Obama nixes French-Saudi plan to finish Assad by bombing his palace

Obama nixes French-Saudi plan to finish Assad by bombing his palace

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report May 30, 2012, 1:07 PM (GMT+02:00)

Bashar Assad's fortified palace atop Mt. Qassioun

US President Obama recently vetoed a detailed Franco-Saudi plan for ending President Bashar Assad’s rule by means of a massive air strike against his palace that would at one fell swoop wipe him, his family and top leadership circle out, debkafile’s military and intelligence sources report.

Their plan was for the presidential palace situated atop Mount Qassioun northeast of Damascus to be devastated by French warplanes taking off from the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier off Syria’s Mediterranean coast and Saudi and United Arab Emirates bombers flying in through Jordan.

They would bomb the palace for 12 hours in several sorties while at the same time American fighter jets launched from a US aircraft carrier cruising in the Mediterranean or Red Sea would shut down Syria’s air defenses, which are considered among the most sophisticated and densely-arrayed in the region.

US warplanes would also keep the Syrian Air Force grounded and prevented from repulsing the incoming bombers.
This plan was presented to President Obama separately by Nicolas Sarkozy before he was voted out of office and Saudi Defense Minister Prince Salman, who arrived at the White House on April 12 for a personal presentation. The prince maintained that there is no end in sight for the Syrian conflict; it would only spread and ignite the rest of the Middle East. The peril could only be rooted out at source by a single, sharp military strike that would remove Assad and his close clan for good. This would be the only acceptable kind of Western-Arab armed intervention in Syria and it had the added advantage of being effective without bringing foreign boots to Syrian soil.

In early May, Sarkozy was still trying to talk Obama around to the plan. He spent his last days in the Elysée Palace in long telephone conversations with the White House in which he drove home three points:

1. Because Assad has concentrated his family, top military command and intelligence chiefs at a single nerve center behind the fortified walls of the Qassioun Palace, the snake’s head can feasibly be cut off at one stroke.
The case of Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi was different because, unlike Assad, he never stayed long in one place and was constantly on the move.

2. Once that nerve center is destroyed, Syrian army and intelligence would be bereft of their sources of command. Their troops may remain in their bases and wait for news, while their officers may use the sudden political vacuum in Damascus to try and seize power. In either case, the Syrian military would be free of its orders to crush the anti-Assad revolt.
3. The French, Saudi and UAE air forces lack a central command center capable of coordinating a major combined air operation and therefore depend on the United States to provide this essential component. American military input is also vital for paralyzing Syria’s air defenses by applying its cyber warfare capabilities to disrupt the radar systems of Syria’s anti-air missile batteries.
Our Washington sources report that Obama consistently resisted repeated French and Saudi efforts to jump aboard their initiative.
The Saudi defense minister at one point in their conversation told the US president harshly that it was time for the Americans to stop talking and start acting. But Obama remained unmoved.
These events, revealed here by debkafile, provide the background for Presidents Barak Obama and Francois Hollande’s divergent responses Tuesday, May 29, to the al-Houla atrocity and its 108 brutally murdered victims.The White House repeated its objection to military intervention in Syria “at this time,” because it would only “increase the carnage.” A military option was left on the table.

That was standard Obama-speak for the crisis in Syria, behind which he remains determined to stay out of armed action for unseating President Assad and instead seek a deal with the Russians on the Syrian ruler’s fate as part and parcel of a comprehensive accord on Syria and Iran’s nuclear program.
President Hollande was at first quoted as saying he does not rule out armed intervention in Syria. Elysée sources later watered down this statement with the qualifier: …”only with UN Security Council approval.”
On top of the American hurdle, Moscow and Beijing rushed Wednesday, May 30, to reiterate that they would oppose (veto) any Security Council resolution authorizing military intervention in Syria, so effectively nipping the French intention in the bud.
Bashar Assad accordingly had no qualms about sending UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan off empty-handed from a final bid to salvage his peace mission: The world powers have left him sitting pretty in his palace, unconcerned about his future and free to pursue one of the most vicious anti-opposition campaigns of modern times.

Ecumenism never works, Interfaith is not what it seems

Ecumenism never works, Interfaith is not what it seems

Listen to this. This is a good story. From Ezra 4:1-5, a one act play in three parts, with application for today.

Pt 1: Question
"Now when the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin heard that the returned exiles were building a temple to the LORD, the God of Israel, they approached Zerubbabel and the heads of fathers’ houses and said to them, "Let us build with you, for we worship your God as you do, and we have been sacrificing to him ever since the days of Esarhaddon king of Assyria who brought us here."

Pt 2: Answer

"But Zerubbabel, Jeshua, and the rest of the heads of fathers’ houses in Israel said to them, "You have nothing to do with us in building a house to our God; but we alone will build to the LORD, the God of Israel, as King Cyrus the king of Persia has commanded us."

Pt 3: Reaction

"Then the people of the land discouraged the people of Judah and made them afraid to build and bribed counselors against them to frustrate their purpose, all the days of Cyrus king of Persia, even until the reign of Darius king of Persia."

Note that the first verse states that these were enemies of Judah and Benjamin. Every translation uses the word enemies or adversaries. These people who showed up undoubtedly had heard the shouts of praise and weeping as recorded in the previous verse (Ezra 3:13). And no one could miss 50,000 or so people tramping back with all their families, servants and animals. Their arrival was noted. And not appreciated. What to do? What to do? Well, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em!

"Let us help you!" they said. They were all nicey-nice. They asked politely. They said that they respected the Israelites' God. For gosh sakes, we worship Him, even sacrifice! We're like you!

The two tribes said ... drumroll please ... NO.

By today's standards, we'd say that the Israelites were being mean, impolite, "exclusive", "intolerant", and "haters" by refusing the offer. After all, weren't the would-be helpers seeking? Wouldn't it achieve a dual common goal by getting the temple finished earlier and offering the seekers the opportunity to dazzle them with their wonderful personalities before setting the bait-and-switch of ... ta-DA! ... sharing the knowledge of the LORD?

No it would not. First, the Jews knew that the LORD had placed it upon their hearts to do the work, He had not placed it upon the Gentiles's hearts and therefore they were respecting the decree of the LORD by working exclusively toward fulfilling His command. Second, they were respecting the decree of the King to be the ones who built it. And third, we knew then and we know now that there is never a common spiritual goal when pairing with Gentiles. They promote satan's goals, we promote Jesus's. There is between them a great gulf fixed.

Sure enough, their true colors came out. And right away too. They immediately began a multi-pronged approach to thwarting the goal of rebuilding the temple and thus of God's work. They were doing satan's work. It had only been a ruse in that first prong approach of joining them. When that didn't work, right away began to bribe the officials, appeal to the king, discourage the Jews, frustrate them, and bully them. They kept this up for fifteen years. Fifteen years. As we can see by their persistence, their goal was never to help get the temple built, it was only to prevent the temple from being built.

See? Ecumenism never works. The seeker's goals are not the same as ours, and their true colors will come out soon enough.

We can see by one of satan's methods that he sows tares among the wheat, something undoubtedly the pagans had wanted to do. The Jews would have naturally relaxed their guard by being in daily proximity to the pagans, and satan would have started sowing the tares. Intermarriage, friendliness, social mixing or melding their different religions, pollution would have begun. Just ask Solomon how that works out.

Note I'm talking about maintaining separateness when setting out to accomplish a purpose of God, or a consecrated thing, not that we never mix with unbelievers. The fact is, though, the bible is replete with warnings not to mix holy and profane:

"Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?" (2 Corinthians 6:14)

The Greek lexicon defines this unequal yoking as "used figuratively of Christians wrongly committed to a partner holding very different values (priorities), i.e. that run contrary to faith (the kingdom of God). Scripture uses symbols to teach about the importance of keeping spiritually pure. Along this line, Scripture prohibited partnering with the apistos, or the unfaithful, by evoking the picture of two different animals yoked together. Would the field get plowed if you yoked a bull and a goat together?.

"...but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away...(Matthew 13:25)

Félicien Rops, Satan Sowing Seeds, pencil, c. 1872.

I've used this pencil drawing before recently. I like it. Why? I'm amazed at the accuracy the drawing evokes of satan's activity and methods. It reminds me of so many different verses. The wheat and the tares is one. The verse where God asks satan where he has been and satan says he has been roaming through the earth and going back and forth in it. (Job 1:7). Another verse is good to remember here, satan is god of this world, (2 Corinthians 4:4) and he has been given power to deliver kingdoms to all he chooses (Matthew 4:8-9).

We must resist the world because satan is the god of it. "But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light." (1 Peter 2:9).

We should not combine with unbelievers, or even with those who say they worship the same God as we do but obviously do not. Let not the political, cultural, or social desires get in the way of the biblical desire to remain dedicated to being pure and bringing glory to Jesus. Ecumenism, or interfaith, is not what it seems. This is evidenced by the immediate reaction of the rejected pagans who had asked to "help" build the temple but only wanted to allow satan to go back and forth on it, sowing tares.

Strange sounds- Part II

Gary and Bob continue their discussion of the eerie sounds coming from the skies.

Will God Destroy Smokers? Follow Up

Will God Destroy Smokers? Follow Up
http://gracethrufaith.com/ask-a-bible-teacher

Q. Re: Will God Destroy Smokers. Are you saying that if a born again believer dies due to lung cancer caused by smoking, he will be included in the rapture as it has been written that the dead in Christ will rise first at the time of rapture? Will it be the same with those people who claimed to be born again dying because of being a drug addict? Will they be included in the rapture? How can those people who claimed to be truly born again believers still be included in the rapture despite the fact that the cause of their death are their vices, such as smoking, etc? Might they be continuing their vices because they are being encouraged by your view, even if they don’t quit? Please give a clearer explanation about the matter.

A. There’s not a single verse in the New Testament that when taken in context makes inclusion in the rapture conditional upon our behavior. You have singled out smokers and drug users, but you can’t condemn people for the vices you don’t like and ignore the others.
As I said , if your opinion is correct you would have to include drinkers, over eaters, people who can’t control their anger, or don’t exercise, or subject themselves to too much stress, or eat too much junk food, or intentionally work in hazardous conditions, or take unnecessary risks in their recreational pursuits, and all others who do things that can adversely affect their health. We’re either saved by grace or we’re not.

In a first, U.S. declares 5 million Palestinians to be refugees: report

In a first, U.S. declares 5 million Palestinians to be refugees: report

STRANGE SOUNDS

Gary and Bob discuss the strange sounds that have been heard coming from the skies all around the world.

Prophecy in the News - Christ at the checkpoint - Christian Palestinianism

The Parable Of The Wedding Banquet

Jesus spoke to them again in parables, saying: “The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son. He sent his servants to those who had been invited to the banquet to tell them to come, but they refused to come.

“Then he sent some more servants and said, ‘Tell those who have been invited that I have prepared my dinner: My oxen and fattened cattle have been butchered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding banquet.’

“But they paid no attention and went off–one to his field, another to his business. The rest seized his servants, mistreated them and killed them. The king was enraged. He sent his army and destroyed those murderers and burned their city.

“Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding banquet is ready, but those I invited did not deserve to come. Go to the street corners and invite to the banquet anyone you find.’ So the servants went out into the streets and gathered all the people they could find, both good and bad, and the wedding hall was filled with guests.

“But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing wedding clothes. ‘Friend,’ he asked, ‘how did you get in here without wedding clothes?’ The man was speechless.

“Then the king told the attendants, ‘Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

“For many are invited, but few are chosen.” (Matt 22:1-14)

Why All The Parables?

The Greek word for parable literally means to set along side. A fictional earthly story is set alongside a heavenly truth to help convey its meaning. When the disciples asked Jesus why He spoke to the people in parables He said,

“The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.” (Matt. 13:11-12)

In effect this means a parable was meant to accomplish two things: 1) to instruct His followers, and 2) to confuse everyone else. These seemingly conflicting objectives can both be accomplished because it’s the Holy Spirit who gives us the understanding we need. Without the Holy Spirit no one can comprehend the things of God. Paul put it this way;

The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Cor. 2:14)

The parable of the wedding banquet is a good example. It’s either very instructive or very confusing depending on your understanding of the Bible. (A working knowledge of Jewish wedding customs during Biblical times can also be helpful but is not essential.)

The Wedding Planner

First century Jewish wedding customs held that the father of the groom was in charge of the event and bore all the expense associated with the wedding and the banquet that followed. I’ve been told that in case of royalty or the very wealthy this often included providing a specially made garment to be worn over a guest’s regular clothing. This wedding garment was presented to the guest upon arrival and donned immediately. Refusal to wear it was an insult to the Father of the groom and could get a guest ejected from the festivities. In case of large gatherings it also served as identification to discourage uninvited guests from crashing the party.

As I said, the Parables of our Lord Jesus are earthly stories meant to explain heavenly truths. Each person or object is symbolic of someone or something else. Understanding the symbolism is crucial to discovering the lesson of the Parable. In fact receiving the full theological impact of a parable requires such an understanding.

The King represents God the Father, His Son our Lord Jesus. Invited guests who declined His invitation symbolize Israel’s rejection of the Messiah and the servants He sent to invite them are the prophets. The city He destroyed is Jerusalem, and the wedding banquet is the Kingdom of Heaven. This puts the timing of the parable at the Second Coming.

Do You Know The Bride?

Some say the last group He sent His servants out to invite represents the Church, but the symbolism and timing are wrong. The Church is the Bride of Christ (Ephes. 5:25-27), not a group of last minute substitute guests. Since Israel had already declined His invitation, and the Church (being the bride) would not need an invitation, who could these guests be?

They have to come from a time after the Bride is chosen and prepared, because the wedding banquet is ready and only the guests are lacking for the festivities to begin. They’re from a group we call Tribulation believers, those who come to faith after the Rapture of the Church in Revelation 4 but before the Wedding Banquet of Revelation 19.

Here’s The Real Lesson Of The Parable

The wedding garment represents God’s righteousness. This is a concept explained on several occasions in both the Old and New Testaments. Isaiah described our righteousness as filthy rags (Isa 64:6) and God’s righteousness as “garments of salvation” and “robes of righteousness” (Isa 61:10) where the acquisition of these qualities is likened to clothing given us at a wedding.

I delight greatly in the Lord; my soul rejoices in my God. For he has clothed me with garments of salvation and arrayed me in a robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom adorns his head like a priest, and as a bride adorns herself with her jewels (Isa 61:10).

In Revelation 19 the church has been prepared as a bride having been clothed in white linen, representing our righteousness. But as in Isaiah 61:10, the righteousness symbolized by the clothing is given to the bride, not purchased or earned. Paul said that ours is a righteousness that comes to us through faith (Romans 3:21-22).

The fact that a guest is thrown out into the darkness for not wearing wedding clothes indicates these last minute guests are required to be clothed in “garments of salvation” as well. Rev. 16:15 tells us Tribulation believers will have to “keep their clothes with them.” In other words they’ll be responsible for maintaining the righteousness they will have been given by obeying God’s commandments and remaining faithful to Jesus (Rev. 14:12). Only the Church has been promised the gift of eternal security.

Therefore the guest who was escorted out had been a Tribulation believer who was now trying to gain entrance to the banquet in his own clothing, having lost or discarded the “garment of salvation” he’d been given. He was hoping to gain entrance to the kingdom in his own righteousness, which as Isaiah said, is like filthy rags in God’s sight.

This is another slant on the parable of the 10 bridesmaids (Matt. 25:1-13). The setting there is also the time of the 2nd Coming. And again, the Church is not a bridesmaid. The Church is the bride and could not be refused admittance to her own wedding banquet. The five who were excluded were tribulation believers who had lost their salvation either by not obeying God’s commandments or by not remaining faithful to Jesus or both. This is indicated by their lack of sufficient oil, which is symbolic of the Holy Spirit. Since the Holy Spirit is sealed within the Church as a deposit guaranteeing our salvation (Ephes 1:13-14), the bridesmaids who were excluded from the banquet have to represent a post rapture group from whom the Holy Spirit had departed for lack of faith.

Many are invited, but few are chosen (Matt 22:1-14). God doesn’t desire that any should perish, but that all would come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). But whether it’s the Bride or the wedding guests, the only righteousness that gains us admission into His presence is that which is given us as a gift and accepted in faith (Rom 3:21-22). All of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ (Gal 3:27). For God made Him Who had no sin to become sin for us, that in Him we might become the righteousness of God (2 Cor 5:21). Selah.

Rolling through the bay

La monnaie européenne et ses symboles religieux -1

La monnaie européenne et ses symboles religieux -1

http://schoenelblog2.blogspot.com.br/

De temps en temps je rafraichis la mémoire spirituelle de l’Epouse du Christ pour lui rappeler que la base de ses réflexions doit être spirituelle et non terrestre. Il est beaucoup question de la crise européenne de la dette en ce moment et du sauvetage de la zone euro. D’un point de vue spirituel, l’euro devrait être considéré comme un artéfact spirituel ou la projection visible d’une domination spirituelle maléfique. Dans le cas de l’euro il ne s’agit pas d’une représentation de Mammon comme simple représentation de l’argent en général, mais plutôt, comme aime à nous le rappeler tellement nos politiciens éclairés par leur porteur de lumière, Lucifer, une idée de l’Europe comme concept politique. Car de plus en plus on nous répète que ce fut une erreur de mettre en place la monnaie sans prévoir une fédéralisation des pays de la zone. Toute les négociations actuelles concernant le pacte budgétaire européen, n’a qu’un but, donner à la Bête de l’Apocalypse, une tête unique, un chef, un messie en hébreu, qui dirige politiquement la zone. Les différences culturelles empêchant les rapprochements, le diable les contraint désormais financièrement en les enfonçant dans des dettes impayables à se fédérer autour de lui.

La Banque centrale européenne (BCE) résiste. Ni la menace de sortie de la Grèce de la zone euro, ni les risques de contagion aux autres Etats membres ne l'ont encore convaincue d'intervenir. La voix la plus audible jusqu'ici a été celle de Jean-Claude Trichet, l'ancien président de l'institution, qui a plaidé pour un « fédéralisme d'exception » lors d'un discours à Washington. En clair, selon lui, lorsqu'un Etat membre menace de faire faillite, l'Union européenne doit prendre le contrôle de ses finances publiques. La position officielle de la BCE, elle, se résume à « préférer »que la Grèce reste dans l'euro. L'heure est néanmoins à fourbir les boucliers. La BCE devient par la force des choses le ‘sauveur’ en dernier recours.

Il est évident que le mode de consommation occidental et son modèle économique basée sur une croissance sans fin sont le vrai problème actuel, mais il n’en est jamais fait mention. Toute une génération a vécu au-dessus de ses moyens, accumulant une montagne de dette qui nous écrase désormais. Mais ni un changement du modèle de consommation ou celui du financement de la dette est envisagé. Car il serait possible de produire durablement ou de financer les Etats directement par la banque centrale avec un taux 0, donc sans intérêts, mais alors il deviendrait difficile pour Satan de réduire en esclavage sa civilisation corrompue par l’argent.

On impose donc un modèle économique et une monnaie qui sont le reflet du Maître, Baal et de son corps, la monnaie. Car dans l’antiquité l’or était considéré comme le corps des dieux et la monnaie qu’on en tirait, l’expression de leur autorité. Les premières pièces furent frappées dans des temples et les idoles qui y étaient représentées gardaient le trésor des royaumes à l’abri de leurs regards. Ainsi quand le besoin s’en faisait sentir, on puisait dans le trésor du temple l’or nécessaire pour financer une guerre, des travaux ou un tribut. Ce principe valait à Jérusalem du temps de Jésus, où les pharisiens et les saducéens se disputaient l’autorité sur le temple justement à cause de l’immense profit qu’ils en tiraient. On connait la suite de l’histoire…

Pour que l’Europe connaisse à nouveau la croissance économique, Messieurs Attali et Lamy proposent les projects bonds. On parle là d’investir plus de 1000 milliards d’euros. Comment sera financé cet énorme gâteau, qui aiguisera les appétits des lobbyistes et des corrupteurs ? Il le sera par de l’endettement ! Oui, nous allons financer la « relance de l’économie » par de la dette, la source du problème. Mais pour que cela fonctionne, il faudra fédérer les ressources et les dépenses futurs, afin qu’une administration commune gère toute la zone et les budgets des Etats, pour éviter les dérives à la grecque. Un "eurobond" ou "euro-obligation" unifierait le principe de l’endettement et celui de l’autorité de tutelle satanique sur toute la zone euro. Le nouveau Président de la Banque Centrale européenne, Mario Dragon, pardon Draghi, c’est la même chose en italien, va donc mettre en place le plan décidé par son maitre à la BRI. La marque de la Bête sera donc bien appliquée au fer rouge sur toutes les mains européennes. Mais qu’est-ce que l’euro ?

Comment faire reposer la gouvernance d’un continent entier, peuplé de 400 millions d’individus, sur la couronne d’une seule reine ? En substance la reine mentionnée ici est, la reine du ciel et mère de Dieu, Vierge immaculé représentant le corps mystique de l’Eglise. Tout un édifice communautaire complexe, d’airain et d’argile, scellant des alliances fragiles repose sur une base aussi étroite qu’une simple pièce de monnaie frappée du sceau de la reine du ciel, symbole de son autorité suprême.

Je voulais reprendre un ancien article écrit sur mon premier blog, mais bizarrement l’article sur les pièces en euro a disparu, je vais donc réactualiser les connaissances sur ces choses cachées, car j’aime bien que la lumière brille dans les ténèbres, moi. On va donc commencer par le drapeau européen, les pièces en euro puis les billets. Comme toutes les pièces européennes sont frappées du symbole des douze étoiles mariales, il convient de revenir à l’idée de base qui a motivé ce choix.

Le drapeau européen

Sans avoir besoin de lancer un sondage, il est probable que bien peu de citoyens appartenant à l'U.E. (anciennement la C.E.E.) connaissent l'historique du choix du drapeau Européen et la nature de l'inspiration de son auteur, un strasbourgeois, Arsène HEITZ, travaillant au service du courrier du Conseil de l'Europe, qui à lui seul a conçu une vingtaine de projets sur les 101 présentés entre 1950 et 1955! « C'est à moi qu'on a demandé de dessiner le Drapeau de l'Europe. J'ai eu subitement l'idée d'y mettre les douze étoiles de la Médaille Miraculeuse de la rue du Bac, sur fond bleu, couleur de la Sainte Vierge. Et mon projet fut adopté à l'unanimité, le 8 décembre 1955, fête de l'Immaculée Conception. »

Ces aveux, du créateur même du drapeau européen, ne peuvent que conforter une signification qui n’est ni d'inspiration maçonnique, ni ésotérique, ni technocratique, mais bel est bien inspirée par l'église catholique romaine. Les douze étoiles ne correspondaient pas, à ce moment-là, au nombre des nations. Le Parlement Européen était «conçu pour» douze nations, mais le drapeau de l'Europe est le drapeau du « Conseil de l'Europe », et ce Conseil n'a jamais comporté douze nations : il en a comporté successivement six, neuf, puis quinze... et actuellement bien plus. Les discussions, réunions, commissions et sous-commissions furent innombrables, pendant plus de cinq ans, de 1949 à 1955. Finalement, c'est le 8 décembre 1955 que le dessin de M. Heitz fut retenu... à l'unanimité !

En effet, les douze étoiles n'ont rien à voir avec le nombre des nations tel qu'on a pu le croire à une époque mais fait directement référence aux douze étoiles de " la médaille miraculeuse de Notre Dame " de la rue du Bac à Paris.

Evidemment, il fallait éviter d'évoquer la signification religieuse des douze étoiles et du fond bleu, en vertu de la sacro-sainte laïcité. En 1950, c'était M. Paul M.G Lévy qui était le premier Directeur au Service de Presse du Conseil de l'Europe. C'est donc lui qui fut chargé de faire aboutir le projet de Drapeau. Cet homme très cultivé ne savait pas dessiner. Mais il connaissait M. Arsène Heitz, homme très simple, employé au service du courrier, mais très artiste pour peindre et dessiner. Tous deux étaient de bons catholiques. M. Paul M.G. Lévy avait une réunion de 3 jours, fixée aux 7, 8 et 9 décembre, pour faire adopter tout un ensemble de projets. Tous les documents sont datés du 9 décembre, puisqu'on signe l'ensemble à la fin de la réunion. Mais tout alla si vite et si bien que cette assemblée termina son travail le 8 décembre, jour où furent apposées les signatures particulières. Et en sortant de la salle, le gendre de Paul Claudel poussa du coude M. Lévy en murmurant: «Mais c'est aujourd'hui la fête de la fête de L'immaculée Conception! » Et tous deux ont retrouvé sans le vouloir le fameux introït du 15 août : « Un signe grandiose est apparu dans le ciel, une femme revêtue du soleil, la lune sous ses pieds, et sur sa tête une couronne de 12 étoiles. » (Apocalypse XII, 1). Arsène Heitz, lui, homme simple, parlait des 12 étoiles de la Médaille Miraculeuse. M. Lévy, professeur d'économie politique, parlait du chapitre 12 de l'Apocalypse.

Le drapeau a été officiellement présenté au public le 13 Décembre 1955...
Le 13 Décembre, à (6 + 6 + 6) ou 18 jours de la fin de l'année, est la fête de Sainte Lucie, Lucie signifie "lumière" en latin. Sainte Lucie fut fêtée dès le Moyen Age en Scandinavie, sur sa tête repose une couronne de bougies allumées (elle porte des lumières), ce qui lui laissait les mains libres pour transporter mets et boissons et éclairer son chemin la nuit (là encore en portant une torche, elle porte la lumière).

Les apparitions de la vierge, rue du Bac.

Les fameuses étoiles européennes sont donc la reproduction de celles figurant sur la médaille miraculeuse de Notre-Dame, emblème de la chapelle du Sacré-Cœur de Jésus construite en 1815. Ici, au 140, rue du Bac (Paris-7e), Catherine Labouré, une fille de paysans de 23 ans entrée dans les ordres, aurait par trois fois vu la Sainte Vierge en 1830.Marie lui aurait demandé de faire réaliser une médaille la représentant entourée des douze étoiles citées dans l’Apocalypse. Catherine Labouré aperçoit le 27 novembre 1830 une apparition de la Vierge, debout, les pieds posés sur un globe terrestre, où s'agite un serpent de couleur verdâtre. La Vierge avait le pied posé sur le serpent. Elle dit : "Cette boule représente le monde entier, la France, chaque personne en particulier."
La Vierge tenait entre ses mains un globe plus petit surmonté d'une croix d'or. Tout à coup les doigts de ses mains se remplissent d'anneaux porteurs de diamants qui jettent des rayons de lumière de tous côtés.

Le contexte historique de la médaille de la Rue du Bac.

Les apparitions de la Vierge s’inscrivirent dans un contexte bien particulier, qui s’apparente plus à une reprise en main directe par le prince de ce monde qui voit la domination sans partage, pendant plus mille ans, de "son" église être battu en brèche spirituellement, d’abord par la réforme protestante, puis au XVIII siècle par le réveil méthodiste de John Wesley. Auxquels il faut rajouter les évènements révolutionnaires français du début du XVIII siècle qui jetèrent l’Europe dans un grand chaos. En France on assiste à la destruction des cathédrales, des églises et des couvents. Partout, écrit Châteaubriand, on peut apercevoir les ruines des églises et des couvents; les hommes, d’une certaine manière, se divertissaient à se promener sur de telles ruines. Tout l’épiscopat, ajoute Montalembert, se trouve en persécution, les prêtres sont envoyés à la guillotine ou exilés.
Les révolutionnaires cherchent à convaincre les hommes que la religion est une folie, une erreur, qui se base sur l’ignorance et sur la superstition. La vague révolutionnaire alla jusqu’à chasser le pape de la ville éternelle, siège séculaire du vicaire de Rome. Le 24 novembre 1848, portant le "Saint Sacrement" sur son cœur, Pie IX fuyait de Rome pour sauver sa vie dans l’exil et ne pas priver l’église de son chef. A Rome la révolution chantait victoire : on proclama la république, le gouvernement fut confié à un triumvirat. “Le peuple est l’unique maître”, hurlait la foule devenue féroce.

C’est dans ce contexte catastrophique que "Marie" apparut plusieurs fois au XVIII siècle afin de sauver "son" église, il y a urgence car l’église catholique romaine est en passe de s’effondrer.

Tandis que le pape exilé observait de la forteresse de Gaète cette terrible situation, le cardinal Lambruschini se présenta à lui en disant : «Saint Père, Votre sainteté n’assainira de nouveau le monde qu’en déclarant l’immaculée conception de Marie comme dogme de foi.Le 2 février 1849, de Gaète il adresse aux évêques catholiques la lettre encyclique «Ubi Primum», dans laquelle il ordonne que partout on élève de ferventes prières et que l’on prépare ce qui est nécessaire pour la solennelle définition de "l’Immaculée Conception de Marie". Plus de 500 évêques, cardinaux, patriarches répondirent au Saint Père qu’ils attendaient avec anxiété le jour de la définition dogmatique de l’Immaculée Conception. L’épiscopat répondit : «Parle, oh! Pierre, par la bouche de Dieu, et nous écouterons humblement». Où est le pape là est l’Eglise et la forteresse de Gaète devint une nouvelle Rome chrétienne. Des millions de cœurs s’unirent en prière et s’adressèrent à l’immaculée conception pour sauver le Pape exilé, pour anéantir les phalanges des ennemis de l’Église.

Le 12 avril 1850 Pie IX retourna à Rome. Aux salves s’unissait la jubilation de la population qui criait ses vivats. Le Capitole, la Coupole de Saint Pierre et toute la ville était en liesse. Ce changement subit Pie IX l’attribua à celle qu’il avait appelée en aide dans la forteresse de Gaète; et se convainquit que le dogme de l’immaculée conception était ce remède que Dieu avait ordonné pour notre époque. Et finalement le 8 décembre 1854, en présence de 200 évêques, Pie IX lui-même dans la basilique Saint-Pierre posait sur le chef de Marie la couronne sans tache, définissait le dogme catholique de l’immaculée conception. Le règne du Christ Roi s'acheva et commença celui de la"Reine du Ciel".

On ignore souvent que les apparitions de la Chapelle de la Rue du Bac ont préparé également les 18 (3 X 6) apparitions de Lourdes en 1858. "La dame de la grotte m'est apparue telle qu'elle est représentée sur la médaille miraculeuse" en disant « je suis l’Immaculée Conception » a déclaré Bernadette qui portait sur elle la médaille de la Rue du Bac. Un immense mouvement de foi maritale s’en suivit en France.

Le 8 décembre 1854 prépara le 18 juillet 1870. Après le dogme de l’Immaculée Conception, devait venir le dogme de l’infaillibilité du pape. Et ainsi l’immaculée conception anéantit l’hérésie de ceux qui ne reconnaissent pas une telle infaillibilité, elle fit en sorte que le prisonnier du Vatican devint le centre autour duquel gravitât le monde; et il fut le promoteur principal du renouveau catholique. Le maître reprit fermement les rênes des destinées humaines en Europe avec tant d’autorité qu’il poussa son audace jusqu’à en imprimer sa marque sur l’étendard européen.

Il est évident que c’est la "Vierge Marie" qui sauva du naufrage l’église catholique romaine au XVIII siècle, sans elle aucun renouveau spirituel catholique n’eut été possible.

Third Georgia patient comes down with flesh eating bacterial infection

Third Georgia patient comes down with flesh eating bacterial infection

http://the-end-time.blogspot.com.br/

Three people from Georgia have now been infected and are being treated for the dread flesh-eating bacterial infection.

1. Aimee Copeland was riding a homemade zip line near the Little Tallapoosa River near Carollton, Georgia May 1st when the line snapped, causing a gash in her left calf. The bacteria thought to have triggered the infection, Aeromonas hydrophila, thrives in warm climates and fresh (brackish) water, like the river where Copeland was kayaking and zip lining with friends.

2. Lana Kuykendall was infected on May 7th after she gave birth to twins at Emory University Hospital in Atlanta.

3. Bobby Vaughn of Cartersville, Georgia's story-- "Reports emerge of third flesh-eating bacteria victim with ties to Georgia." Vaughn is a Cartersville landscaper who was injured at work May 4th when he fell from a tree and suffered a cut to his side.

The scale of miles between each location where the patient became infected is that each side of the triangle is roughly 50 miles from each destination. The distances are not long.

OK, one is a freak thing, two is something that makes me go HMMM, but three is a pattern. Three from the Atlanta area is just too close for comfort!

But now there is one in Long Island NY, a veteran fought for his life from a hospital bed warding off this weird bacteria. He survived. The article says that the bacteria "is rare". I think they need to look up the definition of "rare" again. Four in the news in one week, suddenly, is not rare. It's freaky...

I think of the verse that will be fulfilled in the Tribulation, the one where Jesus promised that there will be pestilences, (Luke 21:11; Rev 6:8). He created the entire world and all that is within it in 6 days. He can create a disease that will kill a fourth of mankind. Or He will allow a mutation of a disease that man in his own sin created, to kill a fourth of mankind. Or both.

What we have today is a flesh eating bacteria that is hard to handle in these relatively calm times with all the focus of the practicing experts brought to bear, with a total focus of curing the patient afflicted with it. A cure is almost too hard for them to manage now. Imagine when things are really chaotic and a quarter of the world is dying from plagues and wars and other deathly afflictions. If a person in the Tribulation catches this bacteria you will watch your flesh rot off while doctors are performing triage on patients worse off than you, until even they are overwhelmed with the flood of medical emergencies and finally practicing medicine as we know it sputters to a halt. If you believe I am overstating things, look what happened during Katrina.

I bring these unpalatable things to mind for you so as to think on His mercy. THIS is the age of grace, when repentance will bring joy and redemption to the penitent. Submitting to the loving care of the Savior brings to fruition for each individual all the promises of glory, peace, eternal joy with Him in heaven. Rejecting His offer of grace brings pain, death, and eternal separation from all his promises in hellish agony.

He said that he told us these things head of time so that when they came to pass you would believe. This presently ending of the Age of Grace is the last lead-time you will have to make these choices. (John 13:19). You can choose Jesus during the Tribulation, IF you survive any part of it, IF you don't wait too long before all the world becomes deluded by the antichrist, IF Jesus doesn't give you over to your perversions first, IF......

No, do it NOW. He loves you and wants you. He wants YOU.

Un G8 toujours aussi vain

dimanche 20 mai 2012
Un G8 toujours aussi vain
http://schoenelblog2.blogspot.com.br/

Les dirigeants des pays du G8 ont plaidé samedi avec un bel ensemble en faveur de la croissance économique pour compenser l'effet de l'austérité budgétaire et appelé de leurs vœux le maintien de la Grèce dans la zone euro. "Tous les dirigeants sont d'accord aujourd'hui ici, la croissance et l'emploi doivent être notre priorité absolue", a déclaré le président Barack Obama, hôte du sommet organisé dans sa résidence forestière de Camp David, en clôturant les travaux. Le renouvellement des chefs d’Etats autour de la table des négociations, en dit long sur la profondeur de la crise actuelle.

La crise de la dette qui balaye les chefs d’Etats les uns après autres, montre l’inéficacité économique des politiques employées dans le monde occidental depuis 60 ans. Sur fond de guerre monétaire pour assurer la survie économique des blocs occidentaux, les Etats-Unis en sont à produire 2,5 dollars de dette pour 1 dollars de croissance, l’échec est patent. L’Europe suit le même chemin mais par des mesures drastiques de réductions budgétaires le poids de la dette va être maitrisé à moyen terme, sauf si on rechute en récession rapide, ce qui semble être le cas. Car un profile en W s’amorce et rechute comme en 2007. Alors on lâche du lest en espérant que les choses vont s’améliorer.

Dans une interview récente à Bloomberg TV, le lauréat du prix Nobel et économiste Paul Krugman a dit: «J'aurais aimé avoir eu tort pour le salut du monde" au sujet de sa prédiction selon laquelle les "austériens" (les partisans chevronnés de l'austérité, NDA) qui « faisaient pression pour l'austérité budgétaire détruiraient l'Europe. Ce sentiment trouve un écho dans des pays tels que les Pays-Bas, entre autres, qui ont annoncé qu'ils allaient recommencer à dépenser. Et la victoire du nouvellement élu président français François Hollande est une manifestation du rejet absolu des mesures d'austérité. »

La planche à billet est actuellement la seule planche de salut US et si on compare les niveaux d’endettements dans le monde, le cas grec présenté comme catastrophique, fait doucement sourire face à celui des Etats-Unis. L’explosion de la bulle immobilière américaine a été le révélateur de l’entrée en phase terminale d’un modèle ayant déjà sombré en 1929. Les pertes induites ayant menacé en 2008 d’emporter le système bancaire dérégulé, les États sont venus à son secours, ainsi qu’à celui de l’économie en profonde récession. Les pertes ont ainsi été transférées aux États, mais leur taille gigantesque a entrainé l’explosion des dettes publiques, et une deuxième phase de la crise.

En marge du G8: l’Iran

Mais les dossiers économiques ne sont pas les seuls sur la table du G8, également bien encombrée par des dossiers de politique internationale brûlants. Vendredi soir, au cours d'un dîner de travail, les dirigeants du Groupe des Huit ont ainsi abordé les questions de l'Iran, de la Syrie et de la Corée du Nord. Ils ont convenu lors de cette première rencontre qu'il était urgent que l'Iran prenne des mesures concrètes pour assurer la communauté internationale de la nature pacifique de son programme nucléaire.

Les dirigeants du G8 ont augmenté samedi la pression sur l'Iran en laissant entendre qu'ils étaient prêts à puiser dès cet été dans leurs réserves stratégiques de pétrole si un durcissement éventuel des sanctions contre Téhéran devait limiter les approvisionnements sur le marché. Avec un franc-parler inhabituel, le G8 a demandé à l'Agence internationale de l'énergie (AIE), l'organisation internationale qui coordonne l'utilisation des réserves des pays occidentaux, de se tenir prête à agir. "En prévision de probables perturbations dans les ventes de pétrole (...) nous nous tenons prêts à demander (à l'AIE) de prendre les mesures appropriées pour s'assurer de l'approvisionnement complet et opportun du marché", a déclaré le G8 dans un communiqué publié dans la foulée du sommet à Camp David. Il s'agit du dernier signe en date du soutien gagné par Barack Obama auprès de ses alliés pour puiser pour la deuxième fois en deux ans dans les réserves stratégiques, une première au cours du mandat d'un président américain.

Certains pays occidentaux envisagent une action militaire contre l'Iran qu'ils soupçonnent de vouloir se doter de l'arme nucléaire, a déclaré dimanche le vice-ministre russe des Affaires étrangères, Sergueï Riabkov. Le responsable russe s'adressait à des journalistes dans l'avion qui le ramenait du sommet du G8 à Camp David, où les dirigeants mondiaux ont laissé entendre qu'ils étaient prêts à puiser dès cet été dans leurs réserves stratégiques de pétrole si un durcissement éventuel des sanctions contre Téhéran devait limiter les approvisionnements sur le marché. "C'est l'un des signes nombreux et variés, venant de plusieurs sources, qui montrent que l'option militaire est considérée comme possible et réaliste", a dit Riabkov. "Nous recevons des indications, à la fois par des canaux publics et par nos services de renseignement, selon lesquelles cette option est considérée dans certaines capitales comme désormais plus plausible."

Petit à petit la focale se resserre sur l’Iran. Israël voit monter la menace iranienne et s’impatiente, l’Amérique et l’Europe se prépare au pire en organisant dès à présent l’organisation des réserves de pétrole en cas de blocage du détroit d’Ormuz. La Russie a refusé de livrer des missiles très sophistiqués au prétexte qu’ils tombent sous le 4e train de sanctions imposées à l’Iran par le Conseil de Sécurité, et le Président Medvedev publia un décret, en septembre 2010, interdisant la vente des S-300 à Téhéran, en citant les restrictions imposées par le Conseil de Sécurité de l’ONU à l’Iran en raison de ses activités nucléaires. Selon l’agence iranienne Fars, la Russie a remboursé, avec les intérêts de retard, les acomptes que l’Iran a versé pour sa commande de missiles de défense S-300. D’après le contrat passé en 2007, la Russie devait livrer au moins cinq systèmes de missiles de défense S-300. L’Iran n’a donc aucun moyen d’empêcher une frappe israélienne avec ses moyens actuels et les grands blocs USA, Europe et Russie s’organisent autour de la négociation de la dernière chance. Mais il doit être clair pour le monde chrétien, qu’une guerre avec l’Iran, conjuguée avec une crise économique majeure, va transformer la société occidentale en profondeur, de manière extrêmement rapide.

'Political Correctness' Is Totalitarian Mind Control

'Political Correctness' Is Totalitarian Mind Control

By David Kupelian WND

“PC is, strictly speaking, a totalitarian philosophy.” —Newsweek, Dec. 24, 1990, “Thought Police” cover story

A major engine for the left’s insatiable quest for power goes under the strange name of “political correctness”—an insidious frontal attack on common sense and conscience through language manipulation.

Many people mistakenly regard political correctness as just a nutty liberal fetish for not hurting people’s feelings. Words and phrases are continually decreed to be “insensitive” to various “minorities” and therefore replaced with euphemisms so as to avoid real or perceived offense.

People who are mentally retarded used to be called “idiots,” “imbeciles” and “morons”—psychological terms that correspond to different IQ ranges (0-25 for idiots, 26-50 for imbeciles, 51-70 for morons). But as those words gradually came to be considered offensive, the euphemism “retarded” came into vogue. When “retarded” came to be regarded as insensitive, new-and-nicer euphemisms like “intellectual disability” and being “intellectually challenged” emerged, culminating with “special.” It’s hard to be offended over being “special.”

In like manner, the deaf became “hearing impaired,” the blind “vision impaired” and the crippled “mobility impaired,” inspiring a new breed of cocktail-party jokes wherein the bald are “folically challenged” and so on.

More subversively, however, people’s ignoble or criminal qualities became disguised and excused with euphemisms: “Illegal aliens” became “illegal immigrants” and then “undocumented immigrants” and presto-chango, something bad was magically transformed into something good. Homosexuals became “gay,” abortion advocates became “pro-choice” and atheists became “brights,” each euphemism converting a negative association into a positive one. Today, increasing numbers of people refer to pedophilia as “intergenerational sex” and child molesters as “minor-attracted persons” or MAPs. (In Islam, the popular euphemism for pedophilia is “child marriage,” just as adultery is called “temporary marriage.” Really.)

Of course, Islam has become a major beneficiary of political correctness, reminiscent of what George Orwell called “Newspeak” in his novel “1984.” After 19 Muslim terrorists, acting in the name of Islam, murdered almost 3,000 Americans in a wanton act of war on Sept. 11, 2001, the government and media, to avoid offending Muslims, declared Islam to be a “religion of peace.”

The Islamic jihad declared on America was mysteriously referred to by our leaders as a “war on terror” involving some unnamed enemy. But even that awkward and evasive expression was deemed too insensitive toward Islam, so under Obama the euphemizing turned surreal when “war on terror” morphed into “overseas contingency operations.” Likewise, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano came up with a friendly new phrase for mass-murder terror attacks. Announcing that she was deliberately avoiding the term “terrorism” in speeches because “we want to move away from the politics of fear,” she adopted the term “man-caused disasters.”

All of this is not, however, just a matter of annoyingly manipulative “word games.” Our civilization is literally being turned upside-down through the strategic redefinition (and therefore transformation) of our society’s operating principles.

Today’s most obvious case in point: Barack Obama, a far-left radical manifestly hostile toward free-market capitalism and American exceptionalism—in fact, to just about everything American—but who campaigned using powerfully evocative words of national restoration and reconciliation. “Hope,” “change,” “fairness,” “justice,” “reform” and “transparency” would usher in a bright new era of “healing” and “unifying” America and the world through this charismatic young leader’s “post-racial,” “post-partisan” presidency. What we got instead was a jarringly narcissistic, supremely demagogic and corrupt Chicago politician, lacking both in experience and wisdom, and displaying breathtaking contempt for America’s Constitution and its best-in-the-world system of government.

If the ongoing language war consisted solely of one man’s use of emotionally compelling catch-phrases—like Obama’s current re-election favorites (“Everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules”) and his ceaseless appeals to raw envy (attacks on “millionaires and billionaires,” “hedge-fund managers” and “oil-company executives”)—it wouldn’t be difficult for truth to prevail.
But the political and cultural left has hijacked virtually our entire language in the last couple of generations. It has redefined many key words, phrases and concepts, changing not only the words we use, but the way we think.

Consider:
“Equality” has been utterly redefined. To previous generations, equality—as in Jefferson’s phrase in the Declaration of Independence that “all men are created equal, and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights”—referred to our being equal in our God-given rights before the law. Today’s idea of equality, however, is based on the virtual repudiation of meaning and morality and God Himself. Good and evil are basically “equal.” As I write in “The Marketing of Evil”:

Today, in the rarified but toxic air of multiculturalism and political correctness, all cultures and all values are of equal value. The most ignorant, oppressive, suffocating, women-hating kind of culture—where people’s hands and feet are amputated as punishment for petty offenses—is now worthy of equal respect to Western culture, which has provided most of the world’s knowledge, progress, food, medicine, technology, quality of life, representative government, and liberty. This moral inversion, which proclaims that all cultures are equal, has extended to virtually every area of society.

“Love” too has been redefined. At its finest, love is a spiritual quality of selfless, sacrificial caring about others, epitomized by Jesus when He said on the cross, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” The soldier who falls on an enemy grenade to save the lives of his fellow warriors acts out of love. But today, “love” has reached a low point—the word is used to sanctify same-sex marriage and celebrate what once were called “vile affections.” Even pedophiles creepily talk about “men and the boys they love” to justify their crimes. After all, how can love be vile? For many, our idea of “love”—basically, our feelings of attraction toward anything to which we are addicted—is now firmly in the gutter, like “equality.”

“Justice,” likewise, has been redefined. Phrases such as “social justice” and “economic justice” are euphemisms for confiscating, by threat and raw force, what belongs justly to others—in other words, injustice. Likewise, “affirmative action” is imposed and defended in the name of justice, but is inherently unjust: The most qualified applicant for a job is turned down in favor of another, because that other person has the right skin color. That used to be called racial discrimination (a great injustice), but now the same act is rationalized as “social justice.”

Freedom Is Slavery

In Orwell’s “1984,” the outside walls of the “Ministry of Truth” (headquarters for propaganda and revisionist history) are adorned with three “Newspeak” phrases—slogans of the political party ruling the total surveillance state of Oceania. They are: WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

America today is rapidly becoming Oceania, where many key political and cultural concepts actually amount to the opposite of what their labels profess:
How about these? THEFT IS JUSTICE. MORALITY IS HATE. FAITH IS IGNORANCE.
Or maybe these: ENVY IS RIGHTEOUSNESS. SIN IS LOVE. CHARITY IS ENTITLEMENT.

A 180-degree inversion of reality has been codified within our political and cultural vernacular. Whereas the poor and disadvantaged once were the grateful recipients of charity, thanks to the generosity of individuals, churches and organizations, today what used to be charity is an “entitlement.” The idea that charity—whether through private-sector generosity or governmental “safety-net” programs—is something to which the recipient is “entitled” is bizarrely presumptuous and discordant to all right-thinking people. It’s almost as though the government intends to program recipients of charity to become arrogant and ungrateful; after all, why would you be grateful for receiving something to which you were already entitled?

Likewise, “tolerance” today often amounts to not only acceptance, but virtual celebration of sexual immorality—or at the very least, an agreement not to utter or write a word of disapproval over immoral, corrupt or self-destructive behavior. However, homosexual activists condemning the “intolerance” of others are notoriously intolerant of all who hold to the millennia-old moral code of the Western world.

Why are the most perverse, immoral and confusing programs imaginable being instituted so easily throughout our nation’s public schools under the banner of “anti-bullying”? Because “gay” activists figured out that the best way to intimidate everyone into embracing their agenda was to package it that way. This is pure conditioning. For most people, the very thought of opposing any “anti-bullying” program is chilling, because we fear being condemned as haters of children.

The emotional programming inherent in words and phrases is so compelling that it affects our behavior in many areas of life. So, for instance, many conservatives automatically conclude that “environmentalism,” “conservation,” “hybrid” vehicles, “recycling” and “organic” foods are things to avoid, just because they associate them with liberals.

The Hidden Power of Political Correctness

The whole idea of political correctness is an assault on the freedom of the human mind.
The operating principle behind political correctness is raw intimidation: In a politically correct culture, if you dare use certain words—and by logical extension, even think a certain way—you are ignorant, insensitive, intolerant, bigoted or hateful.
If you criticize the president of the United States as a “socialist” or “Marxist,” for instance, you will likely be accused of “McCarthyism.” Regardless of the real history of the “McCarthy era”—yes, there really were Soviet agents honeycombed throughout the U.S. government—the phrase has become a verbal weapon with which the left attacks conservatives.

(Personal story: As a guest on Sean Hannity’s “Great American Panel,” I used the words “socialist” and “Marxist” to describe Obama,and rattled off highlights of far-left associations and exploits from his teen years to his presidency. Liberal panelist Bob Beckel, taking offense at my use of the word “Marxist,” turned to me and angrily accused me of being “worse than Joe McCarthy,” insisting I should “apologize to the president.” Apologize for what? Telling the truth? For the record, I like Beckel, he’s a very nice man off-camera.)

The point is, the weaponization of a word like “McCarthyism” has nothing to do with history or reality; it is the intimidation factor that’s programmed into the word—almost like a post-hypnotic suggestion—that we automatically associate with fears of being ostracized, diminished, marginalized and ridiculed. Remember Saul Alinsky’s famous Rule No. 5 from “Rules for Radicals”: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
Nobody wants to be scorned and mocked, and therefore many of us, consciously or unconsciously, avoid intimidating situations by refraining from standing up for what we really believe.

At its core, then, political correctness is nothing more nor less than the unjust intimidation of others into thinking and speaking a certain way. As such, it is pure totalitarian mind control.

[The preceding was excerpted from a much more comprehensive report—titled “Magic Words: The left’s secret weapon for transforming traditional America” by David Kupelian—in the May issue of Whistleblower magazine, “THE ALINSKY CODE.”]