Monday, September 15, 2014

Glenn Beck Interviews Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty (9-12-14 Full Interview)

Imam Starts Chanting “Allahu Akbar” At 9-11 Memorial Ceremony at Barry University


This is nothing short of Jihad my friends.  We don't have to go to Pakistan, Saudi Arabia or anywhere in the middle east.  Mosque's are growing everywhere in the United States. In fact the number of mosques grew some 74% from 2000 to 2010.  
Ali Muhammad Brown has confessed to killing 4 Americans, three in Seattle and one in Jersey as an act of "vengeance" for America's role in fighting against terror just last month.  That is Jihad my friends, American Jihad and it is here with us now, but I am afraid most American's wouldn't recognize it if their own heads were rolling down the driveway. Heck, at least one mosque in Minnesota has been tied to recruiting terrorists for ISIS according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, calling it a ' terror pipeline".   
Do you know what your local mosques are teaching in your area? How many of the middle eastern men that attend local mosques do you think are here legally?  
There were, at last count, at least 35 Jihad training camps in the U.S.
In 2012 undercover reporter Dave Gaubatz wrote this regarding his expose' on mosques in America: 
 
In the last five years I have personally visited over 250 Islamic Centers, mosques, and Islamic Schools throughout America. The goal of my research has been to determine what Islamic leaders are teaching the young and innocent Muslim children. The findings are abhorrent, sad, unbelievable and frightening. Most disturbing is the fact our government is keeping this dangerous fact from the American people.
Muslim children attending mosques and Islamic schools are being taught to hate America, our government, our military personnel and its non Muslim population. (see article here )

So yeah, they are here and growing bolder and will do so until America rises up and personally takes to the streets. - W.E.

SharkTank

Considered to be one of the largest Catholic universities in the United States, Barry University, which is nestled in Miami Shores, Florida, hosted an interfaith memorial service to remember the victims of  the 9/11 terror attacks.
According to Laura Loomer, a senior at the university, the service began with Imam Nasir Ahmad, leader of Liberty City’s Mosque Masjid Al Ansar in Miami-Dade County, repeatedly chanting the ominous phrase “Allah Akbar” during his 10-15 minute address.
“We have to be very careful with exporting democracy, and democracy should not be exported at the point of a gun.”-Imam Nasir Amad (Palm Beach Post 9/12/2012)
The phrase Allah Akbar is arabic for “Allah is greatest.”
Loomer said that she, as well as other students and other members of the community, were offended by Ahmad’s use of the phrase during the service, and felt ” insulted that on a day like 9/11 they would allow for a man of Muslim faith to open the service and chant Allah Akbar, the words that suicide bombers and terrorists chant before blowing themselves up.”
Loomer also discussed her concern with two political science professors at Barry University who agreed that her concern was valid.
Those were the last words that many of the 9/11 victims heard before terrorists flew the planes into the Twin Towers, Pentagon, and the field in PA. I know that not all Muslims are extremists, and I’m not promoting hate, but people need to understand that after 9/11, the words Allah Akbar have a negative connotation in the minds of many in the U.S., and on 9/11 people are very sensitive to this topic.
The way the service was organized was blatantly disrespectful to all Americans as well as the victims of terrorism on 9/11. Words can’t even describe how infuriated I am that this happened at my University. I understand the importance of religious tolerance, but on a day of remembrance that is still so raw to people in this country, this was a very embarrassing and disrespectful way to honor the victims who died at the hands of Islamic extremists who exploited the words “Allah Akbar,” especially since the Muslim prayer preceded the Christian and Jewish prayers that were read at the service.
There is a time and place for everything, and I don’t think it is appropriate for someone to be chanting Allah Akbar at a 9/11 memorial service, especially when that person who chanted it is a Muslim religious leader who was invited by Barry University to come and chant.-Laura Loomer
Is chanting “Allah Akbar!” at a 9/11 memorial service any different and equally offensive as a American Christian cleric singing “Proud to be an American” at a memorial service in Japan honoring those who died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
The answer is ‘no.’

While Muslim organizations like the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR), which have been linked to Islamic fundamentalism, will defend the jihadi “battle cry” as just a simple acknowledgment of their god.
The phrase “Allah Akbar!” has a far different significance to Americans, and to the scores of others around the world, who grieve the loss of a loved one that was killed by some Islamic terrorist who cried out Allah Akbar before, during, or after he has carried out his or her cowardly act of terror.
There are countless videos and reports circulating around the world detailing numerous acts of terror by jihadists crying out “Allah Akbar!” as they commit their crimes of beheadings and mass executions.
The two Islamic terrorists who killed a British soldier killed on the streets of London, also cried out “”Allah Akbar!”
After the Towers fell on 9/11, jubilant Palestinians and other Muslims worldwide celebrated by chanting “Allah is greatest” over and over.
The actual Islamic terrorist who carried out the 9/11 attacks were heard screaming “Allah Akbar!” during the hijacking of the plane, and then most recently, U.S. Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, also cried out “Allah Akbar!” before opening fire and killing 13 soldiers at the Fort Hood Army base.

While the case can be made that “Allah Akbar!” is more of a battle cry than anything pro-Islamic groups or leaders would want to have you believe.
Loomer says the prophet Mohammed meant for it to be a “war call,”citing Bukhar Sahih Hadith 5.516, which states that “When Allah’s Apostle fought or raided people we raised our voices saying, ‘Allahu-Akbar! Allahu-Akbar! None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.”
Islamic apologists will bend over backyards to distance Islam from terrorism, but the actions of Islamic militants who cry “Allah Akbar!” as the carry out these acts of terror, make it impossible for anyone to believe that Islam is not inextricably tied to terrorism.

Saturday, September 13, 2014

Obama Released Five Taliban Commanders for Bergdahl but Threatened Families of Beheaded Journalists with Prosecution if they Raised Ransom Money

Shoebat

Earlier this year, the Obama administration released five Taliban commanders to Qatar in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl, an alleged deserter who may have collaborated with the Taliban and who also could have the blood of American soldiers on his hands. 
While the same was obviously not done for beheaded journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff, the Obama administration took it a step further according to the families of both men.

Bergdahl with Taliban commander Badruddin Haqqani

As Shoebat.com reported via the Daily Beast, CIA Director John Brennan had allegedly been pushing hard for the release of those five Taliban commanders since at least 2011.
A major issue here is one of consistency. Another major issue is the degree to which the Bergdahl family is connected to Islam. Shoebat.com reported on Bergdahl’s father extensively. While both Foley and Sotloff appeared to be sympathetic to the Syrian rebels and in the case of Sotloff, to the Muslim Brotherhood in some ways, there are strong indications that the Bergdahls were more than just sympathetic to Islam.
On one hand, we have the release of five high level Taliban commanders to a nation state that already openly supports terrorism (Qatar) in exchange for one soldier who may have defected to the enemy. On the other hand, the same administration who made that deal forbade the families of two captive journalists to privately raise ransom money to have those journalists released.
Here is Michael Foley, the brother of James, telling Megyn Kelly of Fox News how his family was treated by the administration. Note that Kelly expresses her understanding of a U.S. policy not to pay ransom to terrorists but is clearly taken aback that it would prohibit private funds from being raised to do so:

James Foley’s mother expressed similar sentiment in a separate interview.
The parents of Sotloff are saying the same thing:
The parents of murdered journalist Steven Sotloff were told by a White House counterterrorism official at a meeting last May that they could face criminal prosecution if they paid ransom to try to free their son, a spokesman for the family told Yahoo News Friday night.
“The family felt completely and utterly helpless when they heard this,” said Barak Barfi, a friend of Sotloff who is serving as a spokesman for his family. “The Sotloffs felt there was nothing they could do to get Steve out.”
The journalist’s father, Art, was “shaking” after the meeting with the official, who works for the National Security Council, Barfi said. The families of three other hostages being held by the militant group Islamic State were also at the White House meeting, sources told Yahoo News.
In a show of blatant hypocrisy, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the following in response to questions about the claims made by both families:
“We have found that terrorist organizations use hostage taking and ransoms as a critical source of financing for their organizations and that paying ransoms only puts other Americans in a position where they’re at even greater risk.”
Were not those five Taliban commanders ransom for Bergdahl?

TIE-DYED TYRANNY

TruthRevoltOriginals

Back in the Bad Old Days, tyrants bent others to their will with machine guns and death camps. But what fig leaf can modern, touchy-feely, petty tyrants use to make sure other people remain "in compliance?" How about Saving the Planet?

The Global Roots of "Common Core" Education

BeritKjos

"The task before UNESCO... is to help the emergence of a single world culture with its own philosophy and background of ideas and with its own broad purpose." [1]  Julian Huxley, the first head of UNESCO, 1947.


Parents beware! A New World Order is rising. 

It has no tolerance for Christianity, traditional values, or historical facts that expose its lies. The seeds for this transformation were planted long ago, but few saw the warning signs. Now that the evidence is too vast to deny, we need to prepare our children for a different kind of world: a world where an educated and responsible citizenry no longer exists in sufficient numbers to maintain the rule of law and individual freedom.

Today's education goals were envisioned more than a century ago by socialist American and British elites who steered the process from behind the scenes. Though the labels changed through the years, they all served a globalist vision of a totalitarian world equipped to conform young minds to a socialist/Communist system.  Each decade brought us closer to the fulfillment of that anti-Christian agenda. The latest version of the international education plan is called "Common Core" (CC) or "Common Core Standards" (CCS) or "Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in America. These deceptive labels hide the global agenda—at least for the moment.
"Common Core" is the latest extension of previous programs aimed at mind-changing compliance with UNESCO's evolving guidelines. You may remember some of the past titles: Education for All, Outcome Based Education, Quality Learning, No Child Left Behind, etc. In the years ahead, new labels and propaganda will surely continue to push this global agenda forward until the world's elite masters decide that they have reached their goal: total control of the serfs that serve them.
In a 2009 article titled "The Spiritualization of Science, Technology and Education in a One-World Society," Dr. Martin Erdmann writes,

"Aldous Huxley envisioned a future world society totally controlled by an elite group of scientists. His best-known fictional work explicating this dire prospect bore the title Brave New World. Years later he would “revisit” his prognostications only to conclude that he had underestimated the rate of change realizing his darkest fears."[3]

Aldous, brother of the prominent Julian Huxley who served as the first Director-General of UNESCO, had reason to be concerned. Raised among British socialist/globalist elites (some of whom funded Communism in Russia), he shared their vision and glimpsed their totalitarian goals. Of course, he didn't know that more than half a century later, the global-minded Bill Gates would use his wealth to help establish that long-term vision: 
"Gates’ astronomical wealth has persuaded millions that Common Core is the solution to education problems...But... the truth remains that whenever unelected philanthropists are permitted to direct public policy, the voting public gets cut out of the process."[4]
As you scroll down the century-long chronology, notice the powerful people, the elitist organizations, and the wealthy foundations that have planned, steered and funded the amoral transformation of our schools, churches and communities. Their common goal is global socialism: a totalitarian new world order!
1905. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (CFAT) was founded by Andrew Carnegie in 1905 and chartered in 1906 by an act of the United States Congress. Together with other Carnegie Foundations, it has been a major promoter and funder of socialistic, global education projects.[5]
1908. John Dewey, the socialist "father of modern [progressive] education", laid the foundations for a revolutionary transformation of American schools. In Religion and our Schools, he wrote, "Our schools ... are performing an infinitely significant religious work. They are promoting the social unity out of which in the end genuine religious unity must grow. ...dogmatic [Christian] beliefs... we see...disappearing."[6]
1919.  The Institute of International Education (IIIE) was established with a grant from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.... John Dewey (socialist) served on its National Advisory Council."[7]
1933. John Dewey, "father of progressive education" and honorary president of the National Education Association (NEA), co-authored the first Humanist Manifesto which called for a "synthesizing of all religions." ..."Any religion that can hope to be a synthesizing and dynamic force for today, must be shaped for the needs of this age."[8]
1934. In a report presented at the annual NEA meeting, Willard Givens (later NEA executive secretary) wrote: "...all of us, including the 'owners' [who might they be?] must be subjected to a large degree of social control.... [T]he major function of the school is the social orientation of the individual. It must seek to give him understanding of the transition to a new social order."[9]
1942. The editor of the NEA Journal, J. Elmer Morgan, wrote an editorial titled "The United Peoples of the World." In it, he explained that a world government would need an educational branch, a world system of money and credit, a world police force, "a world bill of rights and duties."[10]
1946. "The establishment [UNESCO] marks the culmination of a movement for the creation of an international agency of education.... Nations that become members of UNESCO accordingly assume an obligation to revise the textbooks used in their schools.... Each member nation... has a duty to see to it that nothing in its curriculum... is contrary to UNESCO's aims." This NEA article was printed in "National Education in an International World" apparently by the far left Teacher's College in New York.[11]
1946.  In his NEA editorial, "The Teacher and World Government," J. Elmer Morgan, wrote, "In the struggle to establish an adequate world government, the teacher... can do much to prepare the hearts and minds of children.... At the very top of all the agencies which will assure the coming of world government must stand the school, the teacher, and the organized profession."[12]
1947. Julian Huxley, first Director-General of UNESCO, wrote in UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy: "The general philosophy of UNESCO should be a scientific world humanism, global in extent and evolutionary in background... In its education program it can... familiarize all peoples with the implications of the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a world organization.... Tasks for the media division of UNESCO [will be] to promote the growth of a common outlook shared by all nations and cultures... to help the emergence of a single world culture."[13]
1948. The NEA produced a set of international guidelines called Education for International Understanding in American Schools. It included this statement: "The idea has become established that the preservation of international peace and order may require that force be used to compel a nation to conduct its affairs within the framework of an established world system.... Many persons believe that enduring peace cannot be achieved so long as the nation-state system continues as at present constituted. It is a system of international anarchy."[14] 
1968. Professor John Goodlad reported that Professor Benjamin Bloom [called Father of OBE] "was invited by UNESCO in 1968 to submit a proposal for a six to nine week training program which would partially fulfill recommendations made at UNESCO's Moscow meeting dealing with the formation of national centers for curriculum development and research..." [15]
1973. The socialist authors of the Humanist Manifesto II wrote: "We deplore the division of human-kind on nationalistic grounds. We have reached a turning point in human history where the best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and to move toward the building of a world community..."[16] 
1976. An NEA program titled A Declaration of Interdependence: Education for a Global Community, was made available to schools across the country.... The report said, "Educators around the world are in a unique position to help bring about a harmoniously interdependent global community."[17]  Note: That "world community" was officially born in 1945, when Alger Hiss served as Secretary General at the founding of the United Nations.
1985. "The curriculum arm of the NEA, the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), co-sponsored an international curriculum symposium in the Netherlands. According to Education Week, the ASCD executive director, Dr. Gordon Cawelti, urged representatives of other Western nations and Japan to press for the development of a 'world-core curriculum' based on knowledge that will ensure 'peaceful and cooperative existence among the human species on this planet.'"    
"This World Core Curriculum would be based on the teachings of theosophist Alice Bailey who received her channeled instructions from her spirit guide, Djhwal Khul. The framework would be written by theosophical (occult) UN leader Robert Muller -- the Under-Secretary of the UN Economic and Social Council."[18]

1991. "On October 30, the U.S. Coalition for Education for All (USCEFA) convened a conference titled Learning for All: Bridging Domestic and International Education  with First Lady Barbara Bush as the 'honorary chair.' It would provide a vital link between the UNESCO plan and U.S. implementation.  Partners in this venture included UNESCO, UNICEF, the World Bank, the NEA, and a long string of organizations involved in education at every level...
     The coalition was part of a 156-nation network working to reform education worldwide by bridging the gap between individual nations and UNESCO’s Education for All. Keynote speaker Elena Lenskaya, deputy to the Minister of Education of Russia, spoke on the topic, "Education for a New World Order."[19]
1992. The text of "The United Nations World Pledge" was recited by students at a Brownsville (Texas ) school: "I pledge allegiance to the world, to cherish every living thing, to care for the earth and sea and air, with peace and freedom everywhere."[20]
1993. "The 240 international affiliates of the NEA and the American Federation of Teachers joined to form Education International (EI)."[21]
Behind that long historical chronology stood influential elites who supported the global vision. They include bankers, presidents, politicians as well as members of secret societies such as The Council of Foreign Relations (CFR), Skull and Bones, Bilderberg and the Trilateral Commission. They didn't leave Obama to rule by himself. Just as President Woodrow Wilson had Colonel Mandel House as his secretive mentor, so President Obama is surrounded by global-minded counselors such as Joe Biden, Zbigniew Brzezinski and others.
So Who Will Rule the Global School?
Seven years ago a world-changing event took place. It would revolutionize education, families, faith and basic values in our fading "land of the free." I'm referring to the Moscow Declaration that was officially adopted on June 2, 2006, by the Education Ministers of the United States, the Russian Federation, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United Kingdom. The members of this international "Group of Eight" (G-8) have committed their nations to "cooperation in education at all levels in the 21st century."[22]
What about America's "Common Core" standards? How do they fit into the Moscow Declaration? 
Marketed to American families as an improved education program, the actual truth about "Common Core" has been hidden from us. Our government leaders didn't tell us that we were already committed to a multinational education agenda! But it all makes sense when we consider the century-old movement toward global education and a new world order!!
Back in 2006, Eagle Forum's Education Reporter explained the  implication of  the "Moscow Declaration':
"Russia's Science and Education Minister Andrei Fursenko described the declaration as 'both a final document of the conference and the document that will be implemented by education ministers of all the world countries and international organizations, including the World Bank, UNESCO, and UN.'"[23]
That certainly sounds like a global education system, doesn't it? But the American people were kept in the dark!  The Education Reporter continues,
"The U.S. Department of Education said the member delegates 'pledged to share best practices across borders' to build 'education systems that can allow people... to live and contribute to a global society...'
"Included in previously adopted initiatives... are those from UNESCO as well as the 1985 agreement with the USSR [before the end of "the cold war"] called 'The General Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics [USSR] on contacts, exchanges and cooperation in scientific, technical, educational, cultural and other fields.'...
"What can be expected from the Moscow Declaration? If the historical results of U.S. participation with international reforms continue in the same vein, it is not unreasonable to expect the whole of U.S. education — from preschool, elementary, secondary, and higher education — will encounter further upheaval and decline."[24]
Today's sobering realities remind me of the boastful statement made by Nikita Khrushchev back in 1959. Perhaps he was right:
"You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism. We won’t have to fight you. We’ll so weaken your economy until you’ll fall like overripe fruit into our hands."[25]
But God said: "My grace is sufficient for thee:

for my strength is made perfect in weakness.'" (2 Corinthians 12:9)

The Common Core Standards Guides the Global Agenda

It's hard to define the actual Common Core standards. Shrouded in positive promises and perplexing assertions, many ordinary readers are left wondering what's true or false. Faced with open-ended and unfamiliar terminology, concerned parents are confused and discouraged. They may recognize the false marketing and deceptive propaganda, but they don't know where to find honest answers. For example, the mission statement posted at "Common Core State Standards Initiative" is anything but clear:
"The Common Core State Standards provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them. The standards are designed to be robust and relevant to the real world, reflecting the knowledge and skills that our young people need for success in college and careers. With American students fully prepared for the future, our communities will be best positioned to compete successfully in the global economy."[26]
What does it mean by "robust"?  Is it "relevant" to the success of all students or just to those who will embrace the spreading immorality and group thinking?
Last year, those confusing but nice-sounding promises brought rapid enthusiasm among some parents, but skepticism is now growing fast. Just ponder the statements below. How do we interpret words such as "clearer and higher" or "rigorous contents"? What does "rigorous" mean in a classroom where facts are replaced by group speculations and dialectical thinking? How can concerned parents find answers to bewildering slogans such as these:
  1. Fewer, clearer, and higher, to best drive effective policy and practice;
  2. Aligned with college and work expectations...
  3. Inclusive of rigorous content and applications of knowledge through higher-order skills...
  4. Internationally benchmarked, so that all students are prepared for succeeding in our global economy...
  5. Research and evidence-based.[27]
This global agenda is far more intrusive, demanding and dangerous to Christian families than most of us can imagine. So ponder this important warning from Phyllis Schlafly:
"UNESCO's efforts in the 1960s and 1970s to influence U.S. school curriculum were unsuccessful. But now UNESCO has found a sugar daddy. On November 17, 2004 at UNESCO's headquarters in Paris, UNESCO signed a 26-page 'Cooperation Agreement' with Microsoft Corporation to develop a 'master curriculum (Syllabus)' for teacher training in information technologies based on standards, guidelines, benchmarks, and assessment techniques. The Agreement states that... 'UNESCO will explore how to facilitate content development.'
"Following the signing of the Agreement, UNESCO Director General Koichiro Matsuura explained it in a speech. One of its goals, he said, is 'fostering web-based communities of practice including content development and worldwide curricula reflecting UNESCO values.' No doubt that is agreeable to Bill Gates because the Agreement states that 'Microsoft supports the objectives of UNESCO as stipulated in UNESCO's Constitution."[28]
Before long, Bill Gates and his UNESCO partners had prepared the following "core standards." Notice that they are far more honest and threatening than the previous propaganda.
  • Environmental education will be incorporated in formal education.
  • Any value or attitude held by anyone globally that stands independent to that of the United Nations’ definition of “sustainable education” must change. Current attitudes are unacceptable.
  • Education will be belief-and-spirituality based as defined by the global collective.
  • Environmental education will be integrated into every subject, not just science..."[29]
Today's emphasis on "saving the earth" will surely involve mental manipulation and moral degradation. The suggested earth-centered spirituality in the third point would fit well in a culture of promiscuity, propaganda and paganism. And the spreading seductions of the occult will speed the rising hostility toward Biblical truth and values. The second and fourth points speak for themselves. Everything must change! "Current attitudes are unacceptable."
This transformational process is well under way. Ponder the moral values taught through the new "Common Core 'Exemplars'" listed here: http://www.corestandards.org/assets/Appendix_B.pdf. Notice on page 108 that this list of chosen "Text Exemplars" includes a sexually explicit novel by Julia Alvarez for ninth and tenth graders. Dr. Mary Grabar gives us a glimpse of its corrupting context:
"I must admit that I would have been too embarrassed to teach Julia Alvarez’s sexually explicit novel, In the Time of the Butterflies, to the college students I have taught for over twenty years, much less to ninth- and tenth-graders, as many Georgia high school teachers have been instructed to do.

"Some high school teachers also have a problem with its overtly feminist and leftist-leaning ideology. The men are portrayed as weak drunkards, continually cheating on their wives....

"The novel is taken straight from Common Core’s “Text Exemplars” for ninth and tenth graders. Although the “exemplars” are officially intended to be suggested readings, educrats take the suggestions literally. They know that they have to prepare students for the national tests being rolled out in 2014-2015.
"For example, there is a drunken New Year’s celebration of 'the triumphant announcement. Batista had fled! Fidel, his brother Raul, and Ernesto they call Che had entered Havana and liberated the country.' No indication in the novel that Fidel and Raul turned out to be tyrants, or Che a mass murderer. The novel has explicit descriptions of masturbation and intercourse, but I’m too embarrassed to quote those."[30]
If only the students children would be equally embarrassed!  But part of the purpose for corrupt literature is to replace Biblical morality with immoral sexuality and all kinds of other hindrances to Christian values. May God show us how we can best equip our children to stand firm in Christ in the midst of the coming battles.

Envisioning an Interconnected World
"In the global village ... networks will link students around the world to each other and to a vast body of information and human knowledge."[31]
That promise was made in 1994 during a trans-Atlantic conference between Washington and Berlin. Education Secretary Richard Riley and Labor Secretary Robert Reich shared strategies for building the Global Village Schools with their German counterparts. They agreed that educational accord would be vital to their goal of "enforcing social transformation."[31]
Do you wonder what kind of "social transformation" they planned to enforce? Was personal liberty on their agenda? Or did they seek totalitarian government control as in the French Revolution? What goals and values would guide their plans for global education and social transformation? Capitalism? Socialism? Or Communism? Or a new form of totalitarianism?
And where does militant Islam fit into this global power struggle for the collective minds of children?  Its ambitious Sharia-minded leaders are unlikely to compromise! And why would they? Corrupt politicians and liberal media masters are already bending over backward to accommodate Islamic "rights." But Islamic leaders have their own agenda in America as well as in the Middle East, and they will not tolerate our Christian beliefs.
Remember, Aldous Huxley warned us about such planned distractions long ago. Surrounded by British Fabian Socialists, he became increasingly troubled about the spread of totalitarianism. In 1958, after the deadly fallout from Communist and Nazi tyranny, he shared his concerns in a sobering 1958 book, Brave New World Revisited:

"In Brave New World [his previous book] non-stop distractions of the most fascinating nature... are deliberately used as instruments of policy, for the purpose of preventing people from paying too much attention to the realities of the social and political situation....
      "In their propaganda, today's dictators rely for the most part on repetition, suppression and rationalization: the repetition of catchwords which they wish to be accepted as true, the suppression of facts which they wish to be ignored, the arousal and rationalization of passions which may be used in the interests of the Party or the State.

      "As the art and science of manipulation come to be better understood, the dictators of the future will doubtless learn to combine these techniques with the non-stop distractions..."[32]

Bombard children with mind-changing suggestions
 A familiar tale told to first-graders in Pennsylvania illustrates both the tactics and the planned  transformation of the world. We all know the story of the Little Red Hen who wanted some bread to eat. She asked some of her barnyard friends to help make it. But the cat, the dog, and the goat all said "no." Finally she did all the work herself. Yet, when the bread was done and its fragrance spread throughout the farm, her unwilling neighbors were more than willing to help her eat it.
"Won't you share with us?" they begged.
"No," she answered. "Since you didn't help, you don't get anything."
In the context of  traditional values, the moral of the story might be: you get what you work for. But those who have learned to think and see from the new global perspective are led to a different conclusion. Listen to the kinds of questions the first grade teacher asked her class: 
"Why was the Little Red Hen so stingy?  Isn't it only right that everyone gets to eat? Why wouldn't she share what she had with some who had none?"[33]
The concerned mother who heard and reported this story asked, "What kinds of values were the children taught?"  The new interpretation emphasizes love and sharing, but what is missing?  How might it confuse a child's values?  
The answers are obvious. The children were taught socialist values. The new interpretation vilified values that had motivated Americans to be diligent, responsible and fair. The teacher's questions were actually strategic suggestions prompting the group to ridicule traditional values, to see reality and society from the new politically correct perspective, and to intimidate and shame anyone who dared to disagree. 
A new mental "framework" is vital to the global paradigm shift. But to launch the new system, the old patterns must be blurred, broken and forgotten. The educational establishment knows that children who are fed a daily diet of biblical truth will resist their plans for change. They also know that students bombarded with strategic suggestions will probably reject Christianity. If schools can build the "right" kind of filter in the minds of young children, the new global beliefs will fit right in.

Focus on feelings, not facts
This shift from factual education to mental manipulation and feeling-based learning began more than seventy years ago. Through the decades, the strategies used to manipulate minds in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were developed, first at the Tavistock Clinic near London and later at Germany's Frankfurt School (originally called Frankfurt Institute for Social Research). Their mind-bending methods soon spread to a rising number of psycho-social research centers in America. They were fine-tuned at Columbia, Harvard, Stanford and other American universities, at our regional educational laboratories and at the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies where Elian Gonzales was remediated in preparation for his return to a Communist system. 
At the 1989 Governor's Conference on Education in Kansas, Dr. Shirley McCune, then head of the Mid-Continent Regional Educational Laboratory, summarized the policy in her keynote speech:
“The revolution… in curriculum is that we no longer are teaching facts to children…. We no longer see the teaching of facts and information as the primary outcome of education.”[34]
"What will take the place of logic, fact and analysis in the coming age?" This rhetorical question was raised by Dr. Donald A. Cowan, president emeritus of the University of Dallas. His revealing answer exposes an important step toward the new consensus: 
"The central way of thought for this new era will be imagination.... Imagination will be the active, creative agent of culture, transforming brute materials to a higher, more knowable state."[35]
A simple example of this process was exposed by a Christian teacher in Sunnyvale CA. During a public elementary school assembly, the students sang the words of the Peacemakers' Planetary Anthem to the tune of the Star Spangled Banner. This melody, which has symbolized freedom to those who have loved America, now became a tactical trigger used to turn hearts from the old ways to the new vision. 
To shape "world-class students" who see reality through a multicultural filter, social engineers keep testing their latest modification strategies on our children. One tactic is managed group thinking (the dialectic process) which prompts them to reject their old home-taught morality and embrace the collective values of their dialoguing classroom group.
The Left may win the next battle in this spiritual war. The signs of a global revolution are already too close for comfort. We can no longer count on the American Constitution which was based on Biblical principles. More often than not, today's choices are totally contrary to America's founding values and God's wise guidelines.
But our Lord still reigns! In the midst of this spiritual war, He will surely provide His strength, wisdom and His comforting nearness to all who choose to trust and follow Him!

"The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; my God, my strength, in whom I will trust; my buckler, and the horn of my salvation, and my high tower.  I will call upon the LORD, who is worthy to be praised: so shall I be saved from mine enemies." (Psalm 18:2)


1. Julian Huxley, the first head of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/globalism/julian-huxley.htm
2. Thomas Sowell, "Indoctrinating the Children," in Forbes, February 1, 1993, p. 65.
3. Dr. Martin Erdmann, "The Spiritualization of Science, Technology and Education in a One-World Society," January 2009, Volume 2, http://www.clinam.org/images/stories/pdf/volume2.1.pdf
4.  Top Ten Scariest People in Education Reform: #5 - Bill Gates, August 2013. http://whatiscommoncore.wordpress.com/2013/03/28/top-ten-scariest-people-in-education-reform-5-bill-gates/
6. John Dewey, "Religion and our Schools." Abstract: "In 1908 . . . Dewey, wrote a paper ‘Religion and our Schools’. In it he argued that religion should not be taught in schools. Yet Dewey had his own radical religious views. These views are now more widely accepted and religious education less confessional." July 6, 2006. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0141620980200202#preview
7. Dennis Laurence Cuddy, Ph.D., Chronology of Education with Quotable Quotes, 1994, p. 18.
8. The Humanist Manifesto 1 (1933) was the first public declaration of the views and objectives of humanism. It rejected God and His values but affirmed humanist faith in the power and evolution of man. The Humanist Manifesto II (1973) reaffirmed and amplified this man-centered, relativistic, utopian belief system. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanist_Manifesto_II
9. "Willard Givens presented a report titled "Education for the New America" at the 72nd Annual Meeting of the NEA, held in Washington, D.C. in July 1934. Cited by Dr. Dennis Cuddy, Chronology of Education with Quotable Quotes, p. 20.
10. Joy Elmer Morgan, "The United Peoples of the World," The NEA Journal (December 1942); p.261.
11. "National Education in an International World." Printed by the NEA in 1946.
12. J. Elmer Morgan, "The Teacher and World Government," The NEA Journal (January 1946); p.1.
13. Julian Huxley, first head of UNESCO,  (Washington DC: Public Affairs Press, 1947). See http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/globalism/julian-huxley.htm
14. Dennis Cuddy, Ph.D., The Grab for Power: A Chronology of the NEA (Marlborough NH: Plymouth Rock Foundation, 1993); p. 8.
15. John I. Goodlad & Associates, Curriculum Inquirythe Study of Curriculum Practice (NY: McGraw Hill, 1979), 261.
16.  Humanist Manifesto II, Tenet  #12. http://americanhumanist.org/Humanism/Humanist_Manifesto_II
17. The NEA promotes "A Declaration of Interdependence: Education for a Global Community," September, 1976. Cuddy, Chronology of Education, p. 59.
18. Muller's beliefs and influence are explained in Brave New Schools [by Berit Kjos], Chapter 2: "The International Agenda" at http://www.crossroad.to/Books/BraveNewSchools/2-International.htm
19. The Conference on "Learning for All: Bridging Domestic and International Education" with Barbara Bush (Honorary Chair) and a Russian keynote speaker, Elena Lenskaya, October 30-November 1, 1991.
20. The text of "The United Nations World Pledge" was recited by students at a Brownsville (Texas ) school, TiVo Community Forum Archive 1, http://archive.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=78176
21. Dennis Laurence Cuddy, Ph.D., Chronology of Education With Quotable Quotes (Highland City, FL: Pro Family Forum, Inc., 1993).p. 100.
22. 'Moscow Declaration" Adopted by G-8: Education Ministers—Secretary Spellings Commits U.S., Eagle Forum, U.S. Dept. of Education, June 2, 2006. http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/2006/june06/moscow.html
23. Ibid.
24. Ibid.
25. Nikita Khrushchev, "Dark Predictions of a KGB Defector," 1959 at http://frontpagemag.com/2010/10/19/dark-predictions-of-a-kgb-defector/print/
28. Phyllis Schlafly, "Bill Gates Teams Up With UNESCO," Eagle Forum, November 30, 2005. http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2005/nov05/05-11-30.html
29. Ibid.
30. Mary Grabar, “Common Core ‘Exemplars’: Literature with Graphic Sex and Praising Castro," Text Exemplars” for 9th and 10th grades, May 7, 2013, http://watchdogwire.com/florida/2013/05/07/common-core-exemplars-graphic-sex-and-praising-castro. See the new "Common Core 'Exemplars'" listed here: http://www.corestandards.org/assets/Appendix_B.pdf.
31. From a publicity flier announcing the trans-Atlantic conference held April 10-13, 1994.
32. Aldous Huxley, Brave New World Revisited (Perennial Library,1958), pps. 36-37. www.crossroad.to/Excerpts/books/transformation/brave-revisited.htm
33. This story was included in the first grade curriculum in New Pittsburgh, PA. The story was also told--using the new paradigm context--at a parents' meeting explaining Character Education. Anita Hoge, formerly a Pennsylvania mother and researcher, reported the story to me.
34. At the time of her 1989 keynote speech, Shirley McCune presided over the Mid-Continent Regional Educational Laboratory (McREL). The Regional Educational Laboratories are private, non-profit corporations which are funded, in whole or in part, under Title IV of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.
35. Spoken at a 1988 forum address at the Dallas Institute of Humanities and Culture. This address formed the nucleus for his book, Unbinding Prometheus: Education for the Coming Age.

Strange UFO Lights in Brazil Sept. 9 2014 (Video)


"The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders-2 Thessalonians 2:9

pisosmadera

Friday, September 12, 2014

Obama’s ISIS War Plan Sparks Warning From Syrian Axis

JerusalemPost

WASHINGTON – The embattled Syrian regime and its closest allies, Russia and Iran, will oppose American military action in its territory against Islamic State, unless the White House coordinates US actions with President Bashar Assad, the axis said on Thursday.

The group expressed its opposition to American force, which it called an “aggressive” and “illegal” intervention in a sovereign state, hours after President Barack Obama announced his intent to target Islamic State terrorists “wherever they exist.”

But the White House made clear that the president’s decision had already been made. Strikes will begin against targets in Syria “at a time and place” of his choosing, senior aides said.

“This is something the president has decided to do,” one official said. “We will take action.”

And in Iraq, the official continued, “we are going to expand the efforts of our air campaign... if there is an [Islamic State] target that we need to hit in Iraq, we will hit it.”

With its veto power on the United Nations Security Council, Russia has long opposed foreign intervention in the Syrian civil war, which it considers a domestic political conflict.

Russia suggested on Thursday that without UN authorization, American action would be illegal.

“The US president has spoken directly about the possibility of strikes by the US armed forces against ISIL [Islamic State] positions in Syria without the consent of the legitimate government,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said. “This step, in absence of a UN Security Council decision, would be an act of aggression, a gross violation of international law.”

Relations between Moscow and Washington are at a post- Cold War nadir, soured ever since Russia intervened in the civil strife embroiling Ukraine.

That conflict has been stoked by Russia, the Obama administration contends, and should be considered a domestic political conflict within sovereign borders.

“Any action of any type without the approval of the Syrian government is an aggression against Syria,” Ali Haidar, minister of national reconciliation affairs, told reporters in Damascus on Thursday. “There must be cooperation with Syria and coordination with Syria, and there must be a Syrian approval of any action, whether it is military or not.”

At the same time, Syria’s deputy foreign minister said that his government was “ready to talk” to the US, and that the two were “natural allies” fighting “the same enemy.”

The Obama administration says the Assad regime has “lost all legitimacy,” however, and refuses to cooperate with Damascus.

State Department deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf said on Thursday that strikes in Syria would not target the Assad regime.

“Obviously we believe Assad has lost legitimacy, but that is separate from our fight against ISIL,” Harf said.

Iran, too, questioned the breadth of the coalition that Washington says represents the international community.

“The so-called international coalition to fight ISIL is shrouded in serious ambiguities,” Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Marzieh Afkham said, according to state-run television, noting that some coalition members were “financial and military supporters of terrorists in Iraq and Syria.”

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei has raised the possibility that Islamic State might have been created by the United States.

The Islamic State organization, which considers itself Sunni, calls for the conversion or killing of all Shi’ites and violently opposes the government in Tehran.

While Obama officials say Tehran can play a constructive role in supporting inclusive governance in Baghdad, they have ruled out military cooperation with the Iranian government.

Sunni powers, historically antagonistic to the Islamic Republic, signed a document in Saudi Arabia on Thursday committing to “appropriate” military cooperation with the United States.

The Jeddah communiqué was signed by ministers representing the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council and Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon.

In a 15-minute televised address, Obama said Islamic State did not yet pose a direct threat to the US – but that it might in short order, if left unchecked.

“We will conduct a systematic campaign of air strikes against these terrorists,” he said from the White House. “This is a core principle of my presidency: If you threaten America, you will find no safe haven.”

Islamic State is neither Islamic, nor a state, the president said, despite ruling territories throughout eastern Syria and northern Iraq. The group has corralled together an army with strength estimated at between 10,000 and 30,000 men.

“It will take time to eradicate a cancer like ISIL,” he continued, adding, “Any time we take military action, there are risks involved.”

But “our own safety – our own security – depends upon our willingness to do what it takes to defend this nation, and uphold the values that we stand for, timeless ideals that will endure long after those who offer only hate and destruction have been vanquished from the Earth,” he continued.

Obama said he already has the authority to act without a new vote for authorization from the US Congress, based on a 2001 authorization vote that allows the president to target al-Qaida and its affiliates.

But the White House has requested a swift vote in Congress on providing $500 million in aid for the training and equipping of moderate Syrian fighters.

The US seeks a force in Syria that can hold ground cleared by American air power.

Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner (R-Ohio) said on Thursday that he supported the measure, and that the president had made a “compelling case for action.”

“These are serious discussions. This is a very serious issue. And it ought to be handled that way,” Boehner said.

But the speaker continued with a critique of the overall strategy, arguing that air power alone would not be sufficient in halting Islamic State. “Somebody’s boots have to be on the ground,” he said.

Germany and Turkey announced on Thursday that, while they were a part of the US-led coalition, they do not intend to participate in the air campaign. The British foreign secretary suggested the United Kingdom, too, would abstain from the strikes, but Prime Minister David Cameron’s office said that no decision had yet been made on the use of British force.

Those governments, along with other NATO alliance members and Australia, Egypt, Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, among others, have agreed to cooperate with the US in its mission.

“Conversations are now under way” on what nations will play what roles in the coalition, US officials said. Instead of military power, some may instead provide funding and training for rebels, while others still will contribute political support.

In the Jeddah communiqué, signatories agreed to join “in many aspects... [of] a coordinated military campaign against ISIL.”

It requires them to halt the arming and financing of Islamic State from their countries, and to publicly repudiate its “hateful ideology.”

“The role played by regional states is central to this effort,” the Gulf states said.

The Pentagon is prepared to begin air strikes as ordered, one senior defense official said after Obama’s speech.

“The US military is ready to conduct direct action against ISIL targets in Syria,” the official said. “Decisions about when to conduct these actions will be made at a prudent time.”

US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said the army was prepared to launch the broad offensive upon the president’s order.

“The men and women of the US armed forces are ready to carry out the orders of our commander- in-chief, to work with our partners across government, and to work with our friends and allies around the world to accomplish this mission,” Hagel said.

From Jordan, Secretary of State John Kerry said the US effort to build an international coalition against Islamic State was already well under way. Kerry was in Baghdad on Wednesday, praising the creation of a new, inclusive government that could take on the security challenge of the terrorist group.

“We are uniting the world against a unified threat, and the president’s strategy will succeed because doing it with allies and partners isn’t just smart, it’s strong,” Kerry said.

The secretary attended the GCC deliberations in Jeddah on Thursday, endorsing the language of the final document. US officials say the Saudis are prepared to “fully cooperate” on training moderate Syrian rebels to help combat the group, and have agreed to host a train-andequip program for moderate Syrian groups.

Rounding out the coalition- building trip, Kerry will travel to Ankara and Cairo for strategic consultations over the weekend.

World War 3: The Russian Bear of Gog Tests New Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (Sept 10, 2014)


"Capable of carrying 10 nuclear warheads"

SignsofThyComing