If you are concerned about the NEXT Generation . . . pass this on... You might consider sharing this with your (of age)children................they are the ones who are going to have to deal with this problem.

This, not the Chinese or the Russians, represents the greatest threat to the world and might be the fulfillment of the book of Revelation in the Holy Bible.

Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat.

Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life.

 

Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.

Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges.

When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well.

Here's how it works:

As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in:

United States -- Muslim 0.6%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1.8%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in:

Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:

France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris , we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam , with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections in:

Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 15%

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:
Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:

Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:

Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and is on-going in:

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace. Here there's supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:

Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 100%

Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.

'Before I was nine, I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel. -- Leon Uris,'The Haj'

It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.

Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their birth rates are higher than the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's population by the end of this century.

Well, boys and girls, today we are letting the fox guard the hen house. The wolves will be herding the sheep!

NOTE: Has anyone ever heard a new government official being identified as a devout Catholic, a devout Jew or a devout Protestant...? Just wondering.

Devout Muslims being appointed to critical Homeland Security positions? Doesn't this make you feel safer already?? That should make the United States much safer, huh!!

Was it not "Devout Muslim men" that flew planes into U.S. buildings
only 11 years ago?

We must never forget this. Was it not a Devout Muslim man who killed 13 at Fort Hood ? (He killed "From within" -don't forget that).

Also: This is very interesting and we all need to read it from start to finish. Maybe this is why our American Muslims are so quiet and not speaking out about any atrocities. Can a good Muslim be a good American? This question was forwarded to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years. The following is his reply:

Theologically - no. Because his allegiance is to Allah, The moon God of Arabia

Religiously - no. Because no other religion is accepted by His Allah except Islam (Quran, 2:256)(Koran)

Scripturally - no. Because his allegiance is to the five Pillars of Islam and the Quran.

Geographically - no. Because his allegiance is to Mecca , to which he turns in prayer five times a day.

Socially - no. Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews..

Politically - no. Because he must submit to the mullahs (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America , the great Satan.

Domestically - no. Because he is instructed to marry four Women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34)

Intellectually - no. Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.

Philosophically - no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.

Spiritually - no. Because when we declare 'one nation under God,' the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as Heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Quran's 99 excellent names.

Therefore, after much study and deliberation... Perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. They obviously cannot be both 'good' Muslims and good Americans. Call it what you wish, it's still the truth. You had better believe it. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country and our future. The religious war is bigger than we know or understand.

Can a Muslim be a good soldier???

Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, opened fire at Ft. Hood and Killed 13. He is a good Muslim!!!

Footnote: The Muslims have said they will destroy us from within.

SO FREEDOM IS NOT FREE.

Please don't delete this until you send it on.

The Tale of Two Young Men and A Verdict

Asked about my assessment of the verdict:

I did watch the trial this month (having read a varied analyses throughout the year).   
Too many deals were made around politics to publicize/present in court  authentic and applicable information...a metaphor for this politicization is the intentionally discrepant pictures (George 27 pictured in his current age, while 17r old Trayvon's middle school pic was widely used giving a misperception of the relativity of both young men (27,17)). How about if they were pictured standing side by side. 

Commentary of the current decadence of mainstream media:  media chosen and used becomes their message to confuse...on purpose -malicious misuse of human intelligence, talents, voice.)

Another hushed but significant event is that the "Conciliation" money allocated in the first week by our Federal Department of Justice (from a civil rights fund started in the 60's) was given to Jess Jackson & Al Sharpton to fund the racial marches and protests that initially separated peeps into opposing camps and made a race issue out of something that never was a race issue. The Racially-motivated Marches and Protests were NOT in the ballpark of CONCILIATION. The Federal gov thus TARGETED this case as an "opportune" ELECTION YEAR race case. George Zimmerman is IN FACT A RACIAL MIX of Latino, white, black, and something else that I can't remember now. But, the race-enthusiasts called him a "White-Hispanic"...never heard that term used till last year. 

Police records support that George's neighborhood was fraught with robberies. He was a legitimate member of the neighborhood watch program. He had a right and license to conceal carry...and likely would have himself been pummeled to death had he not been armed. His injuries support that Trayvon pinned him down, punched his nose, banged his head on the ground repeatedly and was much bigger, stronger than short George. 

What no one has brought up is that George was just ten years older than Trayvon. Both males under 30. Trayvon was a really big guy who had history of drugs & school suspensions...and I worked with suspended kids in three high schools...past age 15 most are men-size in practice and function. Evidence that Trayvon initiated the actual confrontation and aggressive contact was clear. I do believe Trayvon used the racially loaded words his girlfriend repeated from her phone conversation with 
Trayvon toward George...and having had ten years of experience with young men racially aroused and ready to confront, I believe Trayvon very likely did make some threatening comments directly to George...I have no reason not to believe his report, especially given the phone report from his girlfriend.

George responded in every way within FL law which is why the cops did not charge him...until the old-timer race-enthusiasts recognized this event as a useful political football (notoriety and new money in their pockets).  And the police chief was so harassed by the race-enthusiasts that he had to leave his job...not a positive commentary on the level of pernicious attack levelled against the Sanford Police who were actually doing their job and following FL and local  law. 

Since both males were under 30, neither were likely to have achieved an expected adult brain development level giving fuller control of impulses cognitively, emotionally, hormonally. Trayvon was a really big guy who had history of drugs and school suspension...and I worked with a wide-range of suspended kids in two NY schools...past 16 most are most definitely men-size in many ways (I think TV was 6'2")...and stronger than they will be later past age 25. 

I believe that actual justice was done by the jury...which surprises me because the jury was under immense social and media pressure to do otherwise.  The judge was hard on the defense, and i think she was that way so she could not be accused of favoring one side...the defense. The jury's verdict was based on evidence, not moral relativism or generational grudges retained and politicized...and that gives me some hope for America's development beyond special interest groups that have been unfortunately pitted against each other through the subversive agenda to "transform" America since 2008. George Zimmerman was not a racist...he's a mixture of many races himself...he was watching his neighborhood as most young men do...especially one plagued with increases in criminal activity.

As I heard at a Christian Church this morning, Jesus drew in the sand as the Pharisees tried to "trap" & "trick" Him (and His unique "Christian" Golden Rule Message). The tricksters brought to Him  a woman alleged to have engaged in adultery: "LET HIM WHO IS WITHOUT SIN BE THE FIRST TO CAST a STONE."  

Of course, every man departed...to mind his OWN business. 

Good lesson.

Beware Imbibing Soros-Saudi Money & Bully-Muscle.

Hillary Clinton and Chris Christie to headline event - Maggie Haberman - POLITICO.com

When someone seriously neglects, abuses, and disregards their OWN health and well-being, to what extent should YOU trust him/her with YOURS?  Poor Hillary, rightful candidate in 2008, was politically forced out by the "barack-machine" via Soros-Saudi money and bully-muscle.

Prostituting herself politically, she agreed to serve the "Barack-Machine" as its Secretary of State ...and we sadly (couldn't help but pity her) watched her age fifteen (15) years in four (4). She had to have gained at least fifty pounds (50)....perhaps sixty (60). Her sheer haggardness made me wince each time the media caught a shot of her bloated, etched face, bedraggled by limp lackluster locks...no more Goldilocks ...no more Boldilocks...progressively more Hillary Left-Over, ... clearly, "run over" by a baRACK truck!

Out of sympathy, empathy, pity ... I'd almost want to vote for Hillary... as we've been cheering with more gusto this season for Tiger Woods. Why more?  Because he'd been visited by The Phoenix of Human Nature ... who revived his GOLF GAME, post total devastation. When we witness an icon overcome the odds, our sheer relief naturally (through "mirror neurons") can embolden ourselves as observers, modelers, bystanders hoping to cure our own ills and rise above our own devastations.

Tiger's game seems to have (last time) survived his devastating divorce (based on duplicitous behavior). He seems to have sustained a stellar recovery ...  but recovery of what? Recovery of the superficial, easily observable devastation (i.e., his golf game)? Or recovery of that which precipitated the devastating divorce which in turn resulted in the devastated golf game (i.e., addiction to elements inherent in the cheating dynamic)?

Clearly,Tiger's  personal life (in the news once more) reveals he is boldly engaging his drive to double-talk, be duplicitous in intimate relationships (thus pitting his his ex-wife and latest girl-friend against each other). But this time his kids are older, more aware of their dad's M.O. His kids (and the observing public) are getting a repeat performance of the deleterious effects of a CHEATER-personality dis-organization.

SEEMS is the operative word because while Tiger's professional game seems recovered from devastation, Tiger-the-person clearly has not recovered from his addiction to entertaining duplicitous relationships. And THAT's what brought him down the first time ... attention-wise, confidence-wise, performance-wise. His personal life  subsequently impacted his "professional" life.  And while time marches on, and wounds scar over, and the American people are a naturally generous breed, idioms develop based upon reason: Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, shame on me!!

Tiger's dynamics -both those easily visible and those dynamics underlying albeit precipitating -are analogous to the dynamics of both Hillary Clinton and Chris Chrystie.  All three seem to bounce back from devastating circumstances, but that which precipitated their devastations still lie inherent within themselves. And until they change their inner workings, all that they touch will bear those markings. Our lives cannot not reflect an Achilles Heel.

Some lives leave a footprint of "out-of-order" so enormous, we can't miss it (e.g. Chris Chrystie: need for approval, obese, unable to sufficiently regulate emotions). Some lives leave messy fingerprints in all the wrong places (Hillary Clinton: deferred to the Barack-machine, entertains Saudi-Connect, sustained Benghazi Cover-up). And others' lives are harder to put your finger on because they're in pretty-distracting packages (Lindsay Lohan), or  well-oiled Smoking Guns (Soros'-Saudi's Democratic Party), or  appearance-changing chameleons (e.g. Barack Hussein Obama: promising something for everyone, still Smoker-in-Chief, despite reaping all the resources in this world to master his addictive personality). 

Until each heals (brings into balance) their personal Achilles Heel, what they say cannot be trusted. Words for addicts are tokens to get what they want: access to more power. Their words do not determine what they do as follow-though. Instead, what they say they will do is subject to the dynamics of addiction.  The food & need for approval (Chrystie), furious frenzy (Clinton), and fight-flight (Barack's literally endless campaign via AF1)are simply personalized presentations of a psyche's underlying attempt to gain control of the chaos-within through controlling that which is outside...all of those unsuspecting pawns to be manipulated and circumstances to be transformed. This is the essence of sociopathy. 

It is also the essence of  social injustice. Its full maturation manifested through political machines is known through variable forms of fascism -we'd rather not acknowledge. Because once we acknowledge what is true and threatens our well-being, both individually and together in community, our psyches are compelled to do something to save ourselves and each other.  If we also suffer the afflictions of addiction, we're in trouble...because we're compelled to do something...and that something is likely to come from our affliction, not our balance.

If we're able to retain our internal balance, we engage whatever research is needed to bring about necessary and sufficient discernment of truth, leading to right judgment, thus prompting us to take a variety of appropriate actions.  But if our own addiction is triggered (through perceived threat and mirror neurons) then we are catapulted to a critical point: crisis.  A crisis can serve as a noteworthy call to engage healing practices, prompting us to restore order/balance within so we are more likely to bring healing to that which surrounds and scares us. However, the more we allow our psyches to engage the overwhelm of  our own addiction, the more worried we become, the more likely we engage addiction-sets, or we shut down (go to sleep), or  distract ourselves, or lie to ourselves, or project our thoughts onto others, even demonize those who speak what scares us, displacing our feelings onto others. Or we can grab the invitation to recognize this crisis as our opportunity to get up off our mat, kick the dust from our feet, and transform ourselves. This, empowers us to transform the world around us.

An internal ever-clamoring climate-within causes human beings to neglect, abuse, and disregard not only competing personal responsibilities, but professional responsibilities. Charity does in fact begin at home: the person's psyche (like the fetus in Mama's womb) will get what it needs first. Our drive toward life is more powerful than our inclination to give up. Mother Nature will have her way so we'd better learn to accommodate. Living out of balance with Life's Principles is in fact a matter of Life-Death -or Deceit's Variable Faces. Ultimately, our egos are no match for Mother Nature.

The truth eventually outs itself.  It can't not express itself...even weeds break through  pavement! We are driven to quiet, or balance, the elements that produce one's health (physical, emotional, mental, or spiritual). As social beings, we accordingly engage dynamics that quiet, or balance, those elements within self ... and within our environments. Neglecting, abusing, or disregarding our psyche's positive promptings (to  re-examine and re-organize our perceptions of reality) results in a series of very unfortunate downfalls.  Public figures afflicted with glaring Achilles Heels are further subject to bringing  themselves down repeatedly, until they heal themselves...and they don't go down alone. Public figures with multiple ties to vast circles of people, bring the people down with them.

When I watch Tiger play now, the Robert Palmer soundtrack surrounds his golf game, playing loud and clear, " Addicted to Love."

Simple ORIGINS of disagreement around the current gun agenda/legislation:

Dialogue Platform for those among us who find themselves wondering why, as a people of 50 United States, we find disagreement around The Current gun agenda/legislation:

Why require some among us to register, but not all? Register for what purposes? Why some purposes, but not others? Is it simply ours ...or has that or the  UNITED NATIONS' AGENDA been incorporated unbeknowst to  us?

Convicted felons (murderers, child molesters, etc) and convicted drunk drivers are in an entirely different class of citizens commonly known as, "offenders."  Communities require these individuals to register their presence in communities because they have been convicted of crimes against communities. Felons cannot buy guns...for a good reason. Proven offenders -even if they may later become various levels of "rehabilitated"- have earned through past practice a record of community trust-breaking. This diminishing of community trust stands in direct contrast to those who maintain safe and trust-worthy community relationships. The latter are commonly known as law-abiding citizens. Law-abiding citizens are permitted to exercise all rights, some of which are later denied to those convicted of crimes that jeopardize our communities. It's an issue of safety and trust.

LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS have a track record of responsible "law-abiding" performance, unless and until they change that track record through performance proven (in our court system) otherwise, and thus convicted.  LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS have the Constitutional right to bear arms...some choose to exercise this right ...some use arms for hunting, some for self/family security...some make their living keeping "others" safe, e.g. celebrities, government officials, banks, stores, government offices, airports, cities, towns, highways, schools. 

In Western society, States consider citizens innocent and trust-worthy until they prove themselves otherwise. No legal system is perfect because human beings are not only not perfect but are very diverse in what matters most in different times, places, and stages of life. Rational thought has served Western civilizations well in our process of  legislating such matters, especially among more educated peoples. Reserving some rights to legislate, as States rights, keeps our nation a REPUBLIC. 

States (even municipalities within each state) legislate (according to their state's allowances) differently, according to progressively more "local" needs. States (exercising their rights) serve as unique laboratories of Liberty living out our Constitutional Amendments. Some states have very strict gun registration laws...and enforce them. States vary considerably on both "variables." For instance, Chicago has (like NY) the strictest gun laws...but fails to enforce them, tolerating the worst illegal gun use and the highest violence rate of all cities - youth identifying with and emulating celebrities who entertain them, gear their music and videos to them,   glorifying violence. 

Chronic psychosis (the other major category ignored) lurks dangerously below the radar of The Gun Agenda, but flies at the top of the list of mass shooters. Due to lobbying by special interest groups (e.g. ACLU, Disabilities) the progressively mentally-ill who used to be hospitalized have been living among us under-supervised, under-treated, living on their own, homeless, or with another (e.g. Adam Lanza's frightened mother).

So that's the bottomline conundrum being plied by our representatives. In God we trust.

AND THE BIGGER PICTURE, MY FRIENDS AND FAMILY: THIS VOTE IN CONGRESS TODAY WAS REALLY ABOUT OUR GIVING AWAY OUR RIGHT TO GOVERN TO THE UNITED NATIONS: 

 Over the weekend, we came four votes away from the United States Senate giving our Constitutional rights over to the United Nations. In a 53-46 vote, the senate narrowly passed a measure that will stop theUnited States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.

The Statement of Purpose from the bill read:

To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. The U.N. Small Arms Treaty, which has been championed by the Obama Administration, would have effectively placed a global ban on the import and export of small firearms. The ban would have affected all private gun owners in the U.S. , and had language that would have implemented an international gun registry on all private guns and ammo.

Astonishingly, 46 of our United States Senators were willing to give away our Constitutional rights to a foreign power. Here are the 46 senators that voted to give your rights to the U.N.

Notice that ALL are either Democrat or "Independent."

Baldwin (D-WI) Baucus (D-MT) Bennet (D-CO) Blumenthal (D-CT) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Coons (D-DE) Cowan (D-MA) Durbin (D-IL) Feinstein (D-CA) Franken (D-MN) Gellibrand (D-NY)

Harkin (D-IA) Hirono (D-HI) Johnson (D-SD) Kaine (D-VA) King (I-ME) Klobuchar (D-MN) Landrieu (D-LA) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR) Mikulski (D-MD) Murphy (D-CT) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) People this needs to go viral. These Senators voted to let the UN take our guns. They need to lose the election. We have been betrayed. These 46 Senators Voted to Give your 2nd Amendment Constitutional Rights to the U.N.

PERFECTLY CLEAR....... B Brave.

PERFECTLY CLEAR 

And YOU too can wake up now........ B Brave!

Every entity's SIGNATURE lies within its voice, it's art, it's deeds. It's now perfectly clear  through carefully chosen words... always carefully pre-written "...the full WAIT of justice" looks like, sounds like, feels like this  

... Refusal to apply the label "Suspect" to a suspect...tactic of "euphemising" common usage, commonly accepted word meanings, e.g. 'person of interest' which changes no FACT, but effectively suspends the uninformed, the unaware, the trusting listeners' JUDGMENT
...just as Ft Hood Terrorism was labeled "workplace violence" ... Just as barack hussein refused to label Benghazi as "Terrorism" 
... just as he was unwilling to attribute THAT terrorist attack to terrorists ...just as he INSTEAD attributed  Benghazi to AN AMATEUR FILM-maker (who is still in prison) 
... just as he APOLOGIZED at the UN to ARAB NATIONS FOR the AMATEUR FILM...Just as Obama granted permission to the Saudi Gov to SELF-approve Saudis for travelling to and ENTRY into America (knowing  full well the COMMON KNOWLEDGE  that indeed SAUDI's HAVE INITIATED & TRAINED MOST TERRORISTs Worldwide who launch attacks on US)
... just as he met yesterday ("impromptu") with a SAUDI official
... just as the Saudi in custody suddenly became 'not in custody," a suspect became a "person of interest"... just as the Saudi POI is connected to an influential Saudi Family
... JUST AS THAT SAUDI NATIONAL WAS CLASSIFIED IN THE US AS A "STUDENT"
... JUST AS THIS SAUDI WAS ALREADY SCHEDULED BY FBI FOR DEPORTING via the terrorist code (2123B) 
... just as Press Conferences scheduled yesterday were announced, then delayed, then eliminated...just as Barack Hussein Obama promises that 'those who are responsible for this act (hmmm THIS time, did he use "senseless"? or "heinous"?) will feel the full WAIT of Justice." 
... Just as We The People of Boston and throughout our United States of America are WAITING NOW 
... Just as this is yet another example of one of his tactics: AN HUSSEIN WAY OF SUSPENDING OUR JUDGMENT
... Just as MASS HYPNOSIS was televised through his performance today at Cardinal O'Malley's Cathedral of The Holy Cross in Boston. 

Wake up, my Friends. Wake up,  my  sister and brother Americans! Wake up your sons and daughters. Each time YOU receive and/or share a piece of Truth, each truth we have shared further releases  the vice maligned, misplaced upon our hearts and minds 
...just as TRUTH DISPELLS the spell he casts through tactics delaying, always re-defining common word usage, always euphemizing (softening), minimizing responsiveness, minimizing right judgment, minimizing right action, indeed "soothing" US into an extended sleep of further self-deceit (that he's got Us 'covered'... and he does but with DECEPTION, cover-up, delaying, SUSPENDING right judgment, DEFLECTING right action. Indefinitely
...just as Benghazi.

Friends and Family, our time has come. Awareness always grows toward the light just as Light dawns.  
You have been informed. 
... Just as you are NOW AWAKENED from a progressive, albeit regressive, slumber. 
... Justice comes to you through you, to US through us.

Think. Know. Speak. Amen.

To the NONSENCE-MAKERS Congesting America's Intelligence and Right Action

…To propaganda-rags like "the raw story"

…For grunt level verbal-masturbating of a chris matthews...

…To SHAMsters peddling immoral-complicitness of a wolf blitzer mouthing on automatic pilot (…mouthing from NOT even a "hint" of reason to speculate ‘tea party’) AS BOSTON POLICE ALREADY HAD A SAUDI NATIONAL IN CUSTODY re TERRORISM in Boston, this is my response:

You make "NEWS-CASTING is a misnomer. YOUR SPINS AND SLANTS are Nonsense-Makers. Shame is your middle name for peddling this trash-think in the place of worthy issues. Your pop-ups/side pics/word choices demonstrate clearly that GREED FEEDS

1.  Your collective "crap" detectors,

2.  Your capacity to accurately assess your contributions of merit to the American people,

3.  Your willingness to serve as a worthy bridge to our world watching US closely for hope and leadership toward LIBERTY.

Advice: 

Descend into the bowels of  'the establishment' ADVERTISING, leaving delivery of our daily news to the strong stomachs, noble hearts and rational minds.

Professor Palladio

Liberty Campus

United States of America

April 16, 2013

Be the change you want in your world...

Season's Greetings!

The "inspiration" that follows in red font , from TUT's UNIVERSE, deconstructs long-researched principles of human thought and behavior: 

Haven't all the years you've spent being Santa Claus, heidi, been more fun than all the years you spent waiting for Santa Claus?

And not just for the joy you've helped place on your favorite faces, but for your ability to act instead of wait. Acting makes the suspense bearable. It gives you a starring role. Time passes more quickly. And best of all, it makes possible your dance with life as you network and mingle with other dancers.

And so it is in all things, heidi, especially those dreams that have placed their trust in you... act, don't wait.

Happy Hallelujah, Santa Claus!

    The Universe

I post this now because it illumines our understanding of why we (children through adults) feel the " impulse to act" ... of course immediately satisfying because acting reduces growing tension produced by mounting emotion (specifically designed to "move" us into action). 

A crisis causes our fight or flight response.  Personally experienced and immediate danger, or vicariously witnessed (even visually/verbally shared). The more advanced our social circles, the more likely we learn (from modeling and explicit instruction) to consciously exercise efforts that expand well-being overall... to act cautiously, wisely. To act overtime in the variety of ways that meet deep and long-term needs. 

In the meanwhile, we can discern changes to make in our personal relationships, families, neighborhoods. Discerning What can I do right here and now? in fact helps "regulate" our delicate balance between emotion and response to experienced crisis, perceived crisis, vicarious crisis.

Why moderate, regulate, pause and reflect?  Time allows emotion to subside and reason to rise (our higher nature) thus allowing us to monitor, regulate our raw animal instincts (lower nature). After we've experienced a significant life-changing event, e.g. death of loved one, divorce, relocation and job loss, the Well-Being field cautions us to rest and restore rather than making additional significant changes for at least one year. 

Why? Because  time allows us to be in touch with deeper meaning and pervasive resources guiding our greater release ...mourning our loss, making internal adjustments, generating new habits, activating renewed sense of self, and updating our connection to social circles. this increases our capacity make real peace with change...re-engage with the fuller world (which has also continued to change) around us in wholesome, further-empowering ways.

"Regulate" is a fancy word representing effort: monitoring, assessing, restraining, quelling, self-soothing, consciously tempering our mounting store of impulses to act when faced with imminent danger, or witnessing others in danger. Once immediate danger has passed, authentic solutions that prevent, contain, reduce such danger in the future are derived through tempered thinking, research & reflection, collaboration, and logic. 

Regulating our emotional responses to internal need to act or external pressure allows us the time to engage opportunities to think together, to assess and plan sufficiently enough to make sustainable plans that are life-giving, plans that do not embroil us further down the road in heretofore unforeseen dangers...as has happened with ways and means that frittered away moneys that had initially and purposely allocated to social security, medicare, stewarding national resources.  

So, the ever more maturing adult must keep in mind levels of human nature when tragedy strikes around us. We are always prompted to do something, tempted to act immediately to reduce feelings of helplessness.Our higher nature, our greater intelligence cautions us to quell fearfulness, be fully present to what is needed now. 

Only when we meet the needs at hand are we free to assess ever more thoroughly in order to engage plans both sustainable and preserving true liberty. This mindful, thoughtful approach, accrued from the trials and errors of civilization advancing, truly increases our chances to activate the best of our God-given powers on Earth. 

Blessing the BEST among US,

Heidi

Post by Clayton Cramer, reposted here and now re CT tragedy.

Back to my web page at http://www.claytoncramer.com.

Deinstitutionalization of the Mentally Ill:
The Crisis That No One Talks About

Good evening. I have a brother, Ron, who is 12 years older than me; the story I have to tell you tonight is partly the story of his very bright mind, lost to mental illness -- and partly the story of a loss that probably didn't need to happen. Though Ron was quite introverted, and in retrospect we can see some odd behavior before his mental breakdown, he had always seemed like a normal person, though more studious and shy than average.After my brother's service in the Army, he alternated between working and going to UCLA. In his last term, he took the honors sections of calculus, physics, and chemistry, and earned As in all of them. Ron was a very, very smart guy, and I looked up to him. In 1973, I was in my senior year at Santa Monica High School, expecting to finish college without the draft interruption that Ron had experienced. At that point, a tragedy happened to my older brother that neither my parents nor I understood.
The first sign of trouble was that he would keep changing radio stations every few seconds -- and he gave very evasive answers about why. I now know that paranoid schizophrenics often have auditory hallucinations -- most likely, my brother thought that the radio stations were talking about him.
Ron started to behave rudely to the husbands of my sisters. Why? He considered that my sisters had married "unworthy" guys, and the mental illness broke the facade of civility that had kept him from saying anything previously.
Ron suddenly stopped worked, and stopped going to school. Why? Schizophrenics often have trouble concentrating on complex or lengthy processes, and work and studying were now too hard for him. Because of his financial difficulties, he moved back in with my parents. (I was the last of five children at home.)
Then, over a period of perhaps six weeks, Ron started to talk about patches of color that would change, move, and disappear. His visual senses were now misleading him -- and for a very brief while, my brother knew that something was wrong, but neither he nor my parents quite knew what to make of it.
My parents were perplexed, confused, and I guess somewhat afraid -- they kept as much of this secret from me as they could. Ron began to use foul language in the presence of my parents and me. (For those of you under 35 -- there was a time when the words that you can't say on broadcast television weren't said in front of either children or or your parents in middle class homes.)
The final sign that something was going wrong in Ron's brain were casual acts of violence against complete strangers. I was with my father and Ron at the market. While my father was in the store, Ron suddenly jumped out of the car, ran over to a old man sitting on a bus bench, grabbed him by the shirt, pulled him up to a standing position, and punched him in the face, while making threats. When I asked Ron why he did that, Ron just laughed.
The violence escalated. He smashed in the windows of his car. Why? He gave evasive answers. One evening, I think on my 16^th birthday, Ron for no apparent reason, packed a couple of suitcases, walked out the door in a huff, then returned a couple of minutes later -- and smashed in the front windows of the house we rented. From where we stood in the living room, we could see him kicking his suitcases across the lawn -- and the force that he was using was terrifying. My parents called the police. My brother stood on the front lawn grinning; about 45 minutes later, the police arrived -- just as my brother left.
During this period of a few weeks, there were repeated incidents of violence against strangers. I was scared, especially because my brother was saying some very weird, very strange things to me. My father put what was effectively a medieval castle bar across my bedroom door, giving me a little more sense of security.
Eventually, Ron reached a point where he went to talk to the community mental health center -- and they promptly decided that he was sufficiently dangerous to himself that they sent him to a mental hospital for observation. And this is where one tragedy -- my brother's descent into paranoid schizophrenia -- was compounded by another tragedy.
My brother was held for observation for 72 hours. Then, he was held for another 14 days for further observation and medication. But the psychiatrist in charge of our local hospital's locked ward told us that there was little chance of him being committed. As it was explained to my father, "By the time someone's been pumped full of Thorazine for 14 days, if they still seem dangerous to a judge, they have to be really dangerous." On at least one occasion, someone who purported to be an advocate for the rights of mental patients was present in court to make sure that all the i's were dotted and all the t's were crossed -- and that no one was locked up against their will in a mental hospital.
What? My brother attacked complete strangers for no reason whatsoever. He smashed in windows at our house, he was saying things that were clearly crazy, and he wasn't going to be kept in a mental hospital? Sad to say, this has been a recurring pattern of my brother's life ever since. He has been arrested dozens of times for attacks on complete strangers. He has been arrested for all sorts of bizarre behaviors. He attacked my mother with a shovel once. He tried to strangle one of my sisters once. He tried to strangle our mother, a year later. He has lived in urine-soaked hotel rooms -- and sometimes he has been a homeless person.
And from all those incidents, spanning 16 years of severe mental illness, there have been only two times (to my knowledge) that he has been held for more than observation. In both cases, the long-term care he received dramatically improved his mental health, at least for a few months -- or until he stopped taking his medication. (We are still counting the months of the current improved situation, and hoping that this time, it sticks.) The rest of the time, judges have refused to lock him up for treatment. Let me emphasize that this was not a peculiar situation; Ron is not unique. Indeed, Ron is in better condition than many schizophrenics.
I've read that in 1960, there were about 550,000 people in mental hospitals in the U.S.; today there are about 100,000 -- even though our population has grown by almost 50%. Have we gotten that much better at helping the mentally ill to lead productive lives outside? I would like to think so. When chlorpromazine was introduced several decades ago, I understand it was regarded as a bit of a wonder drug, with the same irrational optimism that Prozac seemed to produce about five years ago.
Sadly, much of that drop in mental hospital patients wasn't because the system is doing so much better of a job. We can see where at least some of those people went -- suffering squalid, filthy, and miserable lives under overpasses, pushing all their worldly possessions around in shopping carts, begging in our streets, catching tuberculosis and pneumonia. They die of exposure, of murder, and quite often, when their delusions or their misery become unbearable, they die by their own hand. I have seen the claim that 15% of schizophrenics commit suicide. I don't know if that is true, but I know some truly tragic stories. My mother has a friend who has two schizophrenic children; her daughter stopped taking her medicine, and was overwhelmed by her illness. She lay down on the railroad tracks near Barstow one night to die -- and she did.
For almost 20 years now, people calling themselves "homeless advocates" -- meaning that they call themselves advocates for the homeless, not they themselves are homeless -- have tried to use this tragedy as variously, an indictment of capitalism, Ronald Reagan, or the heartlessness of various city governments. It is clear, from surveys of the homeless, and from my own experience with my brother, as well as talking to and helping homeless people for more than 20 years, that this tragedy is mostly the result of a well-intentioned effort that started in the 1970s, to make it difficult to lock up mentally ill people against their will.
Look around you in any big city, and you will find enormous numbers of people living on the streets, most of them mentally ill. What sane person would spend a single winter night sleeping on a bus bench if they had any alternative? It will take a psychiatrist to determine exactly what their mental illness is -- but in most cases, it doesn't take professional training to tell that there is something seriously disordered about their minds. A few minutes of conversation is usually quite sufficient.
What happened? In the bad old days, I am told, and my reading of federal court decisions tends to support this claim, people were locked up in mental hospitals who weren't necessarily mentally ill. They might be eccentric, or perhaps they had joined some weird religious cult, or had lots of money that their kids couldn't wait to inherit.
I recall reading of one tragedy involving two sisters who were sent to a mental hospital long, long ago back East after their parents died because they were incapable of speaking anything but gibberish, and were therefore assumed to be retarded. Seventy years later, it was discovered that the gibberish was -- Serbo-Croatian.
Our state mental hospitals, according to both newspaper accounts of the 1960s, and what my sister told me -- she worked as a cook at a mental hospital for a few weeks before quitting in disgust -- were repulsive institutions. They warehoused children and adults in circumstances that would be unacceptable in a dog pound.
For all these reasons, there was a well-intentioned effort to reform commitment laws, starting with the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, adopted by the California Legislature in 1967, effective in 1969. It became the model for mental illness commitment laws throughout the United States. At roughly the same time, the federal courts became increasingly insistent on certain standards of procedure and proof for committing people to mental hospitals for indefinite periods of time.
From what we were told, from what we saw with my brother, and from what I have gleaned from reading countless newspaper accounts where the mentally ill finally got some attention -- usually after committing murder -- our system is refusing to lock up large numbers of people who are clearly unable to care for themselves because of mental illness.
Now here is the troubling part of all this. When I read the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, the statute is perfectly reasonable as written. If a person engages in an act of serious violence against someone else, or demonstrates a likelihood of suicide, commitment for involuntary long-term treatment is supposed to be pretty easy. The same is true for someone who is "gravely disabled," defined as someone who can't provide for their own food, shelter, or clothing because of mental illness. [1]  The courts and the legislature have agreed that "provide for" doesn't mean "able to beg." [2]  And yet, I can't go to most big cities anymore -- and increasingly, some parts of Rohnert Park, without seeing people that are clearly in that situation. One guy who sits in front of Target in Rohnert Park can't bear to be indoors -- he camps in the fields at night west of town. He's not destitute; he showed a sizable roll of cash to a friend from church who was trying to help.
Of course, sometimes the courts make decisions that twist the law. But I've spent some time reading the decisions associated with Lanterman-Petris-Short about "gravely disabled," as well as a number of the federal court decisions that might explain why the law isn't being used here in California -- and I'm stumped. While I know of particular decisions in other parts of the country -- I'll tell you about one in New York City a bit later -- there seems to be no legal obstacle here to committing large numbers of mentally ill homeless people to hospitals. At least in a mental hospital, they won't be vermin-infested, coughing up blood, and dying by degrees. At least some of them will be treated sufficiently to end the nightmare that afflicts them, and be able to return to the society of the sane.
I've heard it claimed that there's a shortage of beds in mental hospitals, and that's why so many mentally ill people wander the streets. Perhaps this is so, but let me tell you, when my brother was going through various observation periods, I never heard this complaint from doctors or staff. At about the same time in the late 1970s that mentally ill homeless people were becoming a fixture on the streets of Santa Monica, a friend of mine named Eileen was losing the battle with schizophrenia. Her illness was not as severe as Ron's; she at least knew that she had a problem. After three days of not being able to sleep, because the voices kept shouting, "Kill yourself!" she went to the same community mental health center where my brother had gone; she explained what was going on, and she was on her way to the state mental hospital at Camarillo that day.
Another sign that the current law is not being used is that there are people released who are clearly dangerous. About eight years ago, a friend named John worked as a workman's compensation rehabilitation counselor. One of his clients had a serious cocaine problem, and connections to the Vallejo drug gangs. This client was mentally unstable, and ended up in a mental hospital for observation. Part way through the 14 days, she started to make serious death threats directed at John, along the lines of, "I'm going to get an Uzi, and kill John." As required by law, the psychiatrists at the mental hospital reported these threats to John. But what made this even more frightening was -- they expected her to be released at the end of the 14 day observation period -- and she was!
John called the police department where he lived, where she lived, and the sheriff's department. All of them basically said, "Give us a call when she tries to kill you." No one suggested, "Maybe she shouldn't be let out of a mental hospital while she's threatening to murder someone." It was a scary few days for John, between the time she was released, and the end of California's 15 day waiting period to buy a handgun.
Do judges not want to lock up people in mental hospitals? I am beginning to fear that this is the problem. In the 1960s, psychiatrists like R. D. Laing and Thomas Szasz challenged the traditional view of mental illness, especially schizophrenia, one of the psychoses that causes so many of the problems we're seeing. Dr. Laing argued that schizophrenics were, if anything, more sane than the rest of us. Dr. Szasz saw the mentally ill as victims as a plot by the government to oppress people -- rather like the way the Soviet Union regularly declared political dissidents to be mentally ill. [3]
If these ideas had stayed in dusty journal articles, I don't think we would be facing the problem we have today. This notion that mentally ill people aren't really so different from the rest of us -- perhaps even a bit more sane -- showed up repeatedly in movies of the late 1960s and 1970s. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, They Might Be Giants, and King of Hearts are just a few of the movies that were popular as I was reaching adulthood, and I fear have profoundly shaped the thinking of a great many judges.
Some years ago, when Ed Koch was mayor of New York City, there was a homeless woman living on a steam grate. Her clothes were filthy, covered with excrement; she was clearly insane. Mayor Koch finally became so upset about the continual news coverage of this tragedy that he ordered the police to take her to a mental hospital. They did so. The ACLU, incensed at this high-handed treatment of a homeless person, filed suit. While the lawyers filed briefs, and the judges pondered the question of due process, the mental hospital treated her.
By the time the courts ordered her release, some time later, she was no longer incoherent. The lawyers doing this fine work for the ACLU hired her to work as a receptionist in their office. Eventually, the ACLU won a resounding victory for the Constitution, due process, and, in their eyes, for this homeless woman. The appellate court judges that heard the case decided that forcing her into a mental hospital denied the basic human dignity to make our own decisions.
That's not the end of the story, however. After a few months of not taking her medicine, this woman again became delusional. She started to act strangely enough that the lawyers finally had to let her go. Newspaper reporters were still following the case; and the last act I saw reported in this tragedy was that she was back on the steam grate, defecating in her pants. Isn't human dignity wonderful?
The popular historian Paul Johnson wrote a scathing book some years ago titled Intellectuals. Perhaps it's too much of a stereotype, but Johnson described an intellectual as "someone who loves ideas more than people." While I have the utmost respect for the Bill of Rights, and I am troubled by what can happen when our rights can be taken away on the whim of a judge or a psychiatrist, I fear that this particular case is one of those examples of lawyers and judges more in love with an idea than with people.
So far, I've mostly focused on the suffering of the mentally ill. But there's another side as well -- the danger to our society when people with a limited grasp on reality wander the streets. Let's face it -- most people in this county wouldn't spend $50 to save a homeless person from freezing to death. If you want to appeal to the masses, you need to point out to them the public safety side of this tragedy.
The places change, the victims change, but the tragedy keeps repeating. A month or two ago, it was at a church in Fort Worth. A month before that, it was Buford Furrow shooting kids in Los Angeles. Last year, Russell Weston Jr. murdered two police officers at the U.S. Capitol. There's a common element to all these tragedies -- all the killers were clearly mentally ill months to years before they started shooting people. These three recent high-profile cases draw the picture in blood.
Buford Furrow was arrested by Washington State police in 1998 after he tried to gain admission to a mental hospital. He was refused, so he drew a knife on the people who told him he wasn't crazy enough. When he went to court, he told the judge about his fantasies of mass murder of minorities. In spite of this statement, and an extensive history of violence, instead of sending Furrow to a mental hospital, the judge gave him six months in jail, then let him out to carry out his hate crime.
Russell Weston Jr. was obviously mentally ill: a paranoid schizophrenic with delusions about a computer hidden inside the Capitol that would resurrect him after death. He was arrested for making threats against the President, held for a few weeks in a mental hospital in Montana -- and released. A year or so later, he went to his father's house, stole a gun, then drove to Washington DC, where he murdered two police officers.
The latest act in this public policy tragedy involved Larry Gene Ashbrook. His brother described Ashbrook as a paranoid schizophrenic -- and one scary enough that he once had to drive Ashbrook away with a shotgun. According to news accounts in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Ashbrook was regarded by neighbors as dangerous and disturbed -- but they were afraid to call the police for fear of retaliation. And why not be afraid? Fort Worth mental health outreach nurse Barbara Murphy described the situation under Texas law: "The bottom line is the police cannot do anything and we cannot do anything except listen to them and try to get them into help."
Three examples. But they aren't alone. One study completed in 1992 indicates that about 1000 murders a year are committed by mental patients who have refused treatment. Murder rates have fallen by about one-third since 1992, so those numbers may not still be accurate, but my point is that there are a lot of these murders by untreated mental patients.
I can point you to other examples of people who had come to the attention of the courts and were clearly insane, but were released. If they later commit a murder with a gun, they get a lot of attention, like Patrick Purdy, who murdered five children in Stockton in 1989. (Purdy's mental disability checks bought the guns he used in that schoolyard massacre.) Or the man with a 20 year history of mental illness-related crimes who murdered our landlord's daughter in Golden Gate Park in 1983, and wounded several others.
If they use a knife, they tend not to get the press coverage -- but the victims are still dead. How many of you saw the news story about Joshua Rudiger, arrested in San Francisco last year? The police charged him with murdering one homeless person, and trying to murder three others by slitting their throats. Rudiger explained to the police that he was a 2000 year old vampire. Oh yes, he had been in and out of mental hospitals for schizophrenia since he was 15, including an incident where he shot someone with a bow & arrow. For that incident he was ordered to receive treatment in a live-in treatment center -- and released! He never showed up, and no one went looking for him. Instead, he started killing people.
A couple of years ago, the pastor of the church that I attended asked me to talk to a man who had started attending our church. He was camping in a field behind our church, living out of a bicycle trailer with his dog. He didn't work; like many of the mentally ill living out of doors, he had a government mental disability check of about $600 a month. Ten minutes of conversation were quite sufficient to reveal his confused and irrational thinking; no surprise that he wasn't working.
He was upset that the courts had taken away his children away from him. Perhaps indicative of how disordered his thinking was, he showed me the paperwork that terminated his rights as a parent. The courts had taken away his children because he was showing them pornographic movies, then molesting them. Their mother was already in a mental institution.
You may ask, why didn't they prosecute this guy for child molestation and send him to prison? The children were five years old and younger. I speculate that it would have been a hard case to prove in a criminal trial; the children would have been further traumatized by preparing for the trial. Instead, they let this guy go. My wife still sees him bicycling around Rohnert Park with his dog. Doesn't that make you feel safe and secure?
We have a crisis going on in this country. It is a crisis that makes us less safe on the streets, and that degrades mentally ill people to a point where many people can no longer feel human compassion for their suffering. And yet nothing is being done about it. It is way past time that we recognize that the pendulum has swung too far from the 1950s. Human compassion, public safety, and the need to salvage human wreckage, demands that judges use the laws already on the books to correct this disaster.
Thank you.
1.  Cal. W&I § 5008 (h)(1).
2.  Cal. W&I § 5250 (d).
3.  James F. Calhoun, Abnormal Psychology: Current Perspectives, 2nd ed. (New York: Random House, Inc., 1977), 313.

According to Judicial Watch's report on the subject, which was released in April of 2011:

[The] census Bureau data reveals that most U.S. families headed by illegal immigrants use taxpayer-funded welfare programs on behalf of their American-born anchor babies. Even before the recession, immigrant households with children used welfare programs at consistently higher rates than natives, according to the extensive census data collected and analyzed by a nonpartisan Washington D.C. group dedicated to researching legal and illegal immigration in the U.S.

Our Requiem for The America WE MIGHT HAVE LOST HAD WE NOT EXERCISED OUR CIVIC DUTY THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA

Requiem for 4 American Patroits - YouTube
► 2:51► 2:51	www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jxNSCMXfMk NEW2 days ago - 3 min - Uploaded by bachsong In honor of four American Patroits whose government failed them.... so it shall never happen again... Visit ...