Trust the Billionaires, Chemical Attack - Sunday Update

by the Corbett Reeport

No Right to "Unnatural" Conduct, part II

This post is a follow up to the email discussion I have engaged in concerning homosexual conduct and government policy: No Right to "Unnatural" Conduct. The comments of my interlocutors are presented in quotes:

"I don't know if I could call it [homosexual conduct] un-natural, because animals do it"

Ben: Some clarification is necessary here.

The concept "natural" can be used and understood in many different ways. Everything that happens in nature may be called "natural". But when we talk of "natural" in terms of human moral conduct we are specifically arguing concerning the conduct which is appropriate to the purpose of human nature. The same thing can be done relative to organism in nature, for example it is natural for bees to produce honey, but not for bears.

From a Christian perspective this theory presupposes that there is such a thing as a purpose for human nature because God had a divine purpose in creating human beings in his image. For this reason if some species engage in eating their offspring, for example, it does not imply that it is "natural" for humans to imitate their conduct since it is supposed that humans are to be judged by a higher standard than animals. For humans it is "unnatural"  to engage in such a conduct, because of God's higher purpose for humans in creation.

 "Saying it affects anyone's natural rights other than the people involved is a far stretch that I can not agree with.  As long as it is between consenting adults, and behind closed doors, it does not affect me or anyone else.  The argument that society would become extinct after one generation does not work either (I have tremendous respect for your opinions, Ben) because each couple's decisions would only affect their own posterity.  To make this argument, you would almost have to argue that the government could require me to have children against my will - for the sake of society and future generations."

Ben: Again some clarification: To accept a human right to engage in homosexual conduct affects the whole of society, because it entails a redefinition of human nature against the doctrine of creation.

In Christian terms homosexuality is part of the profile of human conduct that invites the wrath of God upon societies (among others, see Romans 1:17-32).

The argument that society would become extinct if homosexuality became the norm is a simple way to show that homosexuality does in fact carries on social consequences.

In the same way I could argue that gluttony has social consequences, and that therefore government should not protect gluttony as a natural right because it is destructive to society and if it became the norm it would have negative consequences for the whole of society. That does not mean that I am advocating a food  police or alcohol prohibition. There is a middle ground between the extremes of prohibition and defining drunkenness as a natural right.

Concerning the role of government I am only affirming that it has no need to recognize or defend a right for individuals or groups to engage in "unnatural" conduct. But on the other hand good government does have a duty to defend and promote the sanctity of life which includes promoting policies which defend marriage and the family.

War's Plain, Stark, Ugly Meaning

The Horror of It -- Camera Records of War's Gruesome Glories, arranged by Frederick A. Barber of Historical Foundations: "THE HORROR OF IT -- CAMERA RECORDS OF WAR'S GRUESOME GLORIES

with forewords by Carrie Chapman Catt and Harry Emerson Fosdick
arranged by Frederick A. Barber of Historical Foundations 1932 by Frederick A. Barber"

War's plain, stark, ugly meaning.

A Documentary They Did Not Want You to See.

Conspiracy of Silence: 

55:56 - Minutes

In 1993 a team from Yorkshire Television came to Omaha, Nebraska to document, investigate, and un-cover the mysteries surrounding the Franklin case and the ensuing cover-up. What the team would find through the course of their near year long investigation would ultimately reach to the White House itself, where they found that then Vice-President George H.W. Bush had been implicated in the crimes surrounding the case. The explosive documentary was scheduled to air in 1994 on the Discovery Channel. At the last minute the program was pulled from the airwaves, and to this day has never made to television screens. See the documentary certain interests didn't want you to see."

Also, read : The Franklin Cover-Up: Child Abuse, Satanism, and Murder in Nebraska, by John W. De.Camp."A Book dedicated to the children who have been, or will be, abused because of the Franklin cover-up"

No Right to "Unnatural" Conduct

In a recent email dialog, I responded to the notion that Homosexual conduct is not a relevant issue for political discussion, but a matter of personal choice in a free society. (My interlocutors statements are printed within quotes followed by my response):

"It all gets really simple when we realize that the free choices of individuals (ie, sexual orientation) that do not interfere with the natural rights of others is really no issue at all in a truly free society."

Homosexual conduct does interfere with the natural rights of others. Consider a society where homosexual conduct would become the norm. That society would be set to extinction within a generation. It is for such obvious reasons that within traditional Christian ethics (on top of the teaching of the Bible) homosexual conduct has been identified as "unnatural".

There is no right to "unnatural" conduct.

One may as well advocate a "right" to chose to engage in sex with animals, or cannibalism among consenting adults. (Do not laugh, it has already happened)

The above example shows the danger of trying to separate ethics, religion and politics, treating each as if they could function in a vacuum independently of each other. They can't.

"Government involvement in social and culture wars is nothing short of tyranny. For example, marriage is an institution of religion, but government has claimed it and given it special dispensations… therefore, what would otherwise be comical and absurd insensitivity by homosexuals to those of faith who define marriage as between a man and a woman, gay marriage has become a “rights” issue."

Marriage, like the family, are religious institutions with serious consequences for society. A government which in its policies undermines these institutions, at the same time undermines the right to life, liberty and property of its present and future generations.

I agree that "gay" marriage has been wrongly defined as a "rights" issue. But, the main reason is not the limits of government in promoting social policy, but because in principle there is no right for individuals to engage in "unnatural" conduct.

The Great Conspiracy Exposed | Ted Gunderson

The truth is hard to swallow, but it is our only hope of becoming free from the evil conspiracy we are being faced with:

The Great Conspiracy Exposed: Retired FBI "Honcho" Ted Gunderson goes all out in this video and with sincere patriotic fervor explains the cancerous infestation of organized felony crime that has infiltrated the United States government at the local, State and Federal levels. He explains the continuing crime and corruption being carried on under color of law by the Illuminati, the crooked FBI, the murderous CIA and other out-of-control agencies of the federal government. Ted warns that unless Americans "wake up" and take individual action to demand that the gangsters in government be arrested and prosecuted---then, God help us all because we are soon to witness the complete ruination of America and our people who will be ruled by the "iron rod" of a Fascistoid Police State. This is not a theory; it is the hard truth! http://www.1-free-dvd.com http://www.tedgunderson.com http://thesenatorhillary.blogspot.com

The Ugly Truth About War

"War is the health of the state"

"Only fidelity to the constitution will save us from tyrants"

Premonition

Way to Prevent Illness Without Supplements or Drugs?

by Joseph Mercola    "I think we're opening up," Dossey says. "I'm sure you remember, about 40 years ago when meditation burst upon the scene in medicine, it was put down. It was called California Woo woo. Nobody wanted to have anything to do with it. But now nobody raises an eye about meditation and yoga, even in medicine.

    We're in the same place with spirituality that we were with meditation about 20 years ago. People know you can't ignore it. The correlation between spiritual practice and health outcomes is just too strong.

    For example, the data shows that people who follow some sort of spiritual path in their life… live on average seven to 13 years longer than people who do not follow a spiritual practice."

US Government in Massive New Global Warming Scandal – NOAA Disgraced by John O'Sullivan

US Government in Massive New Global Warming Scandal – NOAA Disgraced by John O'Sullivan: 


Global warming data apparently cooked by U.S. government-funded body shows astounding temperature fraud with increases averaging 10 to 15 degrees Fahrenheit.

The taxpayer-funded National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has become mired in fresh global-warming data scandal involving numbers for the Great Lakes region that substantially ramp up averages.

A beleaguered federal agency appears to be implicated in the most blatant and extreme case of climate data fraud yet seen. Official records have been confirmed as evidence that a handful of temperature records for the Great Lakes region have been hiked up by literally hundreds of degrees to substantially inflate the average temperature range for the northeastern United States.

...

Under a scheme called ‘Sea Grant’ NOAA collaborates with national universities to compile an official federal temperature record. In this instance, the partnership is with Michigan University’s ‘Coastal Watch.’

Together the two institutions show temperature maps for northern Lake Michigan registering an absurd 430 degrees Fahrenheit – yes, you read it right – that’s four hundred and thirty degrees – and this is by no means the highest temperature recorded on the charts.

In the heated debate about Earth’s ever-changing climate you certainly don’t need to be scientist to figure out that the Great Lakes would have boiled away at a mere 212 degrees so something has seriously gone awry inside this well-funded program.

"COINTELPRO": You will be surprised

Allow me to call your attention to Episode #141 of the Corbett Report about "COINTELPRO".

It is a very well researched and revealing information.

The same thing with the documentary:

Al Qaeda Doesn't Exist (Documentary) - 1

The corbettreport.com will be figuring high on my list of relevant sources.

Judge Andrew Napolitano Natural Rights and The Patriot Act part 1 of 3

Judge Andrew Napolitano Natural Rights and The Patriot Act part 1 of 3

Napolitano: "Assaults by fanatics on our safety, do not justify assaults by the government on our freedom. ...

Ask your member of Congress whoever she or he may be, where in the Constitution is it authorized for the Federal government to regulate health care. They will not be able to answer that question. ...

These gatherings are more important than anything you can imagine. Because in the long history of the world only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its maximun hour of danger. You are that generation! This is your role! Now is that time! 

Freedom must be defended from every assailant in every corner of this country, from outside the country, from inside the country and especially from the government that wants to take it away from us."

Judge Andrew Napolitano Natural Rights and PATRIOT ACT Part 2 of 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjhNZjanX9k&feature=related

Judge Andrew Napolitano Natural rights Patriot Act - Part 3 of 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7n2m-X7OIuY&feature=related

"Lies the Government Told You" by Andrew Napolitano

"The deception is historic and continuous"

The only issue I take with this wonderful two minute speech is when it says: "The Government at times tells you lies" I would remove the "at times". As he says in the next line: "the deception is historic and continuous." Any way it is a great speech:

"Goverment at times tells you lies. The deception is historic and continuous.

Does the government want you to know that it has killed innocent civilians in Afganistan? Of Course Not!

Does it want you to know that it has dispatched hit squads to kill civilians in Afganistan that it hates and fears in violation of American Law, Afgan Law and International Law? Of course not! ...

The Government needs to be exposed because it cannot be trusted to expose itself.

The light of day and the light of truth are the best disinfectants for the government no matter what it does. ...

Something is not right when people must break the law and risk their freedom  to tell us the truth.

Thank God for the Truth! No matther how it comes to us." Judge Andrew Napolitano:

Secrecy Used to Cloak Illegal Conduct

Unnecessary lies: A whistleblower's perspective on; Necessary Secrets: "

Gabriel Schoenfeld, in his recent book, fails to mention that some government secrets hide illegal government activity.

by Jesselyn Radack, August 9, 2010

Secrecy is a cornerstone of autocratic rule and unaccountable political systems, not democracies. ...

So, why are Schoenfeld's arguments so palatable? In masterful sophistry, Schoenfeld uses reverse psychology: The New York Times  failed to "exercise responsibility" and "broke the public trust" by exposing electronic eavesdropping, not the Bush administration or NSA by engaging in it. Whistleblowers like Thomas Tamm violated their oath of secrecy by disclosing the scandal, not the government by violating its oath to uphold the Constitution. Although he characterizes the Watergate and the Iran-Contra affairs as "renegade governmental activity," secret surveillance (a close cousin to the illegality that underpinned Watergate) gets a pass because in some über-paternalistic way it is meant to protect us — and anyone who tries to bring forth information that would allow the public to exercise its sovereign prerogative of democratic debate be damned, or better yet, sent to prison. Isn't incarceration the ultimate way to stifle public debate by cutting off alternative information at the source? ...

In support of Schoenfeld's novel prosecutorial theory, he trots out many of the old arguments that have been debunked. For example, he states that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) was too "cumbersome." He also dredges up the tired excuse that "advances in telecommunications technology during the two and half decades since FISA was enacted render[ed] it unsuitable" and "[r]equiring a court order to intercept [e-mail] communications was a preposterous barrier to U.S. intelligence gathering." All of this is belied by the fact that FISA was massively expanded in October 2001, at the Bush administration's request, to (in the president's own words) "allow surveillance of all communications used by terrorists, including e-mails, the Internet, and cell phones." After assuring the country that he had all the surveillance tools he needed, Bush proceeded the same month with his secret spying regime. ...

all three federal judges to consider the question have concluded that Bush's NSA program violated criminal law (something Schoenfeld neglects to mention). The clear criminality of the NSA program is further amplified by Schoenfeld's glaring omission of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 — referenced not once in his entire book — which immunized telecommunications companies, terminated all pending lawsuits against them and legalized warrantless wiretapping. It raises the question of why such legislation was necessary, especially the retroactive telecom-immunity provisions, if no law had been broken. ...

Overly broad, ambiguous laws have an irresistible quality, and now — ignoring the president's own edict to "look forward, not backward" — the Obama administration, through its marching orders to Attorney General Eric Holder Jr., has literally taken a page from Schoenfeld's book by forcing a trial for espionage on a person who is not a spy: Thomas Drake. Unfortunately, the Espionage Act does not distinguish between spying and "leaking." A hurdle in the Drake prosecution will be demonstrating to a jury that he had the requisite state of mind that is a crucial element of the crime. Specifically, did he have "reason to believe" that his disclosure — if he made one at all — "could be used to the injury of the United States"? There is more than a reasonable doubt that Drake had any such state of mind. When Drake went to a reporter, it was only after his internal complaints fell on the deaf ears of his bosses, the NSA's general counsel and inspector general, the Defense Department's inspector general and the House and Senate intelligence committees. His disclosures were a matter of public concern and were clearly of public significance: The NSA went on a "billion dollar boondoggle" and ultimately chose an extremely intrusive surveillance program over an even better program that protected privacy. ...

The old adage goes, "it's not the crime, but the cover-up" that will ultimately get bad actors. Under this calculus, at least malfeasors are held accountable at some point. But Schoenfeld's version appears to be "it's not the crime — ever — but the exposure of it" that will be penalized. I submit that when secrecy is used to cloak illegal conduct, that is what should be punished.

Jesselyn Radack is the homeland security director at the Government Accountability Project. As an ethics adviser to the Department of Justice, she blew the whistle on the FBI's interrogation of "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh without an attorney present.

Read the whole article here

Atomic Lies

The truth sometimes is very difficult to come to terms with. Reality can be terrifying. That is why we are so easily deceived when those who know tell us the lies we want to hear.

The truth is not easy, but as good medicine for the soul, it is always necessary.

Targeting Iran: Is the US Administration Planning a Nuclear Holocaust?: by Michel Chossudovsky

"'We have discovered the most terrible bomb in the history of the world. It may be the fire destruction prophesied in the Euphrates Valley Era, after Noah and his fabulous Ark.... This weapon is to be used against Japan ... [We] will use it so that military objectives and soldiers and sailors are the target and not women and children. Even if the Japs are savages, ruthless, merciless and fanatic, we as the leader of the world for the common welfare cannot drop that terrible bomb on the old capital or the new. ... The target will be a purely military one... It seems to be the most terrible thing ever discovered, but it can be made the most useful.'

(President Harry S. Truman, Diary, July 25, 1945)

'The World will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians..' (President Harry S. Truman in a radio speech to the Nation, August 9, 1945).

[Note: the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945; the Second on Nagasaki, on August 9, on the same day as Truman's radio speech to the Nation]

(Listen to Excerpt of his speech, Hiroshima audio video)"

2.1 Kids: Stable Population

Great Video. In a word of lies it is so refreshing to simply hear some truth! Enjoy:

Over Population is a Myth

see more at: http://overpopulationisamyth.com/

World Domination: Race is on for Arctic Treasures

Race is on for Arctic Treasures

The Lies of Hiroshima are the Lies of Today.

The Lies Of Hiroshima Are The Lies Of Today.: by John Pilger 

 "In the immediate aftermath of the bomb, the allied occupation authorities banned all mention of radiation poisoning and insisted that people had been killed or injured only by the bomb's blast. It was the first big lie. 'No radioactivity in Hiroshima ruin' said the front page of the New York Times, a classic of disinformation and journalistic abdication, which the Australian reporter Wilfred Burchett put right with his scoop of the century. 'I write this as a warning to the world,' reported Burchett in the Daily Express, having reached Hiroshima after a perilous journey, the first correspondent to dare. He described hospital wards filled with people with no visible injuries but who were dying from what he called 'an atomic plague'. For telling this truth, his press accreditation was withdrawn, he was pilloried and smeared - and vindicated."

The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a criminal act on an epic scale. It was premeditated mass murder that unleashed a weapon of intrinsic criminality. For this reason its apologists have sought refuge in the mythology of the ultimate "good war", whose "ethical bath", as Richard Drayton called it, has allowed the west not only to expiate its bloody imperial past but to promote 60 years of rapacious war, always beneath the shadow of The Bomb.

...

The most enduring lie is that the atomic bomb was dropped to end the war in the Pacific and save lives. "Even without the atomic bombing attacks," concluded the United States Strategic Bombing Survey of 1946, "air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion. Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that ... Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."

The National Archives in Washington contain US government documents that chart Japanese peace overtures as early as 1943. None was pursued. A cable sent on May 5, 1945 by the German ambassador in Tokyo and intercepted by the US dispels any doubt that the Japanese were desperate to sue for peace, including "capitulation even if the terms were hard". Instead, the US secretary of war, Henry Stimson, told President Truman he was "fearful" that the US air force would have Japan so "bombed out" that the new weapon would not be able "to show its strength". He later admitted that "no effort was made, and none was seriously considered, to achieve surrender merely in order not to have to use the bomb". His foreign policy colleagues were eager "to browbeat the Russians with the bomb held rather ostentatiously on our hip". General Leslie Groves, director of the Manhattan Project that made the bomb, testified: "There was never any illusion on my part that Russia was our enemy, and that the project was conducted on that basis." The day after Hiroshima was obliterated, President Truman voiced his satisfaction with the "overwhelming success" of "the experiment".

...

The question begs: are the rest of us to be mere bystanders, claiming, as good Germans did, that "we did not know"? Do we hide ever more behind what Richard Falk has called "a self-righteous, one-way, legal/moral screen [with] positive images of western values and innocence portrayed as threatened, validating a campaign of unrestricted violence"? Catching war criminals is fashionable again. Radovan Karadzic stands in the dock, but Sharon and Olmert, Bush and Blair do not. Why not? The memory of Hiroshima requires an answer. 

How the Media Control Really Works

The Revolution Will Not Be Televised is a 2002 documentary about the April 2002 Venezuelan coup attempt which briefly deposed Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez.

It reveals how the Media conspired to support a false flag attack to overthrow President Chavez. I do not agree with Chavez socialist agenda. But, watch this video and you will see what happened behind the scenes and the misleading headlines the Media brought to deceive us.

A television crew from Ireland's Radio Telifís Éireann happened to be recording a documentary about Chávez during the events of April 11, 2002. Shifting focus, they followed the events as they occurred. During their filming, the crew recorded images of the events that they say contradict explanations given by Chávez opposition, the private media, the US State Department, and then White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer. The documentary says that the coup was the result of a conspiracy between various old guard and anti-Chávez factions within Venezuela and the United States.

For a detailed account of the events of April 11, 2002 see the excellent documentary:

Llaguno Bridge - Keys to a Massacre
by Angel Palacios
Tuesday Aug 4th, 2009 8:57 AM
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/08/04/18613941.php

Watching these documentaries will not only help you understand better what happened in this failed coup attempt, but also reveals how the media manipulation worked in the perpetration of false flag attacks. Remember that the Media in the US is now controlled by only five big Media corporations.