and political resources of an entire country or continent. And this can be attempted from just about anywhere on earth, at very little expense and with minimal means. The relationship between earth, terra territory, and terror has changed, and it is necessary to know that this is because of knowledge, that is, because of technoscience.
It is technoscience that blurs the distinction between war and terrorism. In this regard, when compared to the possibilities for destruction and chaotic disorder that are in reserve, for the future, in the computerized networks of the world, "September 11" is still part of the archaic theater of violence aimed at striking the imagination. One will be able to do even worse tomorrow, invisibly, in silence, more quickly and without any bloodshed, by attacking the computer and informational networks on which the entire life (social, economic, military, and so on) of a "great nation," of the greatest power on earth, depends.”
www.16beavergroup.org/mtarchive/archives/000361.php
I am incredibly- delighted at all the vital discussions about the war & US gov that are FINALLY taking place- & on a mass scale- as a result of this leak .. Simply miraculous..
FREEDOM & PEACE ( transparency, diplomacy & the evolution of such ) FOR ALL WAR NATIONS.
( WARNING - links ( after excerpt ) are NOT for sensitive viewers- ) "Wikileaks have released over 150 supressed images. This is the tip of the iceberg, keep looking, keep publishing.In the last week Wikileaks has released over 150 censored photos and videos of the Tibet uprising and has called on bloggers around the world to help drive the footage through the Chinese internet censorship regime — the so called “Great Firewall of China”The transparency group’s move comes as a response to the the Chinese Public Security Bureau’s carte-blanche censorship of youtube, the BBC, CNN, the Guardian and other sites carrying video footage of the Tibetan people’s recent heroic stand against the inhumane Chinese occupation of Tibet."
fortuzero.wordpress.com/2008/03/31/tibet-western-media-sa...
file.wikileaks.org/file/tibet-protest-photos/index.html
FREE TIBET!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also other dire & serious issues ( out of countless ) - that expose corruption by corporations & gov's:
"A documentary about intensive pig farming due to be screened at the Guardian Hay festival on Sunday is facing a legal threat from one of the companies it investigates. Pig Business criticises the practices of the world's largest pork processor, Smithfield Foods, claiming it is responsible for environmental pollution and health problems among residents near its factories."
www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/may/29/pig-business-document...
"In an investigation broadcast on BBC Radio 5 on November 14, 2004,[79] it was reported that the site is still contaminated with 'thousands' of metric tons of toxic chemicals, including benzene hexachloride and mercury, held in open containers or loose on the ground. A sample of drinking water from a well near the site had levels of contamination 500 times higher than the maximum limits recommended by the World Health Organization.[80]
In 2009, a day before the 25th anniversary of the disaster, Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), a Delhi based pollution monitoring lab, released latest tests from a study showing that groundwater in areas even three km from the factory up to 38.6 times more pesticides than Indian standards."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster
-
The Blue Mask - Lou Reed - www.goear.com/listen/9960779/the-blue-mask-lou-reed ( & O Superman ) www.goear.com/listen/02cf55d/o-superman-(for-massenet)-la...
Lou Reed The Blue Mask
Lyrics:
They tied his arms behind
his back to teach him how to
swim They put
blood in his coffee and milk
in his gin They stood over the
soldier in
the midst of the squalor
There was war in his body and
it caused his
brain to holler
Make the sacrifice
mutilate my face
If you need someone to kill
I'm a man without a will
Wash the razor in the rain
Let me luxuriate in pain
Please don't set me free
Death means a lot to me
The pain was lean and it made
him scream he knew he was alive
They put a
pin through the nipples on his chest
He thought he was a saint
I've made love to my mother,
killed my father and my brother
What am I
to do
When a sin goes too far, it's
like a runaway car It cannot
be controlled
Spit upon his face and scream
There's no Oedipus today
This is no play you're thinking you
are in What will you say
Take the blue mask down from my face and
look me in the eye I get a
thrill from punishment
I've always been that way
I loathe and despise repentance
You are permanently stained
Your weakness buys indifference
and indiscretion in the streets
Dirty's what you are and clean is what
you're not You deserve to be
soundly beat
Make the sacrifice
Take it all the way
There's no won't high enough
To stop this desperate day
Don't take death away
Cut the finger at the joint
Cut the stallion at his mount
And stuff it in his mouth
---
-
www.flickr.com/photos/97947642@N00/376765112/in/photolist...
Global atheism died with the demise of the brutal, atheist regimes of the 20th century.
Atheism proved to be the most horrendous, barbaric, murderous and criminal ideology the world has ever experienced. Many millions suffered and died at the hands of this hideous ideology, they must not be forgotten.
Who, but a complete idiot would want to resurrect such a monstrous, no-hope philosophy?
The so-called 'new' (improved?) atheists try to disassociate themselves from the disastrous record of the world's first, official, atheist states in the great atheist experiment of the 20th century. But there is no other example to go by.
The atheist experiment has been tried and, from beginning to end, was a diabolical failure. The new atheists may say: it's nothing to do with us gov.
But who wants to risk such devastation again, by giving atheism another chance? Only an idiot would want to take that gamble.
However, it was only to be expected and could easily have been predicted beforehand, that the inevitable result of atheism's lack of an absolute ethical or moral yardstick would be to wreak havoc on the world - and that is exactly what it did.
Atheism hasn't changed at all in that respect, because it can't. The ephemeral values, moral relativism and situational ethics of atheism is the ideal recipe for abuse.
We can see from the aggressive, rabble rousing rhetoric of today's militant, new atheist dogmatists, that the leopard hasn't really changed its spots.
Let no one doubt it - atheism has a hideous, barbaric history, ... we must never let it happen again.
There is no moral or rational defence for atheism, past or present.
But what do atheists themselves say about their ethical and moral values?
They claim that they DO have an ethical and moral yardstick, and cite the Humanist Manifesto as representing the ethics and moral code of atheism.
So is it really true?
The Humanist Manifesto looks good at first glance, but like most proposals atheists come up with, when examined closely, it is full of holes.
Problems ....
1. You don’t have to sign up to the Humanist Manifesto to be an atheist.
2. Even if you do sign up to it, there is no incentive to follow it. No reward for following it, and no penalty for not following it. You are not going to be barred from being an atheist because you reject or break the rules of the Humanist Manifesto. It is not enforced in any way.
3. It borrows its desirable ethics from Judeo-Christian values, there is no atheist, moral code per se.
Genuine, naturalist ethics is basically the Darwinian law of the jungle, the ethics of the Humanist Manifesto are actually a contradiction of social Darwinism. The ethics of the H.M. are not consistant with atheist materialist and evolutionist beliefs.
4. By far the biggest flaw in the Humanist Manifesto is the fact that it is entirely ephemeral. It advocates 'situational ethics' and 'moral relativism'. And that major flaw makes it a worthless scrap of paper.
Why?
Because .....
Situational ethics is based on what people want or find desirable, not on any adherence to what is intrinsically right or wrong.
A good, example of humanist style, situational ethics in practice, is the gender selection abortions now being blatantly carried out in abortion clinics in Britain. It primarily discriminates against female babies, who are especially targeted for killing, because most of the parents who want it, prefer to have boys for cultural reasons.
The abortion clinics openly admit to it happening, and claim it is legal.
The abortion act of 1967 certainly did not intend that, and the Government admits it was not intended.
So we have a Government that knows it is going on, it also knows it is not what the abortion law intended, yet it is still reluctant to do anything about it.
Why? Because it is wedded to the secularist concept of situational ethics, i.e. whatever people want, people get. Any concept of intrinsic right and wrong has to take a back seat, to whatever is the spirit of the times. And that is an example happening right now, in a so-called democracy.
The Nazi persecution of the Jews became popular through brainwashing of the public, and was eventually supported by a good proportion of the public.
So Hitler cleverly used situational ethics to do what he had persuaded people was right and good.
So, all in all, the Humanist Manifesto is a very dangerous document.
It gives carte blanche to any so-called ethical values, as long they become the fashionable or consensus opinion. Whatever people want, people get, or what a government can claim people want, they are justified in giving to them.
And for that reason it would not stop; a Lenin, a Stalin, a Hitler, or a Pol Pot, even if they had signed up 100% to abide by the Humanist Manifesto.
In fact, the 20th century, atheist tyrants even called their regimes ... People's Republics. They claimed they were representing people's wishes, and thus carried out their 'situational ethics' on behalf of the people.
What about the logic and science of atheism?
..If people would only think for themselves - there would be no atheists.
Atheism is anti-logic ......
Atheism = NOTHING created Everything, for NO REASON.
Makes perfect sense .... NOT!
www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existen...
Atheism is the rejection of one of the only 2 origins options.
The only two options are:
1. An uncaused, supernatural first cause.
2. An uncaused, natural first cause.
Atheists categorically reject option one, therefore they believe in option two - by default.
Option two (an uncaused, natural first cause) is impossible according to logic, natural laws and the scientific method.
Every natural event/effect/entity has to have an adequate cause.
All material/natural entities/events are contingent, they rely on preceding causes.
A natural first cause, cannot be a very FIRST cause because something (which didn't need a cause) must have caused it.
A natural first cause also cannot be the very first cause of the universe because it is woefully inadequate for the effect. An effect cannot be greater than its cause.
So atheism is a set of beliefs which violate the scientific method, ignores logic and defies natural laws.
Atheism is a religion because it credits matter/energy with similar creative powers and attributes as those applied to a creator God, it is really just a more sophisticated version of pagan naturalism, which imbued natural entities such as Mother Nature, The Sun or Moon god etc. with creative and magical powers.
Evolution is on the rocks - some recent evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/7215 7635944904973/
Fossil museum:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/7215 7641367196613/
To clarify further:
If there are only 2 options and one is ruled out as 'impossible' by logic, natural law and the scientific method, then it is safe, indeed sensible, to deduce that the other option is the only possible, and likely one.
Anyone who believes in science should know - that the basis of the scientific method is looking for adequate causes for every natural event/effect.
An 'uncaused' natural event is an anathema to science, it cannot even contemplate such a prospect.
If someone was to propose a natural first cause of everything, science would have to ask - what caused it? You cannot claim it was uncaused - that defies the scientific method.
However, if it was caused - if it had a preceding cause, ... then it cannot be the FIRST cause. Because FIRST means FIRST, not second or third.
So the very first cause of everything must be UNCAUSED ... which means, according to science, it CANNOT be a NATURAL cause.
In other words ... it cannot be a contingent entity, it can only be an eternally self-existent, self-reliant, autonomous, infinite, omnipotent entity which is entirely independent of causes, and the limitations that causes impose.
Furthermore, the first cause also has to be completely adequate for the effect, the effect cannot be greater than the cause ... so the first cause has to have adequate powers, properties and potentiality to create the entirety of the universe, i.e. nothing in the universe can be superior in any respect to the first cause.
That means the first cause must embody, or be able to create, every property and quality that exists, which includes: natural laws, information, life, intelligence, consciousness, self-awareness, design, skill, moral values, sense of beauty, justice etc.
All proposed, natural first causes - Big Bang's, Singularities, quantum mechanics etc. are not only ruled out because, as contingent events, they cannot be uncaused, they are also grossly inferior to the effect, which definitively rules them all out as credible first causes.
To put it more simply ... all effects/events/entities are the result of a combination of numerous, preceding causes, but the very first cause is unique, inasmuch as it is a lone cause of everything.
Everything can be traced back to that single cause, it is responsible for every other cause, entity and effect that follows it. Unlike other lesser or subsequent causes it has to account for the totality of everything that exists. So it cannot be inferior in any respect to any particular property, entity, event, effect, or to the totality of them all.
If we have intelligence then, that which ultimately caused us cannot be non-intelligent.
Atheists assume that we are greater in that respect than that which caused us .... that is ridiculous and it defies logic and natural law.
What about infinite time?
Time is simply a chronology of natural events. Time began with the origin of the material realm. No natural events ...means - no time. All natural entities, events/effects are contingent, they cannot be self-existent, they rely on causes and the limitations that causes impose. they are not autonomous entities, to propose that is anti-science.
Atheists often say: you can’t fill gaps in knowledge with a supernatural first cause.
But we are not talking about filling gaps, we are talking about a fundamental issue ... the origin of everything in the material realm.
The first cause is not a gap, it is the beginning - and many of the greatest scientists in the history of science had no problem whatsoever with the logic that - a natural, first cause was impossible, and the only possible option was a supernatural creator.
Why do atheists have such a problem with it?
Atheists seem to think that to explain the origin of the universe without a God, simply involves explaining what triggered it, as though its formation from that point on, just happens automatically.
This has been compared by some as similar to lighting the blue touch paper of a firework. They think that if they can propose such a naturalistic trigger, then God is made redundant.
That may sound plausible to some members of the public, who take such pronouncements at face value, and are somewhat in awe of anything that is claimed to be 'scientific'.
But it is obvious to anyone who thinks seriously about it, that a mere trigger is not necessarily an adequate cause.
A trigger presupposes that there is some sort of a mechanism/blueprint/plan already existing which is ready to spring into action if it is provided with an appropriate trigger. There has to be an existing, inherent potential for future development and everything that follows the trigger. So a trigger is not a sole cause, or a first cause, it is merely one contributing cause.
Natural things do only what they are programmed to do, i.e. they obey natural laws and behave only within the limits dictated by the potential of their pre-ordained properties, composition or structure.
Lighting blue touch paper achieves absolutely nothing, unless there is a carefully designed and manufactured firework already attached to it.
Atheists invent all sorts of bizarre myths to explain the origin of the universe and matter/energy.
Such as it arising from nothing of its own volition, for no reason.
Or even the utterly, ludicrous notion - of the universe creating itself from nothing. Obviously for something to create itself, it would need to pre-exist its own creation, in order to do the creating.
Incredible!
“When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.”
― G.K. Chesterton ..... HOW TRUE THAT IS PROVING TO BE!
[To forward this meme and essay to a friend, click the Curved Arrow in the lower right corner. You will have an easy choice between email, Facebook, etc.]
November 2018:
The Best and possibly the ONLY Way we can beat the Leftist Cult Democrat party and all their legions of collaborators [Media, Hollywood, Newspapers, Magazines, your children's teachers, TV programs, Leftist Organizations funded by Leftist Billionaires, and/or US Gov't funding, etc] is to begin and continue to influence your friends and family, and have the most energetic of these people do the same with their friends and family.
Trying to play 'catch up' in the few weeks prior to an election is futile, when the forces of the Leftist Cult control almost the entire Media, schools, some churches, etc. One would think that the nonstop Leftist Propaganda Narrative is so obvious that it is ignored by most....but, advertising works, otherwise companies wouldn't bother spending billions advertising.
And, the Leftist Cult gets all this 24/7/365 nonstop advertising for FREE!!! They don't have to pay a dime!!
In the 2018 election, we saw one group, suburban college educated [leftist indoctrinated] women succumb to the anti-Trump, anti-Republican, anti-common sense bludgeoning narrative coming from every outlet. Yet, blue collar areas, such as the mining and forestry area in Northern Minnesota, a previously hugely dominated area by the Leftist Democrat party, is turning decisively Trumplican...as in the New BIG Tent America First party, which working Americans are realizing is the movement which is ACTUALLY FOR Them, rather than the Open Border, Leftist Cult Democrat party that wants to shut down mining, forestry, manufacturing, etc., and bankrupt all those industries, like coal, or offshore all those 'dirty' jobs to the third world.
The Left is a Cult. Their ideas are not based in any science or common sense. They can't prove man made Global Warming by REAL scientific method, yet they promote the narrative of a world on the verge of ecosystem collapse - why?.....to scare the children into believing in the Leftist Cult.
Transgenderism is the latest 'hero' issue group for the CULT. Now that they have destroyed the ageless concept of marriage being between a man and a woman, with ZERO study as to what the long term implications of such policies will be [try building a new gas station with ZERO studies of what the environmental impact will be], they are on to indoctrinating children that there is a question as to what sex you are, and maybe your child should think about the notion of whether they really are a boy or a girl. Never mind that transgenders have 20 TIMES the suicide rate of the general population! Was there any thought given to what the long term implications of this drive towrds normalizing Transgenderism? Oh gee, where did the scientific method go?.....oh...not needed for Leftist Cult latest fad agendas, now to become ensconced firmly into the NEW TRANSFORMED American society run by the Leftist Cult under their monoploy over ALL power, both governmental and Cultural Institutions, such as TV and Hollywood.
We are fighting a behemoth, and the BEST weapon we have to fight the beast is to use our OWN personal influence.
Some of us are naturally influential. We have that type of personality. But, we ALL have influence.
The best way to mobilize your influence is to do it consistently, over time.
We can wait until the few weeks before an election, and go knock on doors and make telephone calls to strangers, but, that is only somewhat effective, and it works mainly on people already in your camp.
How much better to actually use your influence over time to 'Wake People UP!' to the truth.
What's really happening is simply NOT reported in the Media. Who among your friends understand that The Leftist Elites in Sweden allowed huge numbers of Middle Eastern young male migrants into Sweden, without consulting the people of Sweden, and that Sweden has then become one of the Rape Capitals of the World? Was this reported or even mentioned in the Leftist Media?.....NO.
The Swedish Leftist Gov't. has taken this even further, telling the Swedish People that they have NO say in the matter, and that they must accept the fact that the native Swedish People will be a minority in their own country in a few decades.
Understand that the Swedes have inhabited Sweden for 10,000 years, ever since the glaciers retreated at the end of the Ice Age. Yet, the Leftist Ruling Elite of Sweden deem that Sweden has NO real culture, and they, the elites have deemed that Sweden will become a Multi-Culti Society, and that the Swedish People will have NO say in the matter.
None of this is known by your neighbors, your friends. It is simply NOT reported. Nor are any other key issues to America, such as the Left's intention to have an Open Border policy, where the poor of the Third World will pour into America and receive massive welfare benefits, paid for by your children and grandchildren, right up until the time that the entire house of cards collapses.
One half of the people in the third world say they would like to emigrate to the Western welfare Nations. How could this even be possible, as there are billions of people in the Third World. Africa alone will have four billion people in a few decades. [See the essays I have on the Mass Immigration in a number of memes, and the excellent videos linked on this subject. These videos explain the utter impossibility of mass immigration from the third world being sustainable].
Even the Dali Lama, the religious leader of Buddism, a hero of the Hippies and the Left [previously] has said that Europe should be for the Europeans. What a concept....he points out, as I do, in my memes, that mass immigration from the third world only guarantees that the third world countries will remain mired in Kleptocracy. As the Dali Lama says, people need to stay in their own countries, and make them good places to live.
These memes are intended for YOU to forward to the people in YOUR Sphere of Influence, along with other articles outlining issues the Leftist Media will NEVER report.
We need to develop ways to fight the Leftist Cult Behemoth, and I can't think of a more effective way to do it than to begin to become your own disseminator of this hidden information to your friends and family.
Yes, you may feel like you are imposing upon your friends, but, that will probably pass as a feeling. Your friends may come to respect your efforts and you will have more to talk about than just the ordinary day to day.
Becoming an influential person in your own circle, AND persuading some of your friends to do the same with their circle of friends, is the BEST way to fight the Leftist Cult Behemoth.......it may be the ONLY way.
Think of yourself as a Patriot soldier in the 2nd American Revolution. It is certainly easier than what the Ist American Revolution soldiers endured at Valley Forge, freezing in the winter, waiting to fight the most formidable military machine in existence at that time...the British Army and Navy.
================
Nov 11th, 2016:
Trump may possibly have won the popular vote, as well as easily winning the Electoral College, when you subtract the MILLIONS of illegal alien votes in California and elsewhere, plus voter fraud operations of the democrats.
ALL illegal aliens are given drivers licenses in California.
All people in California who are issued drivers licenses are registered to vote automatically, in California.
There are NO data bases in California allowed to query whether someone is a citizen or not.
Thus, illegal aliens vote in California, and there are MILLIONS of them.
Obama was interviewed by a 'Hispanic' American 'journalist', and she asked him if the federal government would be tracking 'undocumented Americans' who voted. Obama said all Americans can vote, and, NO, the government would not be tracking people who were not citizens who voted...he said they would not be tracked or punished for voting.
I know this is hard to believe that an American president would be ENCOURAGING non-citizens to vote, but it is true.
www.youtube.com/embed/AQKAz7l5Es4
So, it is OBVIOUS that MILLIONS of ILLEGAL ALIENS voted.
It is simply unreal that this MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD is going on CONDONED and IMPLEMENTED by states like California.
There MUST be action taken by the Federal gov't to stop this fraud perpetrated by the democrat controlled mega states, because the illegal votes they allow cancel out the votes of honest people in honest states, like North Dakota, say.
We NEED total revision of our voting laws and everyone MUST prove their citizenship, and we can no longer allow the massive voter fraud by whatever means the democrats use.
This is SPITTING in the face of all honest Americans.
=====================
Oct 20th, 2016:
The American People know that there is surely massive voter fraud being committed by the Leftist Democrat party across the nation.
The Leftist democrat party vehemently opposes any sort of voters presenting identification papers to vote, or to receive absentee ballots. The Leftist Democrats also oppose the gleaning of voter rolls for people who have moved, died, or are felons.....Why, if not for purposes of using these obsolete voter registrations for voter fraud?
We see precincts in Pennsylvania and Ohio which have not given a single vote to a republican presidential candidate over multiple elections.
In Wisconsin, in Dane county, the home of the Leftist University of Wisconsin, and in the city of Milwaukee, we see more votes being cast than there are registered voters.
On a Native American reservation in South Dakota, we see more votes being cast than there are people who live on the reservation.
In California, the leftist democrat party has enacted a law that everyone who receives a drivers license is also registered to vote. And, they then passed a law that all illegal aliens are given a driver's license when they come of age to drive. Thus, all illegal aliens in California are able to vote.
We see instances of people bragging of how they have voted multiple times by going from polling place to polling place on election day.
In Minnesota, long renowned for the honesty of their humble, Northern European origin citizens, a former comedian, was elected as the new democrat senator, when a previously uncounted box of votes turned up in the trunk of someones car....It had been a close election.
There was a study done which showed that of all close elections (thousands of close elections) which showed that the democrat candidate won 75% of these close elections. Statistically, this should break approximately 50/50.
In Iraq, after our soldiers had liberated that country from Saddam Hussein's dictatorship, people were required to ink their thumbs and be fingerprinted in order to ensure that they only voted once...YET, In America, we don't even require people to show identification papers, and to have proof that they are, indeed America citizens?
President Nixon and the King of Thailand, 1969 . This was one of a set of slides I picked up recently-the photographer was a US Gov't employee-or maybe CIA. He spent the years 1965 to 1971 in constant travel around Asia and the US.
Atheism died with the demise of the brutal, atheist regimes of the 20th century.
Atheism proved to be the most horrendous, barbaric, murderous and criminal ideology the world has ever experienced. Many millions suffered and died at the hands of this hideous ideology, they must not be forgotten.
Who, but a complete idiot would want to resurrect such a monstrous, no-hope philosophy?
The so-called 'new' (improved) atheists try to disassociate themselves from the disaster of the world's first, official, atheist states of the great, 20th century, atheist experiment. but there is no other example to go by.
The atheist experiment has been tried and, from beginning to end, it was a diabolical failure. The new atheists may say: it's nothing to do with us gov.
But who wants to risk such devastation again, by giving atheism another chance?
However, it was only to be expected and could easily have been predicted beforehand, that the inevitable result of atheism's lack of an absolute ethical or moral yardstick would be to wreak havoc on the world - and that is exactly what it did.
Atheism hasn't changed at all in that respect, because it can't. The ephemeral values, moral relativism and situational ethics of atheism is the ideal recipe for abuse.
We can see from the aggressive, rabble rousing rhetoric of today's militant, atheist dogmatists, that the leopard hasn't changed its spots.
Let no one doubt it - atheism has a hideous, barbaric history, ... we must never let it happen again.
There is no moral or rational defence for atheism, past or present.
..If people would only think for themselves - there would be no atheists.
Atheism is anti-logic ......
Atheism = NOTHING created Everything, for NO REASON.
Makes perfect sense .... NOT!
www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existen...
Atheism is the rejection of one of the only 2 origins options.
The only two options are:
1. An uncaused, supernatural first cause.
2. An uncaused, natural first cause.
Atheists categorically reject option one, therefore they believe in option two - by default.
Option two (an uncaused, natural first cause) is impossible according to logic, natural laws and the scientific method.
Every natural event/effect/entity has to have an adequate cause.
All material/natural entities/events are contingent, they rely on preceding causes.
A natural first cause, cannot be a very FIRST cause because something (which didn't need a cause) must have caused it.
A natural first cause also cannot be the very first cause of the universe because it is woefully inadequate for the effect. An effect cannot be greater than its cause.
So atheism is a set of beliefs which violate the scientific method, ignores logic and defies natural laws.
Atheism is a religion because it credits matter/energy with similar creative powers and attributes as those applied to a creator God, which is really just a more sophisticated version of pagan naturalism, which imbued natural entities such as Mother Nature, The Sun or Moon god etc. with creative and magical powers.
Evolution is on the rocks - some recent evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/7215 7635944904973/
Fossil museum:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/7215 7641367196613/
To clarify further:
If there are only 2 options and one is ruled out as 'impossible' by logic, natural law and the scientific method, then it is safe, indeed sensible, to deduce that the other option is the only possible, and likely one.
Anyone who believes in science should know - that the basis of the scientific method is looking for adequate causes for every natural event/effect.
An 'uncaused' natural event is an anathema to science, it cannot even contemplate such a prospect.
If someone was to propose a natural first cause of everything, science would have to ask - what caused it? You cannot claim it was uncaused - that defies the scientific method.
However, if it was caused - if it had a preceding cause, ... then it cannot be the FIRST cause. Because FIRST means FIRST, not second or third.
So the very first cause of everything must be UNCAUSED ... which means, according to science, it CANNOT be a NATURAL cause.
In other words ... it cannot be a contingent entity, it can only be an eternally self-existent, self-reliant, autonomous, infinite, omnipotent entity which is entirely independent of causes, and the limitations that causes impose.
Furthermore, the first cause also has to be completely adequate for the effect, the effect cannot be greater than the cause ... so the first cause has to have adequate powers, properties and potentiality to create the entirety of the universe, i.e. nothing in the universe can be superior in any respect to the first cause.
That means the first cause must embody, or be able to create, every property and quality that exists, which includes: natural laws, information, life, intelligence, consciousness, self-awareness, design, skill, moral values, sense of beauty, justice etc.
All proposed, natural first causes - Big Bang's, Singularities, quantum mechanics etc. are not only ruled out because, as contingent events, they cannot be uncaused, they are also grossly inferior to the effect, which definitively rules them all out as credible first causes.
To put it more simply ... all effects/events/entities are the result of a combination of numerous, preceding causes, but the very first cause is unique, inasmuch as it is a lone cause of everything.
Everything can be traced back to that single cause, it is responsible for every other cause, entity and effect that follows it. Unlike other lesser or subsequent causes it has to account for the totality of everything that exists. So it cannot be inferior in any respect to any particular property, entity, event, effect, or to the totality of them all.
If we have intelligence then, that which ultimately caused us cannot be non-intelligent.
Atheists assume that we are greater in that respect than that which caused us .... that is ridiculous and it defies logic and natural law.
What about infinite time?
Time is simply a chronology of natural events. Time began with the origin of the material realm. No natural events ...means - no time. All natural entities, events/effects are contingent, they cannot be self-existent, they rely on causes and the limitations that causes impose. they are not autonomous entities, to propose that is anti-science.
Atheists often say: you can’t fill gaps in knowledge with a supernatural first cause.
But we are not talking about filling gaps, we are talking about a fundamental issue ... the origin of everything in the material realm.
The first cause is not a gap, it is the beginning - and many of the greatest scientists in the history of science had no problem whatsoever with the logic that - a natural, first cause was impossible, and the only possible option was a supernatural creator.
Why do atheists have such a problem with it?
Atheists seem to think that to explain the origin of the universe without a God, simply involves explaining what triggered it, as though its formation from that point on, just happens automatically.
This has been compared by some as similar to lighting the blue touch paper of a firework. They think that if they can propose such a naturalistic trigger, then God is made redundant.
That may sound plausible to some members of the public, who take such pronouncements at face value, and are somewhat in awe of anything that is claimed to be 'scientific'.
But it is obvious to anyone who thinks seriously about it, that a mere trigger is not necessarily an adequate cause.
A trigger presupposes that there is some sort of a mechanism/blueprint/plan already existing which is ready to spring into action if it is provided with an appropriate trigger. There has to be an existing, inherent potential for future development and everything that follows the trigger. So a trigger is not a sole cause, or a first cause, it is merely one contributing cause.
Natural things do only what they are programmed to do, i.e. they obey natural laws and behave only within the limits dictated by the potential of their pre-ordained properties, composition or structure.
Lighting blue touch paper achieves absolutely nothing, unless there is a carefully designed and manufactured firework already attached to it.
Atheists invent all sorts of bizarre myths to explain the origin of the universe and matter/energy.
Such as it arising from nothing of its own volition, for no reason.
Or even the utterly, ludicrous notion - of the universe creating itself from nothing. Obviously for something to create itself, it would need to pre-exist its own creation, in order to do the creating.
Incredible!
“When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.”
― G.K. Chesterton ..... HOW TRUE THAT IS PROVING TO BE!
香港聲援斯諾登遊行 Rally to Support Edward Snowden
星期六 Saturday 2013-06-15
3:00PM – 5:30PM
Central MTR Exit J2
中環地鐵 J2出口
請自備哨子 Bring a whistle!
Rally route: Starting 3pm at Chater Garden, Central MTR exit J2.
Rally to the U.S Consulate and then Tamar SAR government building.
遊行路線：3點於遮打花園（中環站J2出口）起步遊行至美國領事館抗議，
再遊行至添馬艦政府總部要求港府保護斯諾登。
www.facebook.com/events/343137435789907/
遊行 tag #SnowdenHK
Rally tag: #SnowdenHK
協辦團體（歡迎加入）：
Rally co-organizers:
+ inmediahk.net 香港獨立媒體網(www.inmediahk.net/)
+ Hong Wrong (hongwrong.com/)
+ Civil Human Rights Front 民間人權陣線(www.civilhrfront.org/)
+ Hong Kong Christian Institute 香港基督徒學會(www.hkci.org.hk/)
+ Hong Kong First 香港本土(www.facebook.com/hongkongfirst)
+ Midnight Blue 午夜藍 (www.mnbhk.org/)
+ Speak For Humanity (speakforhumanity.com/)
+ Land and Justice League 土地正義聯盟 (landjusticehk.org/)
+ 1908 Book Store 1908書社(www.facebook.com/1908book)
+ Youth Union 青年聯社 (youthunion.blogspot.hk/)
+ Left 21 左翼廿一 (left21.hk/wp/)
+ Socialist Action 社會主義行動 (www.socialism.hk/)
+ NuTongXueShe 女同學社(leslovestudy.com/new/ntxs/)
+ League of Social Democrats 社會民主連線
+ Hong Kong Professional Teachers Union 香港教育專業人員協會
SnowdenHK: 香港聲援斯諾登遊行 Rally to Support Edward Snowden - 星期六 Saturday 2013-06-15 3-5.30pm 中環地鐵J2出口 Central MTR Exit J2
/ SML.20130615.Events
/ #SMLEvents #SMLPublicMedia #SMLUniverse
/ #中國 #中国 #China #香港 #HongKong #HK #CN #Snowden #EdwardSnowden #NSA #US #GOV #PRISM #events #rally #public #ORG #SupportSnowden #Facebook
I thought Bush was a chimpanzee-idiot! Make up you minds! He cannot be both.
Also he is also either a Nazi or a Zionist.... he cannot be both you Moonbat, wackjobs. Make up your minds. BTW I love the way CUBA's gov't is NOT a REGIME. In 1959 the vote was promised by the rotund one. I was born in 1959.
Minolta D500
Interesting fact: Question these Moonbats and you also find a large overlap with the very same straight-jacketeers who are convinced that the US gov faked all the Moon landings.
am bringing this back around for the Digging in the Archives Tuesday group pool for january 13, 2015. some of the back story for our local heroine is below.........
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
deborah sampson is our local hometown heroine. she enlisted in the revolutionary army, dressed as a man under the name of robert shurtleff. she fought until she was wounded and her masquerade was discovered. honorably discharged, she received a soldier's pension from the new US gov't.
this statue is in front of the library and she often dons seasonally appropriate attire like this scarf. nope, it wasn't me who put it there ~grin~.......... the plaque at her feet credits the sculptor, lu stubbs, and gives the date 1989.
scavchal #16 monument (and, with this one, i am done. mosaic to follow)
The WikiLeaks Saga - INTERPOL & US GOV'T are searching the world for Julian Assange.
BrotherBoogie.com
This is a test site from the CDC (yup THAT CDC ... the US.gov CDC.) It currently is an installation of posters of the various things the CDC does. There are movies and podcasts available.
They do a lot of good work in RL, and it is great that they are getting their feet wet in SL. I hope they are able to show a lot more of what they do in a compelling way.
Knoh Oh
(SL Healthcare Tourist)