Do You Worship in a State-Approved Church? – Separation of church and state: straight from the mind of Hitler

church high inside
June 29, 2015 by Anthony Sacramone

So now that the call for pulling churches’ tax exemptions is gathering Internet speed, I wonder if future commissars will make a distinction between “bad” churches and “good” churches. The former would have their charitable status eradicated, while the latter would continue to enjoy the tax benefits of getting on History’s good side, and no negative stigma would be attached to flouting one’s membership in same.

A “bad” church, of course, would be one that remained impenitent and continued to believe, teach, and confess the historic Christian faith and uphold the moral code embedded in that faith (regardless of, and even because of, how many fail flawlessly to obey it).

Which is to say, Southern Baptist, confessional Lutheran and Reformed/Presbyterian, “continuing” and confessional Anglican, Assembly of God, and Eastern Orthodox ministers, pastors, and priests may very well have to have “the talk” with their members.

That talk will probably go something like this:

As we know from history, the early Christians were sent out into a world that demonstrated great hostility to their message. They had neither political nor social status or props to keep them afloat nor financial incentives to encourage generosity. They did have, however, the Word and the Sacraments and the Great Commission. And of course, each other.

These inducements, prompting great courage, hope, and perseverance in the face of all manner of persecution and marginalization, were enough. Within one century, a small band of outlaw Jews and the believers in their care had spread the Good News and established churches throughout the Near East, as far south as Africa, as far east as southern India, and into various parts of Europe.

Those who gave — of their time, money, goods — gave gratuitously, and could count on no immediate reward, certainly not from Rome’s tax assessors.

Are you made of the same stuff? Or should I say, are you filled with the same Spirit? Will you continue to give, to support this ministry, to support this minister, regardless of whether you can write it off at the end of the year? Are you willing to dig deeper to make up for the losses owing to the changes in the tax codes?

Or will you walk away, the doors of this church closed shut forever behind you?

Why are you here? For the music? You don’t have to come here for that. That’s what iTunes is for. To see familiar faces, catch up on the latest news? Throw a party. Take your friends to lunch.

Or is it for the Word and for the Sacraments? That you cannot find anywhere else. It doesn’t have to be this building — in fact, we may have to move. It doesn’t have to be with air conditioning that works all summer, or even at all. It may not have a dedicated fellowship hall or special space for children and teens. But it has to be somewhere, with someone standing in the pulpit and at the altar. It doesn’t have to be me. You may have to find a single minister, at least for the time being, or one who has a second source of income. In fact, every minister, every priest, may, like the Apostle Paul, have to go back to tent-making now and again to make ends meet.

But you will need someone, someone who has received a call to minister to you what only a called and ordained minister of the Word can.

In the coming weeks we will throw open our books to all members so you can see exactly what it takes to keep the lights on here, and what losing our tax-exempt status will mean for our budget.

But please know this: I will not harangue you every Sunday about how you’re not giving enough or doing enough. There will be no guilt trips or strange looks at those who don’t give at all, who have never given at all. You will either rise to this occasion or you will not. Perhaps you cannot.

God has not been displaced by this court, this culture, this country. He is still on his throne and Lord of that History that is so often spoken of as it if were as autonomous as the Western Self, a contradiction that very few of the elite and enlightened seem to grasp.

We all know that nothing can ultimately prevail against the Church, the Body of Christ. Not hell, not hate, not even our own moral failings. Christ died once and cannot die again. We died once, in the waters of baptism, and rose with him, our new lives kept safe with him, no matter what the short term brings.

“Out of my distress I called on the LORD;
the LORD answered me and set me free.
The LORD is on my side; I will not fear.
What can man do to me?
The LORD is on my side as my helper;
I shall look in triumph on those who hate me.
It is better to take refuge in the LORD
than to trust in man.
It is better to take refuge in the LORD
than to trust in princes.“

Or something to that effect. You can write your own version on your lunch hour tomorrow.

Roman Catholics will be in an interesting position. I wonder if Catholic Dems will force the IRS to make distinctions between “Francis” Catholics (good) and “Benedict” Catholics (bad). Yes, yes, you and I know there is no real difference when it comes to affirming all that. But we’re dealing with crazy people here, for whom theology, reason, tradition, legal and social precedent, First Amendment rights, separation of powers, etc., etc., are so many humorous asides in the keynote speech at the Annual Transhumanist and Euthanasia Dinner Dance.

In 1957, China established the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Assocation, “the only organisational body of Catholics in China officially recognised by the government of the People’s Republic of China, but [that] is not recognised by the Vatican. Experts consider it wrong to identify this institution of political control with the part of the Church in China that accepts or tolerates its control, some of whose bishops the Holy See recognizes as in full communion with it.”

That quote is from Wiki. Here is something from the Cardinal Kung Foundation:

Bishop Andrew Tsien, Bishop of Hualian, Taiwan, explained that the objectives of the Patriotic Association are:

Short term: To substitute it for the true Roman Catholic church.

Long term: To eliminate religion in order to achieve a pure materialistic and autocratic society.

Catholics and other Christians, as well as Buddhists, Muslims, and other religious Chinese, have been and continue to be punished in far more extreme ways than just suffering hits to the wallet.

In his remark on the pastoral letter on women issued by the Patriotic Association’s Bishops Conference, Rev. Matthias Lu, Ph.D., S.TH.L., Director of the St. Thomas Aquinas Center in California, wrote:

“Its (the Patriotic Association’s) commitment is to manipulate the mass of the Catholic population in order to integrate them into the Socialist revolutionary movement by submitting them to the leadership of the Communist Party in all things.”

To accomplish this goal over the past 45 years, the Chinese government put tens of thousands of Roman Catholic faithful in jail for 10, 20, 30 or more years. Thousands perished in jail. Many were shot in public. All foreign missionaries were banished. As you are painfully aware, this persecution continues even today.

We are certainly not there in the United States, and it would be hysterical in the literal sense to assert we are, or anywhere close. But you don’t have to throw people in jail to destroy them, or at least marginalize them politically and socially. You can shutter their businesses and wrestle those mediating institutions that stand between the individual citizen and the Leviathan state—like churches—into desuetude.

Who would be the equivalent of the CPCA in the United States, given a pass by State functionaries and allowed to function, tax-exempt status intact? TEC? ELCA? The Moravians and the Quakers? UCC and American Baptists? The United Methodists may find themselves split between “good” and “bad,” with Hillary as a member of the former and George W. Bush a member of the latter.

Would the State have to make historically black churches exempt from persecution, for fear of a backlash from its base? (Not to mention the extraordinary good they do in their communities—but that may be seen as neither here nor there when it comes to political purity.) Would more traditional clergy be pushed out of those churches or be persuaded to focus on social-justice issues only?

This will all work out for the Church’s good in the long term, of course. The only reason History is allowed to run any course is for the sake of the Elect. That does not mean there will not be a lot of pain along the way. Purging and pruning guarantee it. But about how the story ends, there is no doubt.

Let’s just say we are definitely living in interesting times, as the Chinese curse goes.

https://deadcitizensrightssociety.wordpress.com/2015/06/29/do-you-worship-in-a-state-approved-church-2/

http://strangeherring.com/2015/06/29/do-you-worship-in-a-state-approved-church/
—-
Separation of church and state: straight from the mind of Hitler
Rom 13 Hitler FireBreathingChristian
January 19, 2008 By Bryan Fischer

When Adolph Hitler took power in Germany, he recognized immediately that the major threat to his tyrannical designs would come from the church. If he could neutralize the voice of the church, he correctly reasoned, there would be no one else to stand in his way.

Consequently, he immediately cranked up the Nazi propaganda machine to develop slogans designed to silence the voice of the church, slogans which were then relentlessly hammered into the minds of gullible Germans and their pastors, who meekly complied.

Hitler crafted two slogans in particular, and these became the bulldozers he used to push the church to the margins of the culture and so squelch its freedom to speak truth to power that the liberty of the entire world was soon threatened. Liberty was only preserved at the cost of millions of lives, including hundreds of thousands of America’s finest young men.

These slogans, mind you, do not come from the United States Constitution or from Thomas Jefferson or from the mind of the Founding Fathers. These slogans come straight from the mind of Adolph Hitler, and bear a sobering similarity to the mantras of the ACLU, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State and the Freedom from Religion Foundation.

Here they are, straight from the mind of Adolph Hitler:

“Politics do not belong in the Church.”

“The Church must be separate from the State.”

If they sound eerily familiar, it will only be because you instinctively recognize in these words the voice of tyranny and repression.

Hitler himself drove the pilings even deeper when he said, in December of 1934, “The Nazi State will however not tolerate under any circumstances any new or any continued political activity of the denominations.”

In the same speech, he added these ominous words: “But we will ensure the purging from our public life of all those priests who have mistaken their profession and who ought to have been politicians and not pastors.”

The objective of the Nazi regime was virtually identical to the agenda of today’s ACLU: Contain the voice of the church within the four walls of its buildings, turning them into nothing more than echo chambers, and punish any effort of church leaders to make their voices heard in the public square.

Further, in a manner that is strikingly reminiscent of efforts to purge any references to God from our public systems of education, Josef Goebbels said the following in August, 1935:”To educate the young people into religious ways may perhaps be the task of the Church, but to educate the young in politics is very much our affair …The youth belongs to us and we will yield them to no one.”

All church youth groups were banned in favor of the Hitler Youth, which became the only legal youth organization in the country. Churches were no longer permitted to hold any meetings in public venues. They were instead locked up inside their sanctuaries, forbidden to speak their message outside the four walls of their church buildings.

And the rest, as they say, is history.

The current restraint on the freedom of the church in America to speak truth to political power was imposed in 1954 through the efforts of then Sen. Lyndon Johnson. Johnson, incensed at some non-profit organizations for opposing his most recent run for office, suspended the sword of the IRS over the necks of any religious leader who would dare to stand for justice and truth in the nation’s political life.

And so today’s church is still paying the price for this small-minded politician’s petty and vengeful ability to use the power of the federal government to punish his adversaries.

Prior to 1954, churches had the freedom to be as engaged in matters of public policy as they chose. They were free to be actively engaged without fear of punishment, and free to be completely uninvolved in political matters if they so chose. That, my friends, is liberty, both of the religious and political kind.

While churches may still today distribute non-partisan voter guides, and pastors are free to speak to the moral issues of the day, watchdogs from the ACLU and other leftist groups are lurking around every corner, looking to pounce on any religious leader who would dare use his influence to help shape the direction of America’s public policy.

Just this week, an IRS investigation has been requested by Americans United into a pastor who endorsed Barack Obama from his pulpit last Sunday. In a free country, he should be free to do so without fear that his voice will be strangled by the federal government.

Judicial activism has turned the First Amendment on its head, and the very provision intended by the Framers to protect religious liberty is now being used to repress it.

The remedy? First, Congress should repeal LBJ’s onerous 1954 IRS restriction. Second, we must elect a president who will appoint justices to the Supreme Court who understand the original intent of the First Amendment and will restore constitutional freedoms of religion and speech in full to America’s churches.

Then, and only then, can we be assured that true American liberty will be preserved for us, for our children, and for their children after them.

COMMENT
You will find many comparisons of Hitler and MB Obama on this blog.

(Source: “The Nazi Persecution of The Churches, 1933-45,” by J.S. Conway, Basic Books, 1968)
© Bryan Fischer

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/fischer/080119
obama messiah
Hitler Obama
two churches
woe
state, God, church
unknown Matthew 10 32 33

Related

http://igcseedexcelhistorynazigermany.weebly.com/the-nazis-and-the-church.html

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

VIDEO Hillary’s Emails Prove Hillary Armed US Enemies – Reveal Favor From Clinton Foundation Donor

hillary secret war
Judge Napolitano: Emails Prove Hillary Armed US Enemies
June 2, 2015 By Keith Farrell

Judge Andrew Napolitano has revealed this morning that after reviewing Hillary Clinton’s emails, he has concluded that then Secretary Clinton approved arms for terrorists in Syria and Libya.

The Judge wrote in an Washington Times column entitled “Hillary’s Secret War,” that the emails “persuaded me beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty that Mrs. Clinton provided material assistance to terrorists and lied to Congress.”

On Fox Business News this morning, the Judge told host Chris Payne that he believed there was a conspiracy to “get arms shipped to rebels in Syria and Libya,” between the White House, Mrs. Clinton, and some Congressional leaders.

Some of the groups that received arms with approval from Hillary are actually on the United States’ terror list. That means providing “material assistance” to them is a felony under federal law.

The Judge broke down how arms dealers received permission lawfully from the State Department to sell arms to Qatar.

Napolitano said it was “crystal clear” that “Qatar then sold, delivered, bartered or gave these arms to the terrorist organizations with the consent of Hillary Rodham Clinton.”

VIDEO at the link below
http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/judge-napolitano-emails-prove-hillary-armed-us-enemies
—-
Hillary’s Secret War
TheBattlingBoysofBenghazi
July 2, 2015 By Andrew P. Napolitano

In the course of my work at Fox News, I am often asked by colleagues to review and explain documents and statutes. Recently, in conjunction with my colleagues Catherine Herridge, our chief intelligence correspondent, and Pamela Browne, our senior executive producer, I read the transcripts of an interview Browne did with a man named Marc Turi, and Herridge asked me to review emails to and from State Department and congressional officials during the years when Hillary Clinton was the secretary of state.

What I saw has persuaded me beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty that Clinton provided material assistance to terrorists and lied to Congress in a venue where the law required her to be truthful. Here is the backstory.

Turi is a lawfully licensed American arms dealer. In 2011, he applied to the Departments of State and Treasury for approvals to sell arms to the government of Qatar. Qatar is a small Middle Eastern country whose government is so entwined with the U.S. government that it almost always will do what American government officials ask of it.

In its efforts to keep arms from countries and groups that might harm Americans and American interests, Congress has authorized the Departments of State and Treasury to be arms gatekeepers. They can declare a country or group to be a terrorist organization, in which case selling or facilitating the sale of arms to them is a felony. They also can license dealers to sell.

Turi sold hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of arms to the government of Qatar, which then, at the request of American government officials, were sold, bartered or given to rebel groups in Libya and Syria. Some of the groups that received the arms were on the U.S. terror list. Thus, the same State and Treasury Departments that licensed the sales also prohibited them.

How could that be?

That’s where Clinton’s secret State Department and her secret war come in. Because Clinton used her husband’s computer server for all of her email traffic while she was the secretary of state, a violation of three federal laws, few in the State Department outside her inner circle knew what she was up to.

Now we know.

She obtained permission from President Obama and consent from congressional leaders in both houses of Congress and in both parties to arm rebels in Syria and Libya in an effort to overthrow the governments of those countries.

Many of the rebels Clinton armed, using the weapons lawfully sold to Qatar by Turi and others, were terrorist groups who are our sworn enemies. There was no congressional declaration of war, no congressional vote, no congressional knowledge beyond fewer than a dozen members, and no federal statute that authorized this.

When Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., asked Clinton at a public hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Jan. 23, 2013, whether she knew about American arms shipped to the Middle East, to Turkey or to any other country, she denied any knowledge. It is unclear whether she was under oath at the time, but that is legally irrelevant. The obligation to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth to Congress pertains to all witnesses who testify before congressional committees, whether an oath has been administered or not. (Just ask Roger Clemens, who was twice prosecuted for misleading Congress about the contents of his urine while not under oath. He was acquitted.)

Here is her relevant testimony.

Paul: My question is … is the U.S. involved with any procuring of weapons, transfer of weapons … buying, selling … anyhow transferring weapons to Turkey … out of Libya?

Clinton: To Turkey? … I will have to take that question for the record. Nobody’s ever raised that with me. I, I…

Paul: It’s been in news reports that ships have been leaving from Libya and that they may have weapons … and what I’d like to know is … the (Benghazi) annex that was close by… Were they involved with procuring, buying, selling, obtaining weapons … and were any of these weapons transferred to other countries … any countries, Turkey included?

Clinton: Senator, you will have to direct that question to the agency that ran the (Benghazi) annex. And I will see what information is available and … ahhhh…

Paul: You are saying you don’t know…

Clinton: I do not know. I don’t have any information on that.

At the time that Clinton denied knowledge of the arms shipments, she and her State Department political designee Andrew Shapiro had authorized thousands of shipments of billions of dollars’ worth of arms to U.S. enemies to fight her secret war. Among the casualties of her war were U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and three colleagues, who were assassinated at the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, by rebels Clinton armed with American military hardware in violation of American law.

This secret war and the criminal behavior that animated it was the product of conspirators in the White House, the State Department, the Treasury Department, the Justice Department, the CIA and a tight-knit group of members of Congress. Their conspiracy has now unraveled. Where is the outrage among the balance of Congress?

Hillary Clinton lied to Congress, gave arms to terrorists and destroyed her emails. How much longer can she hide the truth? How much longer can her lawlessness go unchallenged and unprosecuted? Does she really think the American voters will overlook her criminal behavior and put her in the White House where she can pardon herself?

Andrew P. Napolitano [send him mail], a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel. Judge Napolitano has written nine books on the U.S. Constitution. The most recent is Suicide Pact: The Radical Expansion of Presidential Powers and the Lethal Threat to American Liberty. To find out more about Judge Napolitano and to read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit creators.com.

Copyright © 2015 Andrew P. Napolitano

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/07/andrew-p-napolitano/the-secret-war-of-mrs-lenin/
—-
Hillary’s Emails Reveal Favor From Clinton Foundation Donor
hillary favor
July 2, 2015 By Bre Payton

The fax machine struggle wasn’t the only odd tidbit to come out of the latest batch of Hillary Clinton’s emails. It also appears that Hillary received a favor from a Clinton Foundation donor while she was Secretary of State.

Towards the end of the 3,000-page bundle of emails from her secret, off-books e-mail account is this back and forth between Clinton and her support staff:

hillary email

At first blush, it seems a little odd that the CEO of the Knight Foundation and Chairman of the Newseum Freedom Forum, Alberto Ibargüen , would be willing to let Hillary Clinton host a State Department event at the swanky museum for free, but then things get even weirder.

In case you forgot, this is the same Knight Foundation that, along with roughly a dozen other media organizations, came under fire in April for their donations to the Clinton Foundation. According to Politico, the Knight Foundation gave between $10,000 and $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation in recent years.

Upon closer examination, it seems that Ibargüen and the Clinton Foundation like to help out the same charities. The Knight Foundation has donated over $215,000 to TECHO, an organization aimed at reducing poverty in Latin America. Some of those funds were given to the organization upon Ibargüen’s request, tax records reveal. TECHO’s website lists the Clinton Global Initiative as an associated organization, and the Clinton Global Initiative’s website reveals that the Clinton organization also supported TECHO’s work in the past.

TECHO submitted 6 H1-B visa requests in 2014, all of which were accepted.

The demand for H1-B visas has far outstripped supply over the last several years. This year, there are 233,000 applicants for 85,000 visas. Immigration attorneys have helped companies file multiple applications for the same person, in anticipation that some would be rejected, the Wall Street Journal recently reported.

Which brings us back to the event at the Newseum: Clinton spoke about internet freedom and promoted competitive grants the State Department was planning to give to the “best ideas for applications and technologies that help break down language barriers, overcome illiteracy, connect people to the services and information they need.”

If you’re not sure what exactly that means, Hillary Clinton didn’t seem like she did either. In e-mail exchanges between Clinton and her staff, the former Secretary of State remarked that a draft of the speech made her sound like a “techie (which is good, albeit a stretch).”

hillary email 1

In April, The Federalist reported that the Clinton Foundation only spent 10 percent of its budget on charitable grants. The Clinton Foundation also had to refile its tax returns earlier this year after failing to disclose foreign donations while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State.

Bre Payton is a staff writer at The Federalist. Follow her on Twitter.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/02/hillary-clinton-email/

OBAMA BUSTED! Unaired 60 Minutes Clip Proves WH Lied About Benghazi Consulate

hillary
Obama-Liar-2-SC
benghazi guns syria
benghazi 3 times-help-denied
brave men cowards benghazi
Benghazi They Watched Them Die
Benghazi sticker

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 13 Comments

VIDEO BRICS fund operational in 30 days – Greeks Stand Strong Against Bullies- Moral Imperative of BRICS – BRICS Bank Panel

-The Moral Imperative of the BRICS Paradigm
-Tsipras Will Not Back Down On Referendum: Media Lies
-IMF Orders US Tour Operators to Withhold Payments to Greek Hotels
BRICS Finance and Commerce Minister at the signing of documents during the 6th BRICS Summit in Fortaleza, Brazil on 15 July 2014 [PPIO]
brics sign
July 1, 2015

The $100 billion BRICS Contingency Fund, that leaders from Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa had approved last year to combat currency crises, will be operational in 30 days, the Brazilian Foreign Ministry said on Tuesday.

Lawmakers from all five countries have now ratified their participation in the agreement.

China will provide the bulk of the funding with $41 billion, Brazil, Russia and India with $18 billion each, and South Africa with $5 billion.

“The agreement aims to provide temporary resources to BRICS members facing pressure in their balance of payments. This instrument will contribute to promoting international financial stability, as it will complement the current global network of financial protection,” the Brazilian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

“It will also reinforce the world’s economic and financial agents’ trust and mitigate the risk of contagion from eventual shocks which may come to affect the economies of the bloc,” it said.

Last year, during its sixth summit in Brazil, BRICS announced the creation of the BRICS Development Bank and of the BRICS Contingency Reserve Arrangement (CRA).

“The establishment of a self-managed contingent reserve arrangement would have a positive precautionary effect, help BRICS countries forestall short-term liquidity pressures, provide mutual support and further strengthen financial stability,” South African President Jacob Zuma said earlier.

The CRA is meant to provide an alternative to International Monetary Fund’s emergency lending. In the CRA, emergency loans of up to 30 per cent of a member nation’s contribution will be decided by a simple majority. Bigger loans will require the consent of all CRA members.

Meanwhile, the $100 billion development bank, funded by BRICS countries, will offer loans to other middle- and low-income countries.

Membership of the BRICS Bank will be open to all members of the United Nations, subject to agreement from the bank’s board of governors, China’s Vice Finance Minister Shi Yaobin said last month.

“The establishment of the BRICS bank is a landmark event in financial cooperation, which will promote the BRICS countries and other emerging markets, and infrastructure construction and sustainable development in developing countries,” said Yaobin.

“The promotion of reform in global economic governance has important and far-reaching significance,” he added.

As the BRICS countries prepare to launch new financial institutions like the $100 billion BRICS Bank, the China-led Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, and a $100 billion BRICS currency reserve fund, the IMF has once again delayed voting reforms to give emerging countries greater say.

A statement from the International Monetary Fund last month said the board has postponed the discussion on how to move forward without Washington.

BRICS leaders Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, Jacob Zuma, Narendra Modi and Dilma Rousseff are meeting next week in the Russian city of Ufa for the 7th BRICS Summit.

http://thebricspost.com/100bn-brics-monetary-fund-to-be-operational-in-30-days/#.VZSDXEbztjs

The Moral Imperative of the BRICS Paradigm
Special to The BRICS Post
June 29, 2015, 7:04 am

Nineteenth century historian Lord John Dalberg-Acton said, “power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”.

This has never been more true than with the case of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, and the power they hold over world governments and their people.

In one way or another, they have acted intentionally (or unintentionally) to subvert nations and their constitutional governments, monarchies, duly elected leaders, the major media, and any and all guardians of people’s human rights and civil liberties.

This is the global problem we are all facing now – there is currently no competition to the IMF and World Bank in the global marketplace for credit, loans, issuance of money and capital, the power to grow and develop economies, project finance, and to stay competitive with the influx of much needed capital to house, clothe, educate, or feed the people of the world.

The stranglehold that the IMF and World Bank wield over the world has given rise to impossible debts to be paid by Second and Third World nations.

This in turn has led to a stunting of economic growth in the wake of stringent austerity programs, leaving 99 per cent of the world’s wealth in the hands of a few plutocrats/oligarchs.

A by-product of the above is the resulting currency wars, which are now bringing us all dangerously close to nuclear cataclysm with the aggressive advancing of NATO in the Ukraine to Russia’s borders, and with the Greece-EU standoff – which is now pushing Athens closer to the BRICS format of doing business.

Currency wars have invariably followed an attacked nation’s general refusal to join the IMF global banking cartel, instead choosing to maintain its own banking sovereignty.

Such was the case with Libya, Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan, and other nations; future targets of NATO aggression include Iran, Syria, North Korea, and Russia, which overtly or covertly backs them all.

Fighting monopoly

In the US, the business norm has always embraced and encouraged competition – indeed the Sherman Act of 1890 codified this grand old American tradition that monopolies are always inherently evil, harm the people they serve, and corrupt the local, state and federal governments on the judicial, executive and legislative branches.

UK IMF
IMF Chief Christine Lagarde (seen here with UK Prime Minister David Cameron) is a regular participant at the secretive Bilderberg meeting, an annual gathering of some of the most powerful and influential figures in the world, reinforcing without accountability the dominance of a transatlantic capitalist cabal [Image: IMF]

IMF Chief Christine Lagarde (seen here with UK Prime Minister David Cameron) is a regular participant at the secretive Bilderberg meeting, an annual gathering of some of the most powerful and influential figures in the world, reinforcing without accountability the dominance of a transatlantic capitalist cabal [Image: IMF]
But there has been a marriage of corporate/banking interests with government in the US, resulting in a fascist, dictatorial, insensitive federal and local government, supplanting the people and their human and civil rights with the awesome power and cold-bloodlessness of an authoritarian state.

Families have been destroyed, race relations are at an all time low, division is endless and increasing, and the people are literally at each other’s throats, all under the watchful but indifferent eyes of the state.

The hidden hands behind governments – the wealthy international oligarchs and billionaires, banking and corporate interests, and unfriendly foreign governments – look the other way as the fractious atmosphere is fomented.

These are not conspiracy theories, particularly in light of the recent revelations that the multi-billionaire Koch Brothers are behind the right wing elements (Republicans) of the US government, and that billionaire George Soros behind the leftists (Democrats); it is quite evident that we are all pawns in the chess game of life.

Chaos in the streets (fascinating report on Soros’ funding of Ferguson protests) becomes acceptable because then the people will be distracted from dealing with the real causes of their stagnation and stunting of development and growth, while the debt payments keep rolling in from their host nations.

The BRICS solution

The BRICS banking paradigm offers a refreshingly soothing and exciting alternative to this out-of-control octopus of global banking strangulation currently put in place by the IMF.

BRICS also offers a way out of the legacy of European colonialism which has plagued the planet for the past few hundred years, wherein mostly brown and Third World nations are literally under the enslavement and yoke of their European financial masters.

The legacy and badges of slavery live on through the financial masters’ control of these indigenous countries’ money supply and credit.

This is why 132 nations (mostly former colonial victims), which had been calling on the UN for a new financial paradigm, immediately saw hope in the BRICS alternative banking and financing initiatives a few months ago.

57 countries have already formally joined the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), the first total break from the Western Bretton Woods institutions.

Meanwhile, the initial capitalization of the BRICS Bank is stated to be $100 billion, although this is projected to increase exponentially and significantly in the years to come, as their client states and governments have already promised to contribute to its success.

For every Coca Cola, there has always been a Pepsi Cola. For every McDonalds, there has always been a Burger King. And for every PC Computer, there has always been a Mac.

The United States has always stood for healthy and robust competition, frowning on monopoly and anti-trust activity, so it appears to be a natural and historically traditional progression that if the United States is to remain as a healthy member within the global banking community, that they would also join, if not wholeheartedly support, the creation of the BRICS paradigm.

Choke hold

Why the United States has openly discouraged and fought this new global banking alternative is the ultimate manifestation of the consequences the stranglehold that the world’s central banks, as organized by and under the IMF, has caused.

Within the United States, the subjugation and subversion of the US Constitution and the attendant civil liberties the people have enjoyed is at an all-time low – and the people know it.

America’s fate was sealed with the repeal of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act in 1999 during the Clinton Administration.

obama war fund
Anti-war activists protest as U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel (L) and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey (R) testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., the United States, Sept. 16, 2014 [Xinhua]

Following the Great Depression in 1929 (which lasted until 1939), US lawmakers looked for reasons why such a calamitous financial debacle happened. They believed that improper commercial banking pursuits in the stock market led to the crash by using depositors’ monies in high-risk situations.

The 1933 Glass-Steagall Act established barriers between commercial and investment banking. Banks had to either focus on commercial endeavors or investment, but not both. That barrier, removed in 1999, was primarily designed to protect people’s deposits in case the investments fall through.

The peril to people’s investments was further exacerbated by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, which ended previous restrictions that had prevented the merger of banks, stock brokerages and insurance firms.

Such mergers meant that when these enterprises merged, they would have access to personal information of millions of people.

While the Act called for three measures to protect personal data, it did not restrict the mergers.

The 1933 Glass-Steagall Act repeal and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 combined eventually meant that people’s money deposited in banks could now be mercilessly and carelessly plundered and gambled away by the banks due to the dissolution of the previous firewall barriers between the people’s money and the global banks.

Most economists would argue that this was the major contributing factor towards the financial meltdown in 2008, exacerbated and provoked by the low-credit money and mortgage lending practices of the US Housing and Urban Development government agency, which was forced and packaged nicely by huge banking and investment subsidiaries as Goldman Sachs, AIG, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, and the other 10 massive banks deemed “too big to fail”.

Since the great tradition in the US has always historically supported free competition in the marketplace, any marketplace, it is incumbent upon Washington to join the BRICS financial institutions.

The US needs to stop making the 99 per cent pay to make the wealthiest 1 per cent a whole lot wealthier. It must guide its people out of the global quagmire and debt stranglehold it became entangled in because of the IMF and its European colonial counterparts.

This becomes necessary in order to attain economic freedom to better preserve and safeguard the constitutional and civil liberties that Americans fought countless bloody and destructive wars to protect since 1776.

http://thebricspost.com/the-moral-imperative-of-the-brics-paradigm/#.VZSDQ0bztjs

Tsipras Will Not Back Down On Referendum: Media Report
greek pm tsipras
Syriza isn’t set to back down and will go ahead with the popular vote
July 1, 2015 by Zero Hedge

Contrary to suggestions that Greek PM Alexis Tsipras was set to cancel this weekend’s euro referendum as part of a negotiated deal with creditors, at least one report claims Syriza isn’t set to back down and will go ahead with the popular vote.

As noted earlier, Tsipras is set to address the nation soon, although it appears he may wait to see if the ECB tips its hand first.

http://www.infowars.com/tsipras-will-not-back-down-on-referendum-media-report/

IMF Orders US Tour Operators to Withhold Payments to Greek Hotels
Blogger: “To crush us is their aim”
July 1, 2015 by Paul Joseph Watson

The consequences of Greece’s default on its $1.7 billion IMF loan payment may already be damaging the country’s fragile economy with reports that the International Monetary Fund has ordered US tour operators to withhold payments to Greek hotels.

According to Greek blogger Alex Andreou, US tour operators have been told to, “Withhold payments to Greek hotels for services used, by order of the IMF.”

“To crush us is their aim,” tweets Andreou.

He links to a Skai TV report, one of Greece’s mainstream news channels, which suggests that the payments are instead being redirected directly to the IMF to pay off the country’s debt. The report cites the head of the Association of Athens Hoteliers, Yiannis Retsos.

If accurate, the measure illustrates how the IMF is prepared to impose draconian capital controls directly on Greek private business owners in order to recover the debt.

“If this is true, disgraceful. If IMF exceeding their authority, hope they get sued,” wrote one respondent to the report. “Pure thuggery,” added another.

Meanwhile, German chancellor Angela Merkel has ruled out any new negotiations on a bailout deal before Sunday’s referendum. According to polls this morning, Greeks are likely to vote “no,” rejecting the bailout out and potentially leading to Greece’s exit from the Euro single currency.

However, some speculate that Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras could cancel the referendum altogether.

The Greek government has denied reports that it has completely capitulated to creditors’ demands, instead asserting that a series of amendments to the deal have been proposed.

Greeks are already laboring under capital controls which restrict cash withdrawals to 60 euros a day.

http://www.infowars.com/report-imf-orders-us-tour-operators-to-withhold-payments-to-greek-hotels/

BRICS Bank Panel Hosted by RT and SPIEF
June 30, 2015

RT and SPIEF have jointly held a panel discussion titled ‘THE NEW DEVELOPMENT BANK: A STRONGER ROLE FOR BRICS IN THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL ARCHITECTURE’.

The BRICS economies have established a USD 100 billion development bank to be based in Shanghai. What does this new institution mean for global economic management? What are some of the key areas of focus over the medium term?
RT presenter Peter Lavelle was joined by a set of very distinguished guests – representatives of banks, ministries, think tanks: Pedro Alba, Amar Bhattacharya, Vladimir Dmitriev, Kundapur Vaman Kamath, Philippe Le Houerou, Sergey Storchak, and Shaolin Yang. Front-row guests: Ben Aris, Yaroslav Lissovolik, and Jim Rogers.

http://www.forumspb.com/en/2015/sections/50/materials/260/sessions/1092

http://wchildblog.com/2015/06/30/brics-bank-panel-hosted-by-rt-and-spief/

COMMENT

The IMF, Federal Reserve, Bilderbergers, EU, and Soros NEED Greece to remain in the EU so they can plunder Greece.

Greece has the opportunity to break the yoke of the IMF, Federal Reserve, Bilderbergers, EU, and Soros off their backs with a NO Vote.

The Greeks need to show the same resolve they did when they broke the yoke of the Ottoman Empire off their backs by voting NO, όχι
—-
Related

http://thebricspost.com/imf-delays-voting-reforms-as-brics-set-up-rivals/#.VZSGU0bztjs

http://thebricspost.com/chinese-cabinet-ratifies-brics-bank/#.VZSDYUbztjs

http://thebricspost.com/russia-first-to-approve-china-led-bank-charter/#.VZW3lEbztjs

http://thebricspost.com/brics-civil-society-drafts-goals-for-leaders-summit/#.VZW3qUbztjs

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

VIDEO NBC Can’t Handle The Truth! – Serta Will Stop Selling Trump Mattresses – GOP Worst Nightmare

-Donald Trump is quickly becoming the GOP establishment’s worst nightmare
-Network attempts to downplay Trump
no PC 16
July 2, 2015 by Jon Bowne

NBC said it was severing ties to presidential candidate Donald Trump over his comments on illegal immigration.

It just goes to show how far Americans will be diverted from reality in the name of supposed political correctness.

http://www.infowars.com/nbc-cant-handle-the-truth/

Serta Will Stop Selling Trump Mattresses in Latest Defection
Thought Police
02 Jul 2015

Serta, the largest U.S. mattress manufacturer, will end its business relationship with Donald Trump after he made disparaging comments about Mexican immigrants.

The company, which sells Trump Home-branded mattresses, won’t renew its licensing agreement with the billionaire presidential candidate when it expires at the end of the year, according to an e-mailed statement.

“Serta values diversity and does not agree with nor endorse the recent statements made by Mr. Trump,” the company said in a statement Wednesday. Serta is “in the process of unwinding our relationship.”

Serta is the latest company to distance itself from Trump following remarks he made in a June 16 speech announcing his run for president. In the speech, he accused Mexican immigrants of being rapists and bringing crime and drugs to the U.S. After advocacy groups complained, Macy’s Inc. announced Wednesday that it would phase out its Trump menswear line. Earlier in the week, NBCUniversal cut ties with Trump and said it wouldn’t be airing his annual Miss USA and Miss Universe Pageants.

U.S. Manufacturing

Trump accused NBC and Macy’s of supporting illegal immigration in a statement Wednesday and said he was unhappy that his Macy’s line was manufactured in China. The Trump Home mattresses were made at plants in the U.S. and Canada, Serta said.

Trump Organization representatives didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

Serta began selling Trump Home mattresses in 2009 in the U.S. and Canada. The line is priced from $1,299 to $2,999.

The Hoffman Estates, Illinois-based company accounts for 20 percent of the U.S. mattress market, according to market research firm IBISWorld. It is affiliated with National Bedding Company LLC, which is owned and managed by Serta Simmons Bedding LLC. It supplies many hotel chains, including ones owned by Marriott International Inc., Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc., InterContinental Hotels Group Plc and Choice Hotels International Inc.

To contact the reporter on this story: Claire Boston in New York at cboston6@bloomberg.net To contact the editors responsible for this story: Nick Turner at nturner7@bloomberg.net Kevin Orland

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/serta-stops-trump-mattress/2015/07/02/id/653220/

Donald Trump is quickly becoming the GOP establishment’s worst nightmare
donald trump announces
Jul. 2, 2015 by Maxwell Tani

Real-estate mogul Donald Trump is not the most cautious speaker in the Republican presidential primary field.

He’s in a public feud with the nation’s largest Spanish-language television network, one of its premier broadcast networks, and a major retailer over comments suggesting Mexican immigrants are “rapists” and drug runners.

And despite all that, Trump is rising in recent polls, placing second both in national surveys and in polls of key early-voting states.

This means one thing: In a little more than a month, the outspoken Trump will almost certainly be one of the candidates who polls high enough to earn a spot onstage at the first Republican primary debate. He is now in seventh place, according to the Real Clear Politics average of five recent national polls — the top 10 make it into the debate.

It’s a potential disaster in the making for Republicans who desire a more prim and proper run-up to selecting their nominee.

“I think there’s a real risk that he makes the August 6 debate look like a clown show,” Greg Valliere, the chief political strategist for the Potomac Research Group, told Business Insider. “There will be plenty of outrageous Trump sound bites on the morning news the next day.”

cnn poll bush trump

Trump’s presence on the debate stage presents a complicated situation for the other Republican presidential candidates, who have mostly ignored him or brushed him off.

During the debate they will be forced to confront Trump directly. Some political strategists predict it could distract from meat-and-potatoes issues and make Republicans look silly.

“Donald Trump is like watching a roadside accident,” former George W. Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer told Politico recently. “Everybody pulls over to see the mess. And Trump thinks that’s entertainment. But running for president is serious. And the risk for the party is he tarnishes everybody.”

Valliere said Trump was “a very generous gift to Hillary Clinton.” And some Democratic strategists are ripe with anticipation.

During one 2012 primary debate, eventual nominee Mitt Romney moved far to the right and said he favored the process of “self-deportation,” in a comment that is still attributed to severely hurting his status with Latino voters in the general election. He garnered only 27% of the Latino vote to President Barack Obama’s 71%, prompting the Republican National Committee to focus on Latino outreach in its post election “autopsy” report.

As he has so far during the campaign, Trump is sure to make immigration a focus of his platform during debates.

“I am a person of faith — and the Donald’s entry into this race can only be attributed to the fact that the good Lord is a Democrat with a sense of humor,” Paul Begala, a veteran Democratic strategist and longtime Clinton ally, told The Washington Post.

But not everyone thinks Trump’s presence is a guaranteed negative.

GOP strategist Liz Mair, the founder of Mair Strategies LLC and the former online communications director at the Republican National Committee, told Business Insider that Trump could help first-time Republican presidential candidates learn how to deflect claims from a critic who isn’t concerned about bomb-throwing or disrespecting candidates.

“These guys need to start contending with difficult situations,” Mair said. “And certainly being on the debate stage with him is going to be very challenging.”

Mair also noted that Trump could help the eventual nominee prepare for hecklers and tough questions on the campaign trail, and could even provide an opportunity to make the candidates look good if they can pull of a good heckler’s retort.

“So much of that is going to depend on how coolly and calmly they handle this and laugh it off and dispense with it,” Mair said.

But they also may be dealing with a candidate who, according to recent polls, is in the top tier of GOP hopefuls. Trump has seen a surge in recent surveys, trailing only former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida among GOP primary voters in a new CNN poll released Wednesday.

Some pollsters think a correction could come sooner rather than later, though.

Sam Wang, a neuroscientist and polling expert at Princeton University, told Business Insider that because the presidential field is so large, it isn’t hard for Trump’s core supporters to inflate his strength.

“This year, with close to 20 candidates expected to enter the race, the threshold for looking like a top-tier contender is quite low — even 10% of GOP primary voters is enough,” Wang said. “We don’t know whether his ceiling is greater than 50% of GOP voters (where Rubio is probably at) or more like 25% of GOP voters. I would not construe Trump’s support as indicating that he is serious.”

Added University of Michigan polling expert and political-science professor Michael Traugott: “The poll results with regard to candidate standing are ephemeral at this stage, primarily a function of name recognition. Trump has greater name recognition than many of the others, especially the governors. But name recognition is not the same as support.”

But Trump is uniquely positioned to dominate the news cycle because of that name recognition. His little concern for bomb-throwing has allowed him to grab attention away from candidates who haven’t been as outspoken.

Mair and the Potomac Group’s Valliere agreed that Trump appealed to a part of the electorate that appreciates the real-estate mogul’s willingness to say what other candidates would not.

“He has supporters who hate the status quo, who like someone who says what people are thinking but won’t discuss publicly,” Valliere said.

The official Republican response to Trump has been mixed. Some presidential candidates whose poll numbers are underwater have been willing to engage with him.

On Tuesday, former Gov. George Pataki of New York blasted Trump in a conversation with Business Insider, calling his comments about Mexican immigrants “disrespectful.” The next day, Pataki called on other Republican candidates to denounce Trump’s comments. Earlier in the week, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas took a different stance, defending Trump’s comments.

But the front-runners have largely stayed above the fray.

On Monday, Bush took a subtle swipe at Trump’s self-proclaimed fortune but didn’t weigh in decisively on his pot-stirring.

Regardless of the fact that Trump is quite unpopular among many Republican primary voters, pollsters and analysts agree that he will most likely be able to muster enough support to get to the early debates. And when he gets there, he’ll pose a distinct, perhaps defining, early challenge to the other candidates.

“Trump is bombastic, and my guess is he will try to monopolize the mic,” Traugott said. “It will be an interesting question to see whether the others will ignore him or will be tempted to take equally or more extreme positions to appeal to likely Republican primary voters.”

COMMENT
A recent Fox polls has Gov Scott Walker and Donald Trump at the top with others several points behind

http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-poll-debate-2015-7

DoubleStandardsPC1

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

Waiting For A Train President James A. Garfield was shot

james a garfield
July 2, 1881 by William J. Federer

One bullet grazed his elbow, but a second lodged in the back of President James Garfield, who was shot JULY 2, 1881, as he waited in a Washington, D.C., train station.

The assassin was Charles Guiteau, a free-love polygamist who had been a member the communist cult called ‘Oneida Community.’

President James Garfield had been in office only four months.

Though not wounded seriously, unsterile medical practices trying to remove the bullet resulted in an infection.

Alexander Graham Bell devised a metal detector to locate the bullet, but the metal bed frame confused the instrument.

Two months before his 50th birthday, Garfield died on September 19, 1881.

The next day, Secretary of State James Blaine wrote James Russell Lowell, U.S. Minister in London:

“James A. Garfield, President of the United States, died…

For nearly eighty days he suffered great pain, and during the entire period exhibited extraordinary patience, fortitude, and Christian resignation. Fifty millions of people stand as mourners by his bier.”

Vice-President Chester Arthur assumed the Presidency and declared a National Day of Mourning, September 22, 1881:

“In His inscrutable wisdom it has pleased God to remove from us the illustrious head of the nation, James A. Garfield, late President of the United States…

It is fitting that the deep grief which fills all hearts should manifest itself with one accord toward the Throne of Infinite Grace…that we should bow before the Almighty…in our affliction.”

Garfield had been a Disciples of Christ preacher at Franklin Circle Christian Church in Cleveland, 1857-58.

Garfield was principal of Western Reserve Eclectic Institute (Hiram College), 1857-1860, during which time he defended creation in a debate against evolution.

Garfield became a lawyer in 1861, and a Major General during the Civil War.
Gen James A Garfield

Elected to Congress, Garfield despised fiat paper ‘Greenbacks’, supporting instead gold-silver backed currency.

Elected a U.S. Senator, Garfield gave a stirring speech at the 1880 Republican National Convention opposing the rule that all delegates from each State were required to vote for the candidate with the majority of delegates:

“There never can be a convention…that shall bind my vote against my will on any question whatever.”

Garfield won the crowd. In an unprecedented move, after 34 ballots, he was chosen as the Republican Presidential nominee over Ulysses S. Grant seeking a 3rd term.

Garfield stated in his Inaugural Address, March 4, 1881, just 200 days before his death:

“Let our people find a new meaning in the divine oracle which declares that ‘a little child shall lead them,’ for our own little children will soon control the destinies of the Republic…

Our children…will surely bless their fathers and their fathers’ God that the Union was preserved, that slavery was overthrown, and that both races were made equal before the law.”

Republican President James Garfield appointed African-Americans to prominent positions:

*Frederick Douglass, recorder of deeds in Washington;

*Robert Brown Elliot, special agent to the U.S. Treasury;

*John M. Langston, Haitian minister; and

*Blanche K. Bruce, register to the U.S. Treasury.

Garfield appointed Civil War General Lew Wallace, author of the famous novel Ben-Hur, as U.S. Minister to Turkey.

Garfield described Otto von Bismark, who united German and served at its first Chancellor, 1871-1890:

“I am struck with the fact that Otto von Bismarck, the great statesman of Germany, probably the foremost man in Europe today, stated as an unquestioned principle, that the support, the defense, and propagation of the Christian Gospel is the central object of the German government.”

As a Congressman, James Garfield had stated at the 100th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1876:

“Now more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress.

If that body be ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness, and corruption.

If it be intelligent, brave, and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature…

If the NEXT CENTENNIAL does not find us a great nation…it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces.”

http://www.americanminute.com/

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Russia halts gas supplies to Ukraine after talks fail

Six EU countries depend on Russia for 100 per cent of their gas imports [Xinhua]
russia gas
July 1, 2015

Russian state-owned gas company Gazprom announced on Wednesday that it will halts gas supplies to Ukraine from July 1.

“Gazprom will not supply Ukraine under any gas price if there is no prepayment,” Gazprom Chief Alexei Miller said.

Russia and Ukraine failed to reach a new agreement on gas prices at talks in Vienna on Tuesday.

Russia will not increase the discount it has offered to Ukraine on gas purchases, Russia’s Energy Minister said on Tuesday.

“The price of $247 [per cubic meter of gas] is completely competitive, that is why we are very surprised that Ukraine wants a much lower price – it is out of line with the current market environment,” Russian Energy Minister Aleksandr Novak said.

He stressed that the price “is not subject to correction”. Russia will, however, continue direct supplies of gas to Ukraine’s violence-torn southeast, Novak said.

The two sides have been locked in dispute for four years over a 2009 contract, under which they agreed to tie the price of gas to the international spot price for oil.

Ukraine’s energy company Naftogaz, however, gave assurances on Tuesday that “the transit of Russian gas through Ukrainian territory to Gazprom’s European clients will continue in full, according to contracts agreed.”

The European Union says that one-fifth to one-fourth of its gas supplies come from Russia via the Ukraine. Six EU countries depend on Russia for 100 per cent of their gas imports.

Meanwhile, Russian Envoy to the EU Vladimir Chizhov said on Wednesday that the EU is trying to maintain the transit of Russian gas through Ukraine for “politically motivated reasons”.

“I think they have the ultimate goal of keeping the Ukrainian transit, which is a purely political stance. It does not have any economic basis,” he told Russian agency Sputnik.

He also questioned why the EU is not seeking to enhance cooperation with Russia on the Turkish Stream gas pipeline project through the Black Sea and Greece that bypasses Ukraine.

http://thebricspost.com/russia-halts-gas-supplies-to-ukraine-after-talks-fail/#.VZSDVUbztjs

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

MB Obama Propagandist NYT Is Confused About Protestant Denominations

weapons of mass deception media press
July 2, 2015 By Mollie Hemingway

The New York Times published a piece this week headlined “United Church of Christ Approves Divestment to Aid Palestinians.” It begins:

The United Church of Christ, one of the largest Protestant denominations in the United States, overwhelmingly approved a resolution Tuesday calling for divestment from companies that profit from Israel’s occupation or control of Palestinian territories, and a boycott of products from Israeli settlements.

Leaving aside the divestment issue, this is an incorrect statement. The United Church of Christ is not one of the largest Protestant denominations in the United States. Its membership peaked in 1960 at 2.2 million adherents. It slipped under a million members a couple years ago and is now down to only 979,239 members.

That means there are many, many, many Protestant denominations that are larger than the United Church of Christ. Back when it had 80,000 members more than it does now, there were at least 20 Protestant denominations that were larger.

The church has been hemorrhaging members for decades. It’s a personal story for me. My mom left the church in the late 1960s to become confessional Lutheran. The last family member who remained in the UCC escaped (also to become confessional Lutheran) a few years ago. The church takes hardline progressive positions on every issue, paired with lax doctrinal approaches on sacraments and Scripture. The result has been a steady driving away of members. Men, in particular, have fled. Only 38 percent of its members are male.

Why is it, though, that the media treat shrinking and declining progressive church bodies so well while disparaging those larger church bodies that retain their doctrines in the face of pressure? Consider the fluffy coverage generated for the Episcopal Church. This is another church with steep membership declines. In 1966, 3.6 million Americans claimed Episcopalian affiliation. By 2013, the latest year for which numbers are available, membership had dropped to 1.87 million. The Episcopal Church easily has the highest per capita count of media stories of any church body. I have no doubt that as stories celebrate the Episcopal Church following the U.S. government on its marriage doctrine, few stories will convey what this means for continued declines in the church body.

It is fine to cover every little thing the United Church of Christ does or the Episcopal Church does. These are church bodies that weigh in on the doctrines that journalists care the most about: secular politics and libertine sexual ethics.

But when so much ink is spilled on everything from divestment to the wholesale rejection of traditional Christian sexual ethics, it leaves less time and space to cover those many church bodies that have refrained from following the culture down whatever trajectory it’s headed.

Take this graphic developed by Pew, the progressive non-profit that funds its own research projects:

nyt ssm religions

It purports to show a fairly even distribution of churches on the issue of whether to redefine marriage. But note that the denominations in support of redefining marriage include the Quakers, with fewer than a hundred thousand members, and the Unitarian Universalists who (if you include Canadian members) number only 162,000. We previously discussed the UCC. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, which doesn’t take a position on the issue, is the largest at 3.86 million.

On the other side, the smallest denomination listed is American Baptist, with 1.3 million members. Southern Baptists have 15.74 million members. The Roman Catholic Church has nearly 70 million American members. The listed religious groups opposed to same-sex marriage are something like 15 times larger in membership counts than those that support it. Does it seem like that represents the actual media coverage on this issue? Or is every progressive step away from Biblical teachings on sex celebrated on front pages and tops of news reports while those that resist pressure to follow the U.S. government or cultural elites are given short shrift?

So no, New York Times, the United Church of Christ wasn’t even that big during its heyday. Now that it’s less than half of what it was then, it’s even less worthy of being called one of the United States’ largest church bodies. If its current rate of decline continues, it won’t even exist in the next few decades.

Given how poorly the New York Times covers religion news, as opposed to the political news progressive churches excel in, I’m not sure I want to see more coverage of the larger church bodies. But it’s worth pointing out how limited the New York Times’ understanding of Christianity is. I hope they’ve figured out why Christians celebrate Easter, at least.

Photo Erika Cross / Shutterstock.com
Mollie Ziegler Hemingway is a senior editor at The Federalist.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/02/the-new-york-times-is-confused-about-protestant-denominations/

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments