is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be
None Other Name
Greetings. As our first article from the 'Telegraph', of London, shows, the forces of anti-christ are becoming bolder with each passing day. To quote from the article, “Teachers should no longer be expected to “accord a special status to Jesus Christ” as part of traditional acts of collective worship for pupils.”
Of course,as Christians, we believe that when you reject Jesus Christ, who is the stable center of our world, you become off center, unbalanced, and as, Ephesians, chapter four, states, “Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart.”
And for those who teach and preach such heresies, Psalm 2, pretty much sums up what their future holds:
1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying,
3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.
6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
7 I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.
10 Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
11 Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.
“Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” John 14:6.
“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” Romans 10:9
Blessed are all they that put their trust in him. It is a promise.
Jesus Christ 'should be downplayed in school'
Schools should downgrade Christianity in assemblies for a more "inclusive" multi-faith approach, say religious education advisors.
Current legislation on Christian assemblies was introduced in the 1940s. Photo: REX FEATURES
By Graeme Paton, Education Editor
09 Nov 2012
Teachers should no longer be expected to "accord a special status to Jesus Christ" as part of traditional acts of collective worship for pupils, it was claimed.
Guidance sent out to local committees - established to determine RE in communities across England - called for a focus on a "wide range of religious traditions" such as Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam.
By law, conventional state schools are required to stage daily acts of collective worship that are "broadly Christian" to reflect the country's heritage.
But the National Association of Standing Advisory Councils for Religious Education (NASACRE) said this was "not intended to be interpreted as Christian worship in any conventional sense".
In a report, it also insisted that long-standing Government advice issued in the mid-90s which suggests most religious assemblies should focus on Jesus Christ should be discarded altogether.
However, the comments were attacked by the Church of England.
A CofE spokesman said: "Given that the central figure in Christian belief and practice is Jesus Christ we would expect all schools to include in their collective worship programme stories of his life and work and impact."
Andy Yarrow, head of Chelsea Academy in west London, told the Times Educational Supplement: "You can't separate Christianity from Christ. Without Christ, Christianity loses its distinctiveness."
The law on religious assemblies in schools is enshrined in the 1944 Education Act. It states that all community schools - state primaries and secondaries without a specific religious character - must have a daily act of worship that is "wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character".
Legislation was updated by Government guidance in the mid-90s - circular 1/94. It said that the "majority of acts of worship over a term" must be Christian, adding: "It must contain some elements which relate specifically to the traditions of Christian belief and which accord a special status to Jesus Christ".
Currently, local advisory councils containing faith leaders, teachers and council representatives are established in each area to advise schools on RE and worship.
But NASACRE - which represents these advisors nationally - said circular 1/94 should be scrapped.
It said assemblies should be "inclusive, participative, challenging and educational, drawing on a wide range of religious traditions, without any danger of indoctrinating anyone or compromising the religious, or non-religious, backgrounds of pupils".
A spokesman for the Department for Education said: "The law has not changed and remains perfectly clear; all schools must hold a daily act of collective worship which must be broadly Christian.
"The only exception is for schools which have chosen to follow another faith, such as Judaism."
Waking Times (Edited from longer article.)
Meditating Measurably Changes The Brain Even When Not Actively Meditating
November 13, 2012 |
April McCarthy, Prevent Disease - Waking Times
A new study has found that participating in an 8-week meditation training program can have measurable effects on how the brain functions even when someone is not actively meditating.
Published research has demonstrated that the practice of regular meditation can increase brain density, boost connections between neurons, decrease symptoms of depression and anxiety, provide clarity of thought, and increase positive mood endorphins. Other published studies have shown meditation can improve physical functioning, decrease chronic disease risks, and enhance overall quality of life.
In a 2008 study published in the journal PloS One, researchers found that when meditators heard the sounds of people suffering, they had stronger activation levels in their temporal parietal junctures, a part of the brain tied to empathy, than people who did not meditate.
These studies demonstrate that regular meditation effectively supports mental, emotional and physical health in numerous tangible ways. In building upon this strong body of evidence, researchers are continuing to deepen our understanding of the profound and inspirational benefits of regular meditation practice in everyday life.
("Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things." Philippians 4:8
"Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all." 1 Timothy 4:15
"Bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ." 2Corinthians 10:5)
Religion News Service
‘Scandalous’ evangelist Aimee Semple McPherson gets star turn on Broadway
Nov 12, 2012 NEW YORK—Broadway openings often feature a first—the debut of a new star, the premiere of a new playwright’s work. On Thursday (Nov. 15), theatergoers at the opening night performance of “Scandalous” will witness a never-before-seen trifecta.
“Scandalous: The Life and Trials of Aimee Semple McPherson” is the first Broadway musical about the showbiz-savvy revivalist whose ministry was rocked by scandal in the 1920s. It’s also the first Broadway show with a book and lyrics written by “Today” show co-host Kathie Lee Gifford. And it marks the first time the Foursquare Foundation, which supports Pentecostal ministries, has invested in a Broadway show.
Whether “Scandalous” will become a financial or critical success remains unclear, but Gifford, who has worked on the musical for 12 years, said it’s a story well suited to Broadway.
“Billy Graham would make a very bad musical,” she said in interview. “I consider myself blessed to know him as a friend, but Billy’s life is scandal-free. Aimee’s wasn’t. Aimee was a very theatrical person.”
While McPherson may be known for allegations that she faked her own kidnapping, she was nonetheless a pioneer. She began traveling the country and leading revivals before women had the right to vote. Her Angelus Temple in Los Angeles was an early megachurch. She was one of the first women to receive a broadcast license, hobnobbed with celebrities and appeared briefly on Broadway in the 1930s.
The church she founded in the 1920s grew into The Foursquare Church, which now claims almost 8 million members worldwide.
“McPherson was the most famous evangelist or revivalist in the 1920s, 30s and 40s,” said Matthew Sutton, author of “Aimee Semple McPherson and the Resurrection of Christian America.” “Every American living in that period knew who she was.”
Gifford’s decades-long fascination with McPherson began when she first heard about her in college. “I remember thinking, ‘No one could’ve lived a life like that,’” she said.
Gifford, who speaks often about her Christian faith and has recorded several gospel albums, continued to encounter references to McPherson. At one time, she attended a church led by a preacher who attended a college McPherson founded. Her husband, Frank Gifford, had attended McPherson’s church as a child.
“It seemed like every time I turned around someone was referencing Aimee,” she said.
Gifford said her thoughts on McPherson “marinated” for years until she began work on the musical, which was produced in Seattle in 2011 with the title “Saving Aimee.” Tony Award nominee Carolee Carmello played McPherson in the Seattle and Broadway productions.
The show opens with a scene about the biggest scandal of McPherson’s career. In 1926, she disappeared while swimming in California. When she resurfaced five weeks later in Arizona, she said she had been kidnapped and held prisoner in Mexico. Her critics said she disappeared to be with a married lover. She was charged with lying to a grand jury and conspiracy to commit a hoax in connection with the case, but those charges were dropped.
The show flashes back through key moments in McPherson’s life, including her decision to leave her second husband and travel the country holding tent revivals that drew thousands. She began her ministry a few years after the birth of Pentecostalism, and almost single-handedly popularized the movement that’s best known for speaking in tongues and faith healings.
“Aimee Semple McPherson was one of the great pioneers of religious spectacle,” said Diane Winston, an expert on religion and media at the University of Southern California. “We think today about megachurches where they have rock bands and multi-screens. She was doing the equivalent in the 1920s and 30s.”
The Angelus Temple, which held more than 5,000 people, hosted 21 services a week, said Sutton, who is an associate professor of history at Washington State University. The most popular service featured Bible stories brought to life with professional sets, actors and music. In the Broadway musical, these services are dramatized in several scenes, including one featuring a scantily clad Adam and Eve and a talking snake.
McPherson was also quick to recognize the power of radio. She built her own station, which broadcast her church services, music, and interviews that reached much of the Western U.S.
“She brought old-time religion into the modern age,” Sutton said. “In that era we have radio, movies, and the car. We have Americans moving into cities. She was right there. In that sense, she was the first modern evangelist.”
Gifford—who described her faith by saying she is “a very bad follower of Jesus. Every day I try to be a better one”—said she did not write the musical as an act of evangelism. Yet she hopes audiences will be inspired to recognize their individual value. Several times in the show, McPherson’s character says to another, “If you have a pulse, you have a purpose.”
“What I love about Aimee is that she got dirty for her faith,” Gifford said. “She went into brothels and bars where no legitimate ‘lady’ would have been seen. She went because there were hurting people there. In that sense, she’s a far better Christian than I’ve ever been.”
While the show is more Broadway than Sunday school, there are religious references. The songs “What Does It Profit?” and “For Such a Time As This,” are inspired by verses in the biblical books of Matthew and Esther. There’s also a reference to Jeremiah 29:11 as the McPherson character talked about hope.
The Foursquare Foundation, which normally funds social ministry and evangelism, is one of several financial backers of the show. The foundation had no input on the content.
“We think the story of Aimee’s life is remarkable and uplifting,” said Greg Campbell, the foundation’s executive director. “We hope it will inspire people to learn more about her. And that, we hope, will direct them to a relationship with the Lord Jesus.”
Paul Craig Roberts
Institute for Political Economy
American Immorality Is At A Peak
November 13, 2012 |
When Chris Floyd is at his best, as he is below, he puts things in perspective for readers that they otherwise never confront. Obama has won reelection, and his supporters think that somehow things are going to be different. Fat chance.
While evil continues to envelop America, the public is focused on CIA director General Petraeus' resignation. The FBI spied on him and found that he was having an affair with his biographer, a woman 20 years younger than his 60 years.
What is it with Americans and sex? Why is an illicit affair the ONLY reason for removing someone from political office? Why is it that government officials, presidents and vice presidents included, can violate US statutory law and torture people, spy on Americans without the necessary warrants, murder US citizens without due process, confine US citizens to dungeons for life without evidence and due process of law, start multi-trillion dollar wars on the basis of contrived allegations that have no basis in fact, murder civilians in seven countries, overthrow legitimate governments, and all of these massive crimes against humanity can be accepted as long as no one in Washington gets any sex out of it? Is this feminism's contribution to American morality?
Has the United States, the hero of the cold war, become in its behavior and motivations the enemy it overcame? Why does Washington want hegemony over the world? Why does Washington want this hegemony so badly that Washington is willing to murder women, children, aid workers, husbands and fathers, village elders, anyone on earth including its own American heroes?
What is the evil that drives Washington?
How can the evil that drives Washington be contained, stamped out, prevented from destroying the human race?
What does the world do when it confronts unbridled evil, which is what Washington is?
The Reality of the "Lesser Evil"
Is This Child Dead Enough for You? ~ Chris Floyd - - To all those now hailing the re-election of Barack Obama as a triumph of decent, humane, liberal values over the oozing-postule perfidy of the Republicans, a simple question:
Is this child dead enough for you?
This little boy was named Naeemullah. He was in his house -- maybe playing, maybe sleeping, maybe having a meal -- when an American drone missile was fired into the residential area where he lived and blew up the house next door. [http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/12/photos-pakistan-drone-war/?pid=999]
As we all know, these drone missiles are, like the president who wields them, super-smart, a triumph of technology and technocratic expertise. We know, for the president and his aides have repeatedly told us, that these weapons -- launched only after careful consultation of the just-war strictures of St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas -- strike nothing but their intended targets and kill no one but "bad guys." Indeed, the president's top aides have testified under oath that not a single innocent person has been among the thousands of Pakistani civilians -- that is, civilians of a sovereign nation that is not at war with the United States -- who have been killed by the drone missile campaign of the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate.
Yet somehow, by some miracle, the missile that roared into the residential area where Naeemullah lived did not confine itself neatly to the house it struck. Somehow, inexplicably, the hunk of metal and wire and computer processors failed -- in this one instance -- to look into the souls of all the people in the village and ascertain, by magic, which ones were "bad guys" and then kill only them. Somehow -- perhaps the missile had been infected with Romney cooties? -- this supercharged hunk of high explosives simply, well, exploded with tremendous destructive power when it struck the residential area, blowing the neighborhood to smithereens.
As Wired reports, shrapnel and debris went flying through the walls of Naeemullah's house and ripped through his small body. When the attack was over -- when the buzzing drone sent with Augustinian wisdom by the Peace Laureate was no longer lurking over the village, shadowing the lives of every defenseless inhabitant with the terrorist threat of imminent death, Naeemullah was taken to the hospital in a nearby town.
This is where the picture of above was taken by Noor Behram, a resident of North Waziristan who has been chronicling the effects of the Peace Laureate's drone war. When the picture was taken, Naeemullah was dying. He died an hour later. [http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/12/photos-pakistan-drone-war/?pid=998]
Is he dead enough for you?
Dead enough not to disturb your victory dance in any way? Dead enough not to trouble the inauguration parties yet to come? Dead enough not to diminish, even a little bit, your exultant glee at the fact that this great man, a figure of integrity, decency, honor and compassion, will be able to continue his noble leadership of the best nation in the history of the world? - Do you have children? Do they sit your house playing happily? Do they sleep sweetly scrunched up in their warm beds at night? Do they chatter and prattle like funny little birds as you eat with them at the family table? Do you love them? Do you treasure them? Do you consider them fully-fledged human beings, beloved souls of infinite worth?
How would you feel if you saw them ripped to shreds by flying shrapnel, in your own house? How would you feel as you rushed them to the hospital, praying every step of the way that another missile won't hurl down on you from the sky? Your child was innocent, you had done nothing, were simply living your life in your own house -- and someone thousands of miles away, in a country you had never seen, had no dealings with, had never harmed in any way, pushed a button and sent chunks of burning metal into your child's body. How would you feel as you watched him die, watched all your hopes and dreams for him, all the hours and days and years you would have to love him, fade away into oblivion, lost forever?
What would you think about the one who did this to your child? Would you say: "What a noble man of integrity and decency! I'm sure he is acting for the best."
Would you say: "Well, this is a bit unfortunate, but it's perfectly understandable. The Chinese government (or Iran or al Qaeda or North Korea or Russia, etc. etc.) believed there was someone next door to me who might possibly at some point in time pose some kind of threat in some unspecified way to their people or their political agenda -- or maybe it was just that my next-door neighbor behaved in a certain arbitrarily chosen way that indicated to people watching him on a computer screen thousands of miles away that he might possibly be the sort of person who might conceivably at some point in time pose some kind of unspecified threat to the Chinese (Iranians/Russians, etc.), even though they had no earthly idea who my neighbour is or what he does or believes or intends. I think the person in charge of such a program is a good, wise, decent man that any person would be proud to support. Why, I think I'll ask him to come speak at my little boy's funeral!"
Is that what you would say if shrapnel from a missile blew into your comfortable house and killed your own beloved little boy? You would not only accept, understand, forgive, shrug it off, move on -- you would actively support the person who did it, you would cheer his personal triumphs and sneer at all those who questioned his moral worthiness and good intentions? Is that really what you would do? - Well, that is what you are doing when you shrug off the murder of little Naeemullah. You are saying he is not worth as much as your child. You are saying he is not a fully-fledged human being, a beloved soul of infinite worth. You are saying that you support his death, you are happy about it, and you want to see many more like it. You are saying it doesn't matter if this child -- or a hundred like him, or a thousand like him, or, as in the Iraqi sanctions of the old liberal lion, Bill Clinton, five hundred thousand children like Naeemullah -- are killed in your name, by leaders you cheer and support. You are saying that the only thing that matters is that someone from your side is in charge of killing these children. This is the reality of "lesser evilism."
Before the election, we heard a lot of talk about this notion of the "lesser evil." From prominent dissidents and opponents of empire like Daniel Ellsberg and Noam Chomsky and Robert Parry to innumerable progressive blogs to personal conversations, one heard this basic argument: "Yes, the drone wars, the gutting of civil liberties, the White House death squads and all the rest are bad; but Romney would be worse. Therefore, with great reluctance, holding our noses and shaking our heads sadly, we must choose the lesser evil of Obama and vote accordingly."
I understand that argument, I really do. I don't agree with it, as I made plain here many times before the election. I think the argument is wrong, I think our system is so far gone that even a "lesser evil" is too evil to support in any way, that such support only perpetuates the system's unconscionable evils. But I'm not a purist, not a puritan, not a commissar or dogmatist. I understand that people of good will can come to a different conclusion, and feel that they must reluctantly choose one imperial-militarist-corporate faction over the other, in the belief that this will mean some slight mitigation of the potential evil that the other side commit if it took power. I used to think that way myself, years ago. Again, I now disagree with this, and I think that the good people who believe this have not, for whatever reason or reasons, looked with sufficient clarity at the reality of our situation, of what is actually being done, in their name, by the political faction they support.
But of course, I am not the sole arbiter of reality, nor a judge of others; people see what they see, and they act (or refrain from acting) accordingly. I understand that. But here is what I don't understand: the sense of triumph and exultation and glee on the part of so many progressives and liberals and 'dissidents' at the victory of this "lesser evil." Where did the reluctance, the nose-holding, the sad head-shaking go? Should they not be mourning the fact that evil has triumphed in America, even if, by their lights, it is a "lesser" evil?
If you really believed that Obama was a lesser evil -- 2 percent less evil, as I believe Digby once described the Democrats in 2008 -- if you really did find the drone wars and the White House death squads and Wall Street bailouts and absolution for torturers and all the rest to be shameful and criminal, how can you be happy that all of this will continue? Happy -- and continuing to scorn anyone who opposed the perpetuation of this system.
The triumph of a lesser evil is still a victory for evil. If your neighborhood is tyrannized by warring mafia factions, you might prefer that the faction which occasionally doles out a few free hams wins out over their more skinflint rivals; but would you be joyful about the fact that your neighborhood is still being tyrannized by murderous criminals? Would you not be sad, cast down, discouraged and disheartened to see the violence and murder and corruption go on? Would you not mourn the fact that your children will have to grow up in the midst of all this?
So where is the mourning for the fact that we, as a nation, have come to this: a choice between murderers, a choice between plunderers? Even if you believe that you had to participate and make the horrific choice that was being offered to us -- "Do you want the Democrat to kill these children, or do you want the Republican to kill these children?" -- shouldn't this post-election period be a time of sorrow, not vaulting triumph and giddy glee and snarky put-downs of the "losers"?
If you really are a "lesser evilist" -- if this was a genuine moral choice you reluctantly made, and not a rationalization for indulging in unexamined, primitive partisanship -- then you will know that we are ALL the losers of this election. Even if you believe it could have been worse, it is still very bad. You yourself proclaimed that Obama was evil -- just a bit "lesser" so than his opponent. (2 percent maybe.) And so the evil that you yourself saw and named and denounced will go on. Again I ask: where is the joy and glory and triumph in this? Even if you believe it was unavoidable, why celebrate it? And ask yourself, bethink yourself: what are you celebrating? This dead child, and a hundred like him? A thousand like him? Five hundred thousand like him? How far will you go? What won't you celebrate?
And so step by step, holding the hand of the "lesser evil," we descend deeper and deeper into the pit.
Chris Floyd is an American writer based in the UK.
Lincoln the Racist
Thomas J. DiLorenzo - lewrockwell.com - November 10, 2012
"Who freed the slaves? To the extent that they were ever 'freed,' they were freed by the Thirteenth Amendment, which was authored and pressured into existence not by Lincoln but by the great emancipators nobody knows, the abolitionists and congressional leaders who created the climate and generated the pressure that goaded, prodded, drove, forced Lincoln into glory by associating him with a policy that he adamantly opposed for at least fifty-four of his fifty-six years of his life."
Lerone Bennett, Jr., Forced into Glory: Abraham Lincoln' s White Dream, p. 19
Still from Lincoln, a biopic directed and produced by Steven Spielberg and starring Daniel Day-Lewis.
Let me introduce you to Lerone Bennett, Jr. who was the executive editor of Ebony magazine for several decades (beginning in 1958) and the author of many books, including a biography of Martin Luther King, Jr. (What Manner of Man: A Biography of Martin Luther King) and Forced into Glory: Abraham Lincoln's White Dream. Bennett is a graduate of Morehouse College in Atlanta and authored hundreds of articles on African-American history and culture during his career at Ebony. He spent more than twenty years researching and writing Forced into Glory, a scathing critique of Abraham Lincoln based on mountains of truths.
Forced into Glory, published in 2000, was mostly ignored by the Lincoln cult, although there were a few timid "reviews" by reviewers that have never done one-thousandth of the research that Lerone Bennett did on the subject. As a black man, he was spared the mantra of being "linked to extremist hate groups" by the lily-white leftists at the Southern Poverty Law Center, the preeminent hate group of the hardcore Left. He was also spared that hate group's normally automatic insinuation that any critic of Lincoln must secretly wish that slavery had never ended. They mostly sat back and hoped that he would go away.
Lerone Bennett, Jr. contends that it is almost impossible for the average citizen to know much of anything about Lincoln despite the fact that literally thousands of books have been written about him. "A century of lies" is how he describes Lincoln "scholarship." He provides thousands of documented facts to make his case.
On the subject of Steven Spielberg's new movie on Lincoln, which is entirely about Lincoln's supposed role in lobbying for the Thirteenth Amendment that ended slavery, Bennett points out: "There is a pleasant fiction that Lincoln . . . became a flaming advocate of the amendment and used the power of his office to buy votes to ensure its passage. There is no evidence, as David H. Donald has noted, to support that fiction . . ." To the extent that Lincoln did finally and hesitatingly support the amendment, Bennett argues that it was he who was literally forced into it by other politicians, not the other way around as portrayed in the Spielberg film. (David Donald, by the way, is the preeminent Lincoln scholar of our day and Pulitzer prize-winning Lincoln biographer).
On the issue of the Emancipation Proclamation, Bennett correctly points out that "J.G. Randall, who has been called 'the greatest Lincoln scholar of all time,' said the Proclamation itself did not free a single slave" since it only applied to rebel territory and specifically exempted areas of the U.S. such as the entire state of West Virginia where the U.S. Army was in control at the time. (James G. Randall was indeed the most prolific Lincoln scholar of all time and the academic mentor of David Donald at the University of Illinois).
Lerone Bennett is understandably outraged at how the Lincoln cult has covered up Lincoln's racism for over a century, pretending that he was not a man of his time. He quotes Lincoln as saying in the first Lincoln-Douglas debate in Ottawa, Illinois, for example, that he denied "to set the niggers and white people to marrying together" (Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, vol. 3, p. 20). In Forced into Glory Bennett shows that Lincoln rather compulsively used the N-word; was a huge fan of "black face" minstrel shows; was famous for his racist jokes; and that many of his White House appointees were shocked at his racist language.
Lincoln did not hesitate to broadcast his racist views publicly, either. Bennett quotes his speech during a debate with Douglas in Charleston, Illinois on September 18, 1858 (Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, vol. 3, pp. 145-146):
"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."
Bennett documents that Lincoln stated publicly that "America was made for the White people and not for the Negroes" (p. 211), and "at least twenty-one times, he said publicly that he was opposed to equal rights for Blacks." "What I would most desire would be the separation of the white and black races," said Lincoln (Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, vol. 2, p. 521).
Reading through Forced into Glory, one gets the clear impression that Bennett got angrier and angrier at the non-stop excuse-making, lying, cover-ups, and fabrications of the "Lincoln scholars." He never takes his eye of the ball, however, and is relentless in throwing facts in the faces of the Lincoln cultists.
As a member of the Illinois legislature Lincoln urged the legislature "to appropriate money for colonization in order to remove Negroes from the state and prevent miscegenation" (p. 228). As president, Lincoln toiled endlessly with plans to "colonize" (i.e., deport) all of the black people out of America. This is what Bennett calls Lincoln's "White Dream," and more recent research of the very best caliber supports him. I refer to the book Colonization after Emancipation by Phillip Magness of American University and Sebastian Page of Oxford University that, using records from the American and British national archives, proves that until his dying day Lincoln was negotiating with Great Britain and other foreign governments to deport all of the soon-to-be-freed slaves out of the U.S.
The Lincoln cult, which has fabricated excuses for everything, argued for years that Lincoln mysteriously abandoned his obsession with "colonization" sometime around 1863. Magness and Page prove this to be the nonsense that it is.
In Illinois, the state constitution was amended in 1848 to prohibit free black people from residing in the state. Lincoln supported it. He also supported the Illinois Black Codes, under which "Illinois Blacks had no legal rights. White people were bound to respect." "None of this disturbed Lincoln," writes Bennett.
Bennett also points out the clear historical fact that Lincoln strongly supported the Fugitive Slave Act which forced Northerners to hunt down runaway slaves and return them to their owners. He admittedly never said a word about slavery in public until he was in his fifties, while everyone else in the nation was screaming about the issue. When he did oppose slavery, Bennett points out, it was always in the abstract, accompanied by some statement to the effect that he didn't know what could be done about it. And as a presidential candidate he never opposed Southern slavery, only the extension of slavery into the territories, explaining that "we" wanted to preserve the Territories "for free White people" (Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, vol. 3, p. 311). In Bennett's own words: "One must never forget that Lincoln always spoke in tongues or in a private code when he was talking about slavery or Negroes. And although he said or seemed to say that slavery was wrong, he always qualified the assertion in the same speech or in a succeeding speech, saying either that slavery was wrong in an abstract sense or that it was wrong in so far as it sought to spread itself." He was a master politician, after all, which as Murray Rothbard once said, means that he was a masterful liar, conniver, and manipulator.
All of these truths, and many more, have been ignored, swept under the rug, or buried under thousands of pages of excuses by the Lincoln cult over the past century and more in books and in films like the new Lincoln film by Steven Spielberg. After spending a quarter of a century researching and writing on the subject, Lerone Bennett, Jr. concluded that "Lincoln is theology, not historiology. He is a faith, he is a church, he is a religion, and he has his own priests and acolytes, most of whom have a vested interest in 'the great emancipator' and who are passionately opposed to anybody telling the truth about him" (p. 114). And "with rare exceptions, you can't believe what any major Lincoln scholar tells you about Abraham Lincoln and race." Amen, Brother Lerone.
Most in US won't be able to escape 'fiscal cliff'
CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER, AP Economics Writer
November 13, 2012
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Everyone who pays income tax -- and some who don't --will feel it.
p>So will doctors who accept Medicare, people who get unemployment aid, defense contractors, air traffic controllers, national park rangers and companies that do research and development.
The package of tax increases and spending cuts known as the "fiscal cliff" takes effect in January unless Congress passes a budget deal by then. The economy would be hit so hard that it would likely sink into recession in the first half of 2013, economists say.
And no matter who you are, it will be all but impossible to avoid the pain.
Middle income families would have to pay an average of about $2,000 more next year, the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center has calculated.
Up to 3.4 million jobs would be lost, the Congressional Budget Office estimates. The unemployment rate would reach 9.1 percent from the current 7.9 percent. Stocks could plunge. The nonpartisan CBO estimates the total cost of the cliff in 2013 at $671 billion.
Collectively, the tax increases would be the steepest to hit Americans in 60 years when measured as a percentage of the economy.
"There would be a huge shock effect to the U.S. economy," says Mark Vitner, an economist at Wells Fargo.
Most of the damage -- roughly two-thirds -- would come from the tax increases. But the spending cuts would cause pain, too.
The bleak scenario could push the White House and Congress to reach a deal before year's end. On Tuesday, Congress returns for a post-election session that could last through Dec. 31. At a minimum, analysts say some temporary compromise might be reached, allowing a final deal to be cut early next year.
Still, uncertainty about a final deal could cause many companies to further delay hiring and spend less. Already, many U.S. companies say anxiety about the fiscal cliff has led them to put off plans to expand or hire.
A breakdown in negotiations could also ignite turmoil in financial markets, Vitner said. It could resemble the 700-point fall in the Dow Jones industrial average in 2008 after the House initially rejected the $700 billion bailout of major banks.
Since President Barack Obama's re-election, nervous investors have sold stocks. The Standard & Poor's 500 index sank 2.3 percent last week, its worst weekly drop since June. The sell-off resulted in part from anxiety over higher tax rates on investment gains once the fiscal cliff kicks in.
Last week, Obama said he was open to compromise with Republican leaders. But the White House said he would veto any bill that would extend tax cuts on income above $250,000.
Republican House Speaker John Boehner countered that higher tax rates on upper-income Americans would slow job growth. Boehner argued that any deal must reduce tax rates, eliminate special-interest loopholes and rein in government benefits.
The U.S. government has run annual budget deficits in excess of $1 trillion in each of the last four fiscal years. A report Tuesday showed the government started the 2013 budget year with a $120 billion deficit in October, suggesting a fifth $1 trillion annual deficit is likely.
That adds pressure on Obama and Congress to reach a budget deal.
Still, most economists want an agreement that would lower the deficit gradually over several years, rather than a sharp cut that could rattle the still-weak economy.
More than 50 percent of the tax increases would come from the expiration of tax cuts approved in 2001 and 2003 and from additional tax cuts in a 2009 economic stimulus law.
The first set of tax cuts reduced rates on income, investment gains, dividends and estates. They also boosted tax credits for families with children. Deductions for married couples also rose. The 2009 measure increased tax credits for low-income earners and college students.
The 8 Most Nutrient Dense Foods on Earth
By Jill Ettinger, Guest Writer Waking Times
November 14, 2012
We all know which foods we do best to avoid (right?). Despite the alluring appeal of Oreos, Mountain Dew or McAnything, processed foods provide little nutrition and a whole lot of risks. But when it comes to the good stuff—what are the best foods to put into our bodies? While experts all agree we need a variety of foods for a healthy diet, do you know which are the healthiest of the bunch? The answers may surprise and delight you.
1. Spirulina: While the thought of eating lake algae might gross you out, spirulina is actually pretty tasty, especially blended into a smoothie or hidden in a chocolate bar. It has more antioxidants than any other food on earth and is loaded with protein and minerals making it the most nutrient dense food.
2. Kale: According to Dr. Joel Fuhrman, kale is the most nutritious food, loaded with minerals, vitamins, fiber and amino acids, as well as important antioxidants that reduce inflammation and can prevent cancer. It’s also delicious and an easy to prepare, versatile food.
3. Hemp Seeds: What do you get when you combine protein, fiber, essential fatty acids, antioxidants, amino acids, vitamins and minerals? Hemp, of course. This easily digestible seed is versatile, easy to use and extremely tasty, too.
4. Chocolate: Yes, you read right. Cacao beans are so nutrient-dense that scientists haven’t even begun to identify all the benefits in the little bean yet. Don’t grab a Snickers though—the good stuff is found only in raw cacao beans or nibs (or really, really dark chocolate). Minerals, vitamins and tons of antioxidants are great for your heart, skin, and release chemicals in the brain that make you feel like you’re in love.
5. Broccoli: Mom was right, you should eat your broccoli if you want a healthy digestive system and to decrease your risk of cancer. Broccoli has a wide range of yumminess too, from soups and stews to stir fry.
6. Spinach: Popeye was onto something with that spinach fixation. But skip the canned stuff and stick with fresh or frozen for an antioxidant, protein and fiber-rich burst of healthy goodness. Fresh or cooked, spinach’s sweet and hardy flavor brightens any meal.
7. Chia: The Aztec warriors may have died out, but their legacy is alive and strong in the chia seed. This yummy, unassuming ancient favorite is loaded with omega fats, protein and fiber. Dr. Weil says it’s a better choice than flax because “chia is so rich in antioxidants that the seeds don’t deteriorate and can be stored for long periods without becoming rancid.”
8. Berries: Unlike other fruit, berries tend to be less sugary and full of vital vitamins, minerals and those free-radical avenging antioxidants. Wild berries are always a great choice, especially black raspberries.
("The principal things for the whole use of man's life are water, fire, iron, and salt, flour of wheat, honey, milk, and the blood of the grape, and oil, and clothing." Ecclesiasticus 39:26)
Top 7 Genetically Modified Crops
Check your pantry. Do you have any cereals, crackers, cookies, snack bars, soy milk or baby formula in there? How about anything with corn syrup or processed food made from corn on your shelves? If so, you are probably eating food containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
GMOs are plant or meat products that have had their DNA altered in a laboratory by genes from other plants, animals, viruses or bacteria. For example, genetically modified corn contain a pesticide that cannot be washed off. Most GE food grown in the U.S. is "Roundup Ready," meaning it can withstand spraying of Monsanto's Roundup pesticide and live, while weeds around it die. (Well, that's how it works initially; now resistant "superweeds" have increased the amount of pesticides farmers must spray on their GE crops.)
Research links GMOs to allergies, organ toxicity, and other health issues, though the U.S. Food and Drug Administration does not require safety testing for GMOs.
Market watchers estimate that upwards of 70 percent of processed foods in your local supermarket contain genetically modified ingredients. However, there's no way to be sure of the percentage because no labels are required to inform consumers about the presence of GMOs in food. (That may change if California voters approve Prop 37, a measure that would require labeling on foods containing GMOs.)
The top three GMO crops grown in the U.S. are soy, corn and cotton, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). During the past 12 years, the percentage of acreage planted with GMO crops soared to over 80 percent for each of the top three. (See this graph at Mother Jones.)
Here are the Top 7 Genetically Modified Crops:
1. Corn: Corn is the No. 1 crop grown in the U.S. and nearly all of it -- 88 percent -- is genetically modified. In addition to being added to innumerable processed foods, genetically modified corn is a staple of animal feed.
2. Soy: 93 percent of soy is genetically modified. Soy is a staple of processed foods under various names including hydrogenated oils, lecithin, emulsifiers, tocopherol (a vitamin E supplement) and proteins.
3. Cottonseed: According to the USDA, 94 percent of cotton grown in the U.S. is genetically modified. Cottonseeds are culled from cotton, and then used for vegetable oil, margarine or shortening production, or frying foods, such as potato chips.
4. Alfalfa: Farmers feed alfalfa to dairy cows, the source of milk, butter, yogurt, meat and so much more. Alfalfa is the fourth largest crop grown in the U.S., behind corn, soybeans, and wheat (though there is no genetically engineered wheat on the market).
5. Papaya: 75 percent of the Hawaiian papaya crop is genetically modified to withstand the papaya ringspot virus.
6. Canola: About 90 percent of the U.S. canola crop is genetically modified. Canola oil is used in cooking, as well as biofuels. In North Dakota, genetically modified canola has been found growing far from any planted fields, raising questions about what will happen when "escaped" GE canola competes with wild plants.
7. Sugar Beets: More than half -- 54 percent -- of sugar sold in America comes from sugar beets. Genetically modified sugar beets account for 90 percent of the crop; however, that percentage is expected to increase after a USDA's decision last year gave the green light to sugar beet planting before an environmental impact statement was completed.
The organization True Food Now has a list of foods currently being tested for genetic modification, as well as those foods that are approved but not yet sold in the U.S.
FDA investigates deaths preliminarily linked to energy shots
By William Hudson
November 16, 2012
FDA checking reports about 5-hour ENERGY
(CNN) -- Thirteen deaths have been reported to the Food and Drug Administration as "adverse events" after the consumption of the dietary supplement 5-hour ENERGY, according to an FDA statement.
While anyone can report an adverse event, and although no cause-and-effect relationship has been established, the FDA said it is investigating, as is required by law. A report does not mean a product is responsible for or that it contributed to any health issue.
"If we find a relationship between consumption of the product and harm, FDA will take appropriate action to reduce or eliminate the risk," the FDA said. "While the FDA investigates all reports to the best of its ability, it does not always have access to all the information needed to conclusively determine the cause of the event."
As a dietary supplement, 5-hour ENERGY is not required to disclose the amount of caffeine in its 2-ounce "energy shot." Instead, the 5-hour ENERGY label lists 1,870 milligrams of an "Energy Blend," which includes caffeine, taurine and other ingredients.
A ConsumerLab.com analysis found about 207 milligrams of caffeine in one 5-hour ENERGY. Red Bull, by comparison, contains about 80 milligrams of caffeine in an 8.4-ounce can, while a 16-ounce grande Starbucks Pike Place brewed coffee contains about 330 milligrams of caffeine.
The distributor of 5-hour ENERGY, Living Essentials LLC, said in a statement: "We recommend on product labels and the 5-hour ENERGY website that individuals consume no more than two bottles of 5-hour ENERGY shots per day, spaced several hours apart. Consumers who have caffeine sensitivities should consult with a physician before taking and can consider the 'decaf' version."
Last month, the parents of Anais Fournier, 14, filed a lawsuit alleging that she died after drinking two Monster Energy drinks in a 24-hour period. In her case, an underlying heart condition was complicated by caffeine toxicity, according to the death certificate.
Whether the 13 deaths preliminarily linked to 5-Hour ENERGY were similarly complicated by other medical conditions is under investigation.
In addition to the deaths, there have been a total of 92 patient reports, including 33 hospitalizations, reported as 5-Hour ENERGY adverse events, according to the FDA.
Want real job satisfaction? Be a gardener or a florist: 90% of horticulturalists enjoy going to work
By PAUL SIMS
13 November 2012
It may be cold, wet and windy outside and the garden has probably seen better days.
But that is unlikely to dampen the spirit of the UK's gardeners and florists who are today named as the country's happiest workers.
Research carried out by City & Guilds found nine out of ten horticulturalists (87 per cent) were happy in their job.
A remarkable 80 per cent said it was because they were able to manage their own workload and have autonomy over their schedule and daily tasks.
Research carried out by City & Guilds found nine out of ten horticulturalists (87 per cent) were happy in their job
A similar number (82 per cent) said they were able to use and hone their skills every day which helped to boost their job satisfaction.
They were closely followed by hairdressers and plumbers.
In stark contrast - and perhaps not surprisingly - those professionals who hated their jobs included bankers, IT and data processors, and human resources.
Only 44 per cent of bankers - the average salary for a city trader is approximately £80,000 a year - said they were happy in their jobs.
In fact, the research found those earning more than £60,000 were among the unhappiest.
Furthermore, just 45 per cent of bankers said they felt like they were doing something worthwhile whilst only a third (34 per cent) said it offered good job progression.
Only marginally happier were IT workers (48 per cent) and just above them were human resources employees (54 per cent).
The City & Guilds career happiness index reveals that the majority of desk-based, high pressure jobs do not provide employees with fulfillment.
During the research they interviewed 2,200 workers from a wide variety of professions to gauge employee happiness.
Nine out of ten (82 per cent) of horticulturists said they were able to use and hone their skills every day which helped to boost their job satisfaction
It found the British workforce want flexibility, reasonable control over their daily duties and the opportunity to use their skills to tackle challenges and gain rewards.
Overall, the Career Happiness Index shows that people in vocationally trained and skills-based jobs, such as hairdressers, gardeners, plumbers and electricians, were happiest (65 per cent)
Only 58 per cent of those in largely academically trained, office-based jobs were happy in comparison
Learning a trade from the beginning and working your way up also has a positive impact on levels of pride, with 68 per cent of those in vocationally trained jobs saying they were proud of their work, compared to 62 per cent of those in academically-trained jobs.
The research also found that self-employed people are overwhelmingly happier at work (85 per cent).
More than four in five (83 per cent) of self-employed people claim they enjoy having a flexible work life and 91 per cent said they like having control over their daily duties.
A little over half (54 per cent) of those in full-time employment felt their working conditions were flexible.
The same proportion felt they were appreciated for their work.
Nick Bradley, Group Director at City & Guilds, said: 'At a time when both happiness and employment are high on the Government agenda, we wanted to link the two areas and look into what affects levels of happiness at work and in life.
Only 44 per cent of bankers - the average salary for a city trader is approximately £80,000 a year - said they were happy in their jobs
'Most people spend half of their time working, so we wanted to find out what makes people happy at work and how that differs by job role.
'It's particularly interesting to see that those who have taken the vocational route are happiest and feel the most pride in their work; there's certainly something to be said from learning specific skills and working your way up the career ladder.'
Matt Pottage, Garden Manager at RHS' flagship garden in Surrey, RHS Garden Wisley, said: 'Gardening is undoubtedly the best career there is.
'One of the biggest perks is working outside in the fresh air and being active; on fine summer days or crisp winter days it's just wonderful.
'Similarly to floristry, the scope of creativity is vast on so many levels and the opportunities are endless, it's a wonderful career.'
The findings were released to mark The Skills Show 2012, the UK's biggest careers event which is taking place at the Birmingham NEC from 15 - 17 November.
The event will give young people the chance to have a go at a variety of different skills, and help them to choose the most satisfying career path for them.
("And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it." Genesis 2:15 Man's first "job". God knew what would satisfy man. "Hate not laborious work, neither husbandry, which the most High hath ordained." Ecclesiasticus 7:15)
Until next week...keep on believing
“What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?”
1 Corinthians 6:19