Sunday, 29 November 2009
Saturday, 7 November 2009
Thursday, 5 November 2009
Sunday, 25 October 2009
Watch
Robert-Arthur:Menard gives a seminar on The Illusion of the Person, what Words in Law mean, Consent, Acceptance, Honor & Dishonour, Bills of Exchange, and more! Highly relevant information about just how The Powers That Be govern over us, and what we can do about.
Visit http://ThinkFree.ca and http://HijackingHumanity.com for more information!
Friday, 23 October 2009
Who Killed John Lennon?
By John W. Whitehead
12/1/2008
"You gotta remember, establishment, it's just a name for evil. The monster doesn't care whether it kills all the students or whether there's a revolution. It's not thinking logically, it's out of control." -- John Lennon (1969)In recent years, there have been countless stories about the U.S. government abusing its surveillance powers. They range from government agents listening in on the telephone calls of American citizens to the FBI harassing innocent people over their free speech rights for simply criticizing the government. And once some government bureaucrat decides to focus on a certain person, the data files are collected and civil liberties are undermined. This type of behavior, however, has been going on for a long time. Such was the relentless harassment and government stalking of John Lennon. It is not only a chilling tale of paranoia and abuse of power, it is also a lesson for our times.
In December 1971 at a concert in Ann Arbor, Mich., Lennon took to the stage and in his usual confrontational style belted out "John Sinclair," a song he had written about a man sentenced to 10 years in prison for possessing two marijuana cigarettes. Within days of Lennon's call for action, the Michigan Supreme Court ordered Sinclair released.
What Lennon did not know at the time was that FBI agents were in the audience, taking notes on everything from the attendance (15,000) to the artistic merits of his new song. The U.S. government was spying on Lennon. Supposedly, the goal was to collect enough information to have him deported.
By March 1971, when his "Power to the People" single was released, it was clear where Lennon stood. Having moved to New York City that same year, Lennon was ready to participate in political activism against the U. S. government, the "monster" that was financing the war in Vietnam.
It certainly helped that Lennon was a natural in the spotlight, with one of the most recognizable faces in the world. And with the Beatles' break-up, Lennon began doing his own thing, posing for publicity photos, decked out in Japanese riot gear and singing "Say you want a revolution, We better get it on right away, Well you get on your feet, And into the street."
Lennon had learned early on that rock music could serve a political end by proclaiming a radical message. More importantly, he saw that his music could mobilize the public. For example, on November 15, 1969, during a peace rally in Washington, DC, Pete Seeger led nearly half a million demonstrators in singing Lennon's "Give Peace a Chance" at the Washington Monument. "The people started swaying their bodies and banners and flags in time," Seeger later recalled, "several hundred thousand people, parents with their small children on their shoulders. It was a tremendously moving thing."
The release of Lennon's Sometime in New York City album, which contained a radical message in every song and depicted Richard Nixon and Chairman Mao dancing together nude on the cover, only fanned the flames of the conflict to come.
Government officials had been keeping strict tabs on the ex-Beatle they referred to as "Mr. Lennon." But the official U.S. war against Lennon began in earnest in 1972 when he was served with deportation orders. While the orders were supposedly for a four-year-old marijuana conviction in Great Britain, what Lennon didn't realize was that Nixon was personally driving the effort to have him deported.
FBI files, made public after years of lawsuits, reveal the extent of the Nixon Administration's efforts to "neutralize" Lennon. (However, while ominous in tone, the term "neutralize"--as used by government agents--was never really defined.) With FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover at the helm and reporting to the Nixon White House about the FBI's surveillance of Lennon, memos and reports had been flying back and forth between senators, the FBI and the U.S. Immigration Office. Clearly forces were at work to "neutralize" Lennon.
Nixon's pursuit of Lennon was relentless--and in large part based on the misperception that Lennon and his comrades were planning to disrupt the 1972 Republican National Convention. The government's paranoia, however, was misplaced.
Left-wing activists who were on government watch lists and who shared an interest in bringing down the Nixon Administration had been congregating at Lennon's New York apartment. But when they revealed that they were planning to cause a riot, Lennon balked. As he recounted in a 1980 interview, "We said, We ain't buying this. We're not going to draw children into a situation to create violence so you can overthrow what? And replace it with what? . . . It was all based on this illusion, that you can create violence and overthrow what is, and get communism or get some right-wing lunatic or a left-wing lunatic. They're all lunatics."
Despite the fact that Lennon was not part of the "lunatic" plot, the government persisted in its efforts to have him deported. Finally, in 1976, Lennon won the battle to stay in the country. As he said afterwards, "I have a love for this country. This is where the action is."
Lennon's time of repose didn't last long, however. By 1980, he had re-emerged with a new album and plans to become politically active again. The old radical was back and ready to cause trouble. In his final interview on Dec. 8, 1980, Lennon mused, "The whole map's changed and we're going into an unknown future, but we're still all here, and while there's life there's hope."
That very night, when Lennon returned to his New York apartment building, Mark David Chapman was waiting in the shadows. As Lennon stepped outside the car to greet the fans congregating outside, Chapman, in an eerie echo of the FBI's moniker for Lennon, called out, "Mr. Lennon!" Lennon turned and was met with a barrage of gunfire as Chapman--dropping into a two-handed combat stance--emptied his .38-caliber pistol and pumped four bullets into his back and left arm. Lennon stumbled, staggered forward and, with blood pouring from his mouth and chest, collapsed to the ground.
John Lennon was pronounced dead on arrival at the hospital. He had finally been "neutralized."
The Rutherford Institute - Commentary
Wednesday, 21 October 2009
Unity and Difference
Unity and Difference | ||||||||
| Unity and difference are two contrasting, or even conflicting, themes of our time. On the one hand there is a quest for unity, linking together, forgetting our differences and being one. This applies in human relationships, in the business world, and is an element in international politics. On the other hand there is the sense of distinctiveness, of a unique identity, of an individual pathway and destiny. How does this work for the Jewish people? Is there room for difference, or do we all have to be the same? Of course, there are varied communities: the Sefardi communities, which include diverse groups such as Spanish, Iraqi, Iranian and Moroccan Jews, and the Ashkenazi communities, which likewise include Lithuanian, German Jewish, Polish and Russian Jews, and so on. And yet, despite these differences, we are all one people. There is the same dual tendency within any single community, or even within a family. Each person is an individual, with his or her unique characteristics, and at the same time, we are one together. Our Parshah (Numbers 1:1-4:20) gives us a hint about this dual feature of the Jewish people. The Parshah begins the fourth Book of the Torah, called in English the "Book of Numbers." Although Jews often use the Hebrew name Bamidbar (meaning, "In the Desert") in fact an ancient Jewish name for this book is likewise "Numbers" (Sefer Hapekudim). The reason for this name is very simple: the Book describes how the Jewish people in the desert, led by Moses, are counted several times. In our Parshah G-d tells Moses to count the people as individuals and also by their families, within their tribes. During this process, Moses and Aaron have with them twelve men, heads of each of the tribes, who are now given the name "communal leaders" (Numbers 1:16), that is: leaders not only of their individual tribes, but also of the entire community. The counting in our Parshah differs from the previous counting of the Jewish people. In the earlier counting - carried out by Moses - each individual was counted by giving half a shekel and the total sum of shkalim provided a count for the entire Jewish people.1 In our Parshah, the counting is also of individuals but they are now grouped by family and by tribe. Furthermore, several people - Moses, Aaron and the twelve heads of the tribes - are in charge of the counting. Commenting on this, the Lubavitcher Rebbe suggests2 that each tribe in fact represents a distinctive pathway in life and in service of G-d. We see this from the distinctive blessings which Moses gives each tribe at the end of his life.3 The counting by tribe and by families within the tribes expresses the significance of being different and distinctive. At the same time, all the different pathways join together in the single, united totality of the Jewish people. This is why the leader of each tribe is involved not only in the counting of his own tribe but also that of the entire community. Indeed, as head of a tribe he is also called a "communal leader": his responsibility extends beyond his own Tribe, to everyone in the Jewish people. This presents a useful paradigm for each of us today. We are each unique, with distinctive qualities. At the same time we form the totality of the Jewish people. Further, like the heads of the tribes, our responsibilities are dual: to our own selves and our own group, and also to the entirety of the Jewish people. This combination of individual distinctiveness and unity is the secret of our strength. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
Life
Apparently not and just as i assumed, a mirrade of scientific balle suggest that the human species originated from a bubble of iorn in a lave rock, well thats to put it bluntly, All they know is that the dont knowl. I think the ancients knew and that theres a whole lot of shit they're not telling us.
NASA prepare to release UFO evidence to public.
Revolutionary New Theory For Origins Of Life On EarthScienceDaily (Dec. 4, 2002) — A totally new and highly controversial theory on the origin of life on earth, is set to cause a storm in the science world and has implications for the existence of life on other planets. Research* by Professor William Martin of the University of Dusseldorf and Dr Michael Russell of the Scottish Environmental Research Centre in Glasgow, claims that living systems originated from inorganic incubators - small compartments in iron sulphide rocks. The new theory radically departs from existing perceptions of how life developed and it will be published in Philosophical Transactions B, a learned journal produced by the Royal Society.
Since the 1930s the accepted theories for the origins of cells and therefore the origin of life, claim that chemical reactions in the earth's most ancient atmosphere produced the building blocks of life - in essence - life first, cells second and the atmosphere playing a role.Professor Martin and Dr Russell have long had problems with the existing hypotheses of cell evolution and their theory turns traditional views upside down. They claim that cells came first. The first cells were not living cells but inorganic ones made of iron sulphide and were formed not at the earth's surface but in total darkness at the bottom of the oceans. Life, they say, is a chemical consequence of convection currents through the earth's crust and in principle, this could happen on any wet, rocky planet.
Dr Russell says: "As hydrothermal fluid - rich in compounds such as hydrogen, cyanide, sulphides and carbon monoxide - emerged from the earth's crust at the ocean floor, it reacted inside the tiny metal sulphide cavities. They provided the right microenvironment for chemical reactions to take place. That kept the building blocks of life concentrated at the site where they were formed rather than diffusing away into the ocean. The iron sulphide cells, we argue, is where life began."
One of the implications of Martin and Russell's theory is that life on our planet, even on other planets or some large moons in our own solar system, might be much more likely than previously assumed.The research by Professor Martin and Dr Russell is backed up by another paper The redox protein construction kit: pre-last universal common+ ancestor evolution of energy-conserving enzymes by F. Baymann, E. Lebrun, M. Brugna, B. Schoepp-Cothenet, M.-T. Giudici-Orticoni & W. Nitschke which will be published in the same edition.
###
*On the origins of cells: a hypothesis for the evolutionary transitions from abiotic geochemistry to chemoautotrophic prokaryotes, and from prokaryotes to nucleated cells by Professor William Martin, Institut fuer Botanik III, University of Dusseldorf and Dr Michael Russell, Scottish Environmental Research Centre, Glasgow.
Need i say more on the possibilities on extra-terresterial intervention.
