Tuesday, June 21, 2016

Pestilence Spreading With Refugee Crisis, Putin Suggests Cameron's Basis For EU Vote, Pope's Rhetoric To Facilitate Christian Persecution?

Six Diseases Return To US as Migration Advocates Celebrate 'World Refugee Day'

Six diseases that were recently near eradication are making a comeback in the United States, as the taxpayer funded refugee resettlement industry launches a propaganda blitz about the so-called World Refugee Day this Monday.

The returning diseases are;
1. Tuberculosis
2. Measles
3. Whooping Cough
4. Mumps
5. Scarlet Fever
6. Bubonic Plague

The near eradication of these diseases in the United States during the twentieth century was a remarkable accomplishment of American civilization. Until recently, most Americans believed these diseases were gone from our shores for good.
But a politicized public health system, and a rise in the subsidized migration into the United States, however, have combined to reverse a century of progress.
The number of foreign-born residents of the country has increased by 31 million in three decades, from 11 million in 1986 to 42 million in 2015. Immigration to the United States during this period has come from Middle Eastern, African, Asian, South American and Central American countries where all these diseases are prevalent. The extra 31 million have arrived in a number of ways: approximately 3 million are refugees, 11 million are illegal immigrants, and the remainder are legal immigrants, asylees, and parolees.

These six “comeback” diseases are not the only ones of concern to America’s public health.
A number of other diseases, some of which are prevalent among foreign born residents of the United States and foreign visitors, also present a current problem, to varying degrees, including zika, flesh eating parasites—cutaneous leishmaniasis, ebola, leprosy, intestinal parasites, HIV, scabies, and diptheria.

Putin Suggests Cameron Actually Blackmailed EU 

Russia’s Putin: why did Britain call Brexit referendum … Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday questioned why British Prime Minister David Cameron had called a referendum on Britain’s membership of the European Union.  “If it’s such a problem, why did he initiate this, if he is against it himself?” Putin said of Cameron at a meeting on the sidelines of the St Petersburg International Economic Forum. -Reuters

This was a good question that Putin asked, though it is not clear if this was the language he used.
The Economic Times has a long quote from Putin, as follows:

Meanwhile Russian President Vladimir Putin suggested British Prime Minister David Cameron had called the referendum to “blackmail” and “scare” Europe. “Why has he set up this referendum? To blackmail Europe? Or to scare it? What is the purpose if he himself is against”

The Economic Times states that Putin made this comment “Friday during a meeting with representatives of news agencies, including AFP.”
Reuters, as you can see in our initial excerpt, has much the same quote and identifies it as something Putin said “on the sidelines” on Friday.
If Reuters intentionally didn’t report Putin’s statement about “blackmail,” perhaps it was because it suggests a more Machiavellian – and even malicious – strategy.
Reuters purports to be an impartial news service but anyone who closely follows its reporting can find evidence that the news service is supportive of globalism.
Putin’s statement about “blackmail” raises questions that would be awkward for the British “Remain” faction to address or rebut.

We’ve already presented the strategy ourselves HERE. In a mid-March report entitled “Bank of England Intentionally Strangles UK Economy to Discourage Brexit,” we stated the following regarding the “REAL reason for the Brexit vote.”

It never made any sense to us that Cameron would call for such a vote. The answer may lie in the results of Cameron’s recently announced deal with the EU.
Under the deal, Britain received certain concessions to stay in the EU.  One was that Britain would not be part of an “ever closer union.”
More importantly from our perspective, further EU regulations will not be imposed on the City.  The City may exercise significant EU power behind the scenes, but this can’t be fully admitted for various reasons.
And thus the need for a formal show of negotiations leading to the exemptions that Cameron has generated.
And now that these have been negotiated, there is no further reason for London to pursue Brexit. The movement, once created, must now be halted.

Our suggestion was a polite one: We stated that Cameron’s call for a vote “never made any sense.”
Putin says it may be blackmail. No wonder Reuters might not have wished to report the quote.
More recently, we suggested that he EU – an invention of London’s City and Washington DC – needs to deepen into a political union.
We wrote about this HERE in an article entitled, “Is the Real Brexit Plan to Create a Closer European Union Without Britain?”

The idea is that a “Brexit” – a British exit from the EU – might cause an immediate deepening of ties. In other words, the remaining EU members would soon turn from a coalition of loosely linked nation-states into the longed-for (by some) United States of Europe.

Conclusion: It is possible that no matter what happens with Brexit, those of the internationalist camp will do their best to make the vote benefit and strengthen the EU. If Reuters intentionally avoided reporting on Putin’s statement regarding “blackmail,” that may be seen as an important signal regarding Cameron’s underlying motivation.

Pope’s rhetoric against ‘fundamentalist’ Catholics could help pave way for active persecution

It’s one of the most frequent talking points of Pope Francis. It’s definitely part of his appeal for the media and simultaneously one of the most hurtful things for those inside the Church for whom the faith means everything. I’m speaking of the Pope’s penchant for castigating faithful adherents of the Catholic faith as “obsessed,” “doctors of the law,” “neo-pelagian,” “self-absorbed,” “restorationist,” “fundamentalist,” “rigid,” “ideological,” “hypocritical,” and much more.
The effect of the all-too-frequent barrage from the lips of the Pontiff himself is potentially deadly. It confirms the prejudice of the world against faithful Christians as the media constantly portrays them – as hypocrites and worse. Moreover, it permits the false categorization of adherent Christians with fundamentalist Islamic radicals who need to be suppressed to ensure public safety.

Who can blame the media for such comparisons when the Pope has made them himself? “Fundamentalism is a sickness that we find in all religions,” said the Pope in November while flying home from Africa. “Among Catholics there are many, not a few, many, who believe to hold the absolute truth,” he added. “They go ahead by harming others with slander and defamation, and they do great harm. … And it must be combated.”

Given the inordinate amount of time he spends condemning them, it would be ludicrous to suggest the Pope is only speaking of the infinitesimal number of practicing Catholics who do have a deranged puritanical bent.

It has now been freely admitted by Vatican authorities that there was an extreme liberal group of Cardinals known as the St. Gallen group who backed the papal election of Cardinal Bergoglio.  But even if Pope Francis has an ideological dispute with conservative Cardinals such as Cardinal Raymond Burke, his repeated public criticisms against Catholics who hold to the “absolute truth” is potentially a great danger to the faithful.

In addition to the fact that Pope Francis’ remarks along these lines contradict his predecessors (see end of this article), they are a grave danger because secular authorities are all too willing to crush freedom of religion for Christians with the excuse that they are stomping out dangerous fundamentalism. With the Pope’s own words they can equate Catholics who would hold to all of the Church’s teachings with Islamic or Hindu fundamentalists who employ violence and torture as means of conquest.

It is exactly that distinction -- between faithful and nominal Catholics -- that the world is reading into Pope Francis’ regular haranguing of “fundamentalist” Catholics as opposed to others. The frequency is such that it is beyond the scope of this article to point to all the instances in the last three years of the pontificate. But these few should exemplify the point (emphasis added throughout):

- From the September 19, 2013 Jesuit magazine interview:  “If the Christian is a restorationist, a legalist, if he wants everything clear and safe, then he will find nothing... Those who today always look for disciplinarian solutions, those who long for an exaggerated doctrinal ‘security,’ those who stubbornly try to recover a past that no longer exists—they have a static and inward-directed view of things. In this way, faith becomes an ideology among other ideologies.”
- Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (The Joy of the Gospel) released November 26, 2013: “A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying. … Since it is based on carefully cultivated appearances, it is not always linked to outward sin; from without, everything appears as it should be. But if it were to seep into the Church, it would be infinitely more disastrous than any other worldliness which is simply moral.”
June 2014 interview with Spanish-language magazine La Vanguardia: “The three religions, we have our fundamentalist groups, small in relation to all the rest. A fundamentalist group, although it may not kill anyone, although it may not strike anyone, is violent. The mental structure of fundamentalists is violence in the name of God.”
- In his October 19, 2014 closing address to Extraordinary Synod on the Family, Pope Francis spoke of “traditionalists” with their “hostile inflexibility,” and their failure to allow themselves to be “surprised by God.”
- In the January 2015 book-length interview, The Name of God is Mercy, Pope Francis says “scholars of the law” are “the principal opposition to Jesus; they challenge him in the name of doctrine.” And he adds, “This approach is repeated throughout the long history of the Church.”
- In a September 2015 radio interview with Radio Milenium, Pope Francis said, “Fundamentalists keep God away from accompanying his people, they divert their minds from him and transform him into an ideology. So in the name of this ideological god, they kill, they attack, destroy, slander. Practically speaking, they transform that God into a Baal, an idol. … No religion is immune from its own fundamentalisms. In every religion there will be a small group of fundamentalists whose work is to destroy for the sake of an idea, and not reality.
- In his closing address to the Synod on the Family in October of 2015, the Pope condemned “the closed hearts which frequently hide even behind the Church’s teachings or good intentions, in order to sit in the chair of Moses and judge, sometimes with superiority and superficiality, difficult cases and wounded families."
- Pope Francis’ homily on January 18, 2016 reads: “Christians who say ‘it’s always been done that way,’ and stop there have hearts closed to the surprises of the Holy Spirit. They are idolaters and rebels who will never arrive at the fullness of the truth.”
- The official Vatican radio report on his homily of June 9, 2016 reads: “Pope Francis warned on Thursday against an excessive rigidity, saying those within the Church who tell us ‘it’s this or nothing’ are heretics and not Catholics.”

Obama Has Covertly Signed the US Over to the United Nations 

Agenda 2030 is often referred to as Agenda 21 on steroids. We talk and write about Agenda 2030 as if it were something that will someday come our way if we are not careful. Well, my fellow Americans, I have very bad news. To quote my friend and colleague, Steve Quayle, when he says “what is coming is no longer coming, it is already here”.

From Obama’s Whitehouse.gov “FACT SHEET: U.S. Global Development Policy and Agenda 2030″, we have a declaration on the part of the Obama administration to “to adopt the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (“2030 Agenda”)“. 

From the above-mentioned White House document, dated September 27, 2015, we see that President Obama effectively signed over the sovereignty of the United States to the United Nations and its Agenda 203o program when the “United States joined OGP Steering Committee members in signing a declaration on Open Government for the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”.

On paper, the United States became a de facto puppet state of the United Nations nearly nine months ago. In fact, Obama has stated that “The United States is exercising global leadership that will be pivotal in achieving the 2030 Agenda”, in the following areas”:
Global health and Global Health Security Agenda: What this means is that mandatory vaccinations will be required world-wide.

Climate Change and Resilience: This blends nicely with Power Africa. This means the beginning of a global smart grid, the kind that Patrick Wood has written about and this will all be done under the “pretend” guise of protecting the planet.

With this initiative, many feel that we will be living like we did in 1870 because we will not be able to afford the energy thanks to imposed carbon taxes and restrictions on energy use by the common man. 

Ending extreme poverty” This means the continuation of free trade agreements in search of cheap labor supplies.

This is the path to global socialism. This will permit the continuing dismantling of the American economy. This is why Donald Trump is such a threat to the establishment of the New World Order because he wants to stop free trade agreements and keep American manufacturing at home.

Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women and Girls: 

It is this philosophy of the globalists to eliminate all gender differences (e.g. transgender bathroom issues). This is why we are seeing women now having to register for the draft. This sets up the enforcement of Executive Order 13603 in which both men and women can be declared “unpaid consultants”, which opens to the door to forced relocation of parents to different geographic locations at the same time and without pay (i.e. slave labor). 

Education: This means more Common Core type of programs and more UN interference in our children’s education(see the youtube video below).

Catalyzing private investment and other sources of financing: This means the financing of a global tax within the United States.

Is this uconstitutional? Does it matter? We are playing in a game with no rules. Many predict that this will come in the form of an Internet tax.

I predict that most will have read this document and still not be able to fathom that Obama signed this country over to the United Nations over nine months ago. No amount of documentation would convince them otherwise. After all, cognitive dissonance permeates the belief system of millions of Americans for whom their mantra is “don’t confuse me with the facts”.
The news even gets worse when one considers the following facts that have already been established:
  1. John Kerry illegally signed the UN Small Arms Treaty
  2. Obama has several bilateral agreements with several nations, to help put down any and all civil disturbances under the banner of the UN flag
  3. Obama has signed the TPP trade agreement which removes all legislative power in the United States and hands it over to a corporate tribunal. The United States legal system and legislative authority is no more when the TPP becomes operational.
Hillary supports every aspect of these UN principles adopted by Obama. Trump does not. Anyone who continues to support Clinton must be mentally ill.

A Perfect Recipe For Mayhem

There’s no way that the shady doings of the Clinton Foundation will not become a campaign issuewhether Trump emerges as the eventual GOP nominee or not, and of course the other noisome matter of exactly what Hillary told Too-Big-To-Fail banks in exchange for many quarter-million dollar “speaking fees” still lurks behind all that. Hillary’s partisans at the The New York Times and The WashPo have ignored these stories for months, but the telltale stench remains, like a dead body under the floorboards.. In contrast to her beaming victory lap after the California primary, all this stuff promises some serious frowny-face for Mz. It’s-My-Turn in the months ahead.
As for Trump, the hand-wringing and Maalox-gulping among GOP nabobs got a lot more intense since the Orlando Club massacre, and the (as usual) disjointed utterances by the presumptive Republican Party nominee. This guy is not just a loose artillery shell rolling around on the deck — he’s a dirty bomb wrapped in a smallpox blanket threatening to turn the Grand Old Party into a political Flying Dutchman. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan underscored his extremely conditional endorsement of Trump on the Sunday TV chat forums, hinting that even if Trump got where he is playing by the rules, the rules can be changed at the convention.
That would set the stage for a melee both inside and outside the GOP convention in Cleveland a month from now. The tragedy of a legitimately irate populace vested in such an obviously inept champion will lead to a political explosion when the party poobahs try to maneuver him off-stage. The only worse alternative is if they actually go ahead and nominate the ham-headed sonofabitch. Either way, the Republican Party comes out as burnt toast.
Remember, too, the Black Lives Matter movement and its affiliates promised months ago to bring a disruptive presence to both conventions. Imagine how they will get on with thousands of outraged Trumpsters moiling in the streets. Add a dash of Mexican hot sauce to this farrago and you’ve got a perfect recipe for mayhem.

FBI Tried To 'Lure' Omar Mateen Into A Terror Plot Before Orlando Shooting

No comments: