Global reaction to U.S. President Barack Obama being awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize ranges from hearty congratulations to expressions of disbelief and derision.
The Norwegian Nobel Committee recognized the president for his work to strengthen international diplomacy, citing in particular efforts to rid the world of nuclear weapons. The peace prize appears to have caught everyone, including Mr. Obama himself, by surprise.
At American College in Cairo, political scientist Saiid Sadek found Mr. Obama’s selection odd and undeserved. “There is no peace in Iraq, nor in Afghanistan. The Arab-Israeli conflict is still at a standstill. As usual, nothing happened. And Guantanamo Bay jail is still open. So what for is he getting that prize?,” he said
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon described the peace prize as “great news”. “President Obama embodies the new spirit of dialogue and engagement on the world’s biggest problems: climate change, nuclear disarmament and a wide range of peace and security challenges,” he said.
Two other sitting U.S. presidents have become Nobel laureates: Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt.
The Collapse of the Solomon Brothers Building, WTC 7
The Conspiracy Files delves into the final mystery of 9/11: a third tower at the World Trade Centre, which along with the Twin Towers, also collapsed that day.
Former Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen holds his first news conference as NATO Secretary-General at the alliance headquarters in Brussels August 3, 2009.
‘A Pretty Little Pin’
—– Original Message —–
From: “Alistair Rae” alrae_spamtrap_@iee.org
Newsgroups: soc.org.freemasonry
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2001 4:03 PM
Subject: Re: unusual symbol
> Don
>
> The backing symbol is derived from Hindu mythology. It was used by the Nazi
> Party inverted which denotes an evil connotation, which was borne out by
> later events. In its normal configuration it has some good/ light meanings.
>
> I would assume from the emblem atop it, that it is used in that degree
> Scottish Rite.
>
> In UK the base symbol is used in some of the esoteric orders, but not in
> white.
>
> Hope this gives some guidance. Pretty little pin tho.
>
> Alistair
>
> SW Union of Malta, No 407
> 1AS William Kingston RA Chapter
> MM Mother Kilwinning No 0
> Fr Elias Ashmole College SRIA
>
>
>
> “Donald C. Sargent” dsargent@lcc.net wrote in message
> news:sl8sjtgmbln9sadvtmqcf0hjp2bqvh7j9v@4ax.com…
> >
> >
> > Today I received an e-mail from a friend in New Hampsire. He has a
> > lapel pin and a tie bar that have a symbol that neither of us have
> > seen. It is a white swastika (with the bent arms turning counter
> > clockwise) that has a black triangle with a 32 in it. If you would like
> > to see a picture, you can find it at
> > http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1056318&a=13410637&p=51109149
> >
> > Has anyone seen anything like this before or know what organization uses
> > it? Any help that anyone can give me will be greatly appreciated.
> >
> > Sincerely and fraternally,
> >
> > Don Sargent
> >
> >
According to Freemason Occult Leader Albert Pike, who rewrote the Scottish Rite Rituals in the late eighteen hundreds and who is buried in a crypt inside the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry ‘House of the Temple’ in Washington D.C. Freemasons must ‘Harness the seething energies of Lucifer’ if they want to become the big wheels on the masonic block.
According to ‘off the record’ statements made by attendees of the Freemason founded and controlled ‘Bilderberg meetings’, which is believed to have been set up as a sub-committee to recruit and influence international politicians by the Freemason founded and controlled Council on Foreign Relations, the ‘plan’ is for N.A.T.O. to become the ‘Standing Army’ of the UN.
Satan, er ‘Lucifer’s’, ‘liberal’ jihad international: Welcome to Helmand Province
Funny Oped by Bro. Black who spent decades as a member of the secret Freemason-Politician Bilderberg-Meetings, which have been promoting a one world Global U.N. Government scheme for the past fifty years, by manufacturing and using/abusing various ‘events’ and ‘crisises’ thoughout the world. ‘Conservative’ Black also wrote a 800 page biography on Bro. Stalin’s best bud Bro. FDR.
Guess Lord C. Harbour has had a change of heart while at Camp Coleman, at least while his new appeal is underway.
Wish he had elaborated a little more about his ‘old friend’ Bro. Maurice Strong though. Perhaps for the next dispatch from the sunshine state eh ?
National Post
July 11, 2009
Conrad Black: Capitalists celebrate capitalism’s enemies
Conrad Black, Full Comment
Last week, I wrote in this space about Corporate Knights, a magazine insert (in another Canadian newspaper) whose editorial mission consists in large part of feting tired left-wing icons. The lively response to my column brought the information that this astounding organization had a celebratory day of festivities in Toronto last month, at which its chief private-sector financial supporters were given awards as Canada’s most “sustainable” corporations. As a special reward, they all got to hear from Ralph Nader that corporations are evil and should be nationalized, and from my ineffable old friend Maurice Strong about environmental imperatives.
How can the Royal Bank, Scotiabank, Bank of Montreal, Alcan and Investors Group go through this charade? Nader’s whole career has been an anti-climax since he exposed the safety shortcomings of the Chevrolet Corvair almost 50 years ago, except for his under-recognized international benefaction of providing the margin of victory for George W. Bush over Al Gore (self-elevated inventor of the Internet), by taking 1% of the vote in the 2000 presidential election. Nader is a stuck record, background music to half-a-century of socio-economic evolution. What were hundreds of well-heeled Toronto executives and their innocent guests doing, paying through their unperceptive noses to listen to him?
Maurice Strong is, as a Monty Python narrator might say, something completely different. I have known him for 25 years and have always found him an original character and an engaging scoundrel. His corporate ethics have often been questioned by people a good deal less fastidious than Ralph Nader. Did anyone in this well-stuffed room see the irony in Nader sharing a platform in his fulminations about the evils of capitalism with one of Canada’s formerly most uninhibited corporate raiders, who moved on to plunge up to his eyeballs amid the corruption of the United Nations? Probably none of them thought of Lenin’s assertion that capitalists were so stupid and greedy that they would sell him the rope with which he would, and in many cases did, hang them. But Maurice probably did.
One of the greatest ailments of contemporary capitalism is the mousey ambiguity of most of the lions of finance. Warren Buffett and Bill Gates are two of the most ruthlessly competitive businessmen in U.S. history, which is doubtless the main reason why they are also two of the wealthiest. But Buffett seems almost to believe his own masquerade as America’s friendly Uncle Warren, all smiles and wrinkles rippling amiably out from his twinkling eyes as he sprinkles bons mots and Nebraska saws upon us like stardust. Bill Gates’s less aphoristic performance as the world’s rich altruistic nerd is a little less verbally gymnastic a walk-on part, but is well-costumed in corduroys and a viyella shirt.
Their business and dissimulative talents and their good charitable works are beyond question, but it is all almost enough to incite nostalgia for J.P. Morgan’s admittedly peevish “The public be damned!” or certainly Roy Thomson: “Why do you want to make more money, Lord Thomson?” “To buy more newspapers.” “Why do you want more newspapers?” “To make more money.” JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and Thomson Reuters are all great (and sustainable) companies, and I doubt that any of them has ever paid to listen to Ralph Nader or Maurice Strong.
The real “corporate knights” are people who stand unapologetically for something useful. Donald Trump is an unambiguous capitalist, a very high quality builder, a civically minded New Yorker who has helped the city through some difficult moments, and is personally a very generous and unpublicized philanthropist and a tenaciously loyal friend. Another is Ken Langone, who stuck with New York Stock Exchange president Dick Grasso when he was being persecuted by Eliot Spitzer, after he was deserted by his other blue-ribbon directors.
And there are Canadian corporate knights, too. Frank Stronach has a strange share structure and an unusual range of assets. He built up a splendid auto-parts business, had to rebuild it after the adoption of free-trade agreements with the United States, has had a colourful foray in gambling and entertainment and has seen off the market vulture who brought down Lehman Brothers. When opportunity knocked, he made a strong play to get Opel back from General Motors, which would establish Canadian ownership in the automobile industry for the first time since R.S. McLaughlin sold Buick to General Motors after the First World War.
Where is the outburst of public admiration for Frank Stronach, and when is the banquet to thank him for what he has done for Canada? Even Ralph Nader could not imagine that Canada would be on the cusp of such a corporate repatriation, not even when Frank’s daughter was a federal minister.
Galen Weston is one of the world’s greatest retailers, now locked in mortal combat with Wal-Mart. The Weston-Loblaw group has to carry the dead weight of Canadian unionization, kits out quality stores in always new ways, advertises and markets very imaginatively and has never had a serious quality-control problem or political controversy. The Weston family has been highly respected for 100 years, especially its present leaders, Galen and Hilary Weston and their talented son and daughter.
But the connoisseurs of corporate worthiness are taking their time saluting Weston’s defence of the Canadian food and dry goods market against the Wal-Mart monster, which floods the world with cheap and often defective Chinese products, and puts competition to the wall with its minimalist approach to sites, personnel and compensation. Apparently, they are simply too busy taking in lectures from capitalism’s enemies.
National Post
cbletters@gmail.com
David Poythress Preps for Governor’s Run ATLANTA (MyFOX ATLANTA) - David Poythress said Georgia is ready to elect a conservative Democrat as governor.
The former commander of the Georgia National Guard was the first Democrat to enter the race last summer, 10 years after his last run for the state’s highest office.
General Poythress said he spent half of his time meeting with voters and the other half raising money. Poythress said he expected he will need up to $10 million to run a strong campaign for governor.
This amount is more than six times what Poythress said he spent 10 years ago.
Michael Jackson’s Doctor Not Licensed to Prescribe Controlled Drugs in California
By Jana Winter
According to federal drug regulations, Michael Jackson’s personal physician couldn’t legally prescribe even a powerful cough medicine for the King of Pop in California, and he couldn’t go to the pharmacy to get drugs for him, either.
Federal authorities told FOXNews.com that Dr. Conrad Murray is not licensed to administer certain levels of controlled medications in the state, and that if he gave Demerol or Oxycontin to Jackson, as has been reported, it would have been illegal.
To possess the drugs in California, Murray would have had to bring them with him from Nevada or Texas, which is illegal, or administer drugs that other doctors had provided locally or that Jackson had ordered online from abroad, which is also illegal.
Murray, a cardiologist who runs a practice in Las Vegas and another in Houston, makes house calls to high-profile clients in Sin City — and in Washington and New York.
Friends and former patients say his Zen-like manner, holistic approach to healing and Chopra-esque spirituality likely contributed to the forging of his friendship with Jackson.
It was that friendship, not Murray’s specialty in cardiology, that led Jackson to chose Murray to join him on tour, Murray’s attorneys say. In May, Murray signed on in an official capacity to be Jackson’s personal physician — to the tune of $150,000 per month — for the duration of his 50-concert series in London. Murray says concert promoter AEG LIVE currently owes him $300,000, according to his attorneys.)
The money was one of the main reasons Murray decided to go on tour with Jackson, says Rev. Floyd Williams, 80, who is Murray’s friend and patient. Murray had developed a booming concierge business — he was jetting off to see patients in New York and Washington while building his practice in Las Vegas. Three years ago, Murray joined the Freemasonry, the international fraternal society that dates back to the early 17th century. His friends say this new network galvanized his growing side business.
Two Candidates For Governor Weigh-In On Masonic Controversy
Bro. David Poythress
Bro. Roy Barnes
Former Gov. Roy Barnes and David Poythress Masons, both, as well as rivals for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in Georgia - weigh-in on the controversy over alleged racism in their order as the head of Georgia Masonry says the charges submitted for trial to a Masonic “court” that spawned a civil court lawsuit and drew national attention to the matter are being dropped.
But the lawyer for the Atlanta lodge at the center of the firestorm says the civil suit isnt being withdrawn because its members believe there are continuing efforts on other fronts by some in the centuries-old brotherhood to punish them for admitting a black man as a member.
The story hit The APs national newswire on Tuesday and was featured in online editions of such newspapers as The Washington Post, The Boston Globe and the Los Angeles Times. It was reported locally by the AJC, and had been kicking around Masonic Internet blogs for more than a week.
The suit, which was filed in DeKalb Superior Court, seeks a restraining order against the Grand Lodge of Georgia, whose Grand Master the top official in Georgia - had referred to a Masonic trial the charges brought against Atlantas Gate City Lodge #2 by the heads of two other lodges for admitting a non-white man to the organization.
The suit contends there is no prohibition in the Masonic rules against the admission of a black man and that the charges spring from racial animosity and hatred It also contends the Masonic trial was being rushed toward a Star Chamber; proceeding in bad faith and questioned why the case was even proceeding when the Grand Master, himself, had declared just a few months earlier that the black Mason is a regular Mason and should be received as such
Among the remedies it seeks is an injunction prohibiting the Grand Lodge from proceeding with the original charges or under any subterfuge whatsoever that could result in expelling the lodge, its officers or members from the order.
Poythress, a Mason for more than a decade, told InsiderAdvantage Wednesday afternoon he spoke to the Grand Master after the charges hit the media. He authorized me to say that he is preparing a public statement that will definitively eliminate the question about whether a person of any race can be a member of Masonry they can
Poythress said he is certain that are some individual Masons in Georgia who are racially biased, but does not believe they represent the bulk of Masonic membership or the precepts of the organization.
Barnes said in an e-mailed statement to Insider: As stated by Grand Master Ed Jennings … there is no color or racial prohibition to be a member of the Masons. As he further noted, Mr. (Victor) Marshall was correctly admitted as a member of the Gate City Lodge. This is correct and I agree with it. I would not be a member of an organization that would exclude persons on the basis of race.
Asked why he thought the Grand Master would first issue a declaration stating that Marshall was a regular Mason but then refer to a Masonic trial the charges attempting to assert that he wasnt, Barnes, a lawyer, wrote: I dont know enough about Masonic law to be able to tell you whether it was correct. He may have had no choice. I simply don’t know.”
(Masons have been deeply involved in Georgia’s political and governmental fabric since the days of General Oglethorpe.)
But even if there is now to be no Masonic “trial,” the lawsuit in the civil courts will continue, said David Llewellyn, a member of Gate City Lodge #2 and one of its attorneys in the case.
The Grand Master’s withdrawal of the case “accomplishes one purpose of the suit but there are other (issues) involved which include the fact that this appears to be an effort to punish those of us who belong to this lodge,” he said.
Llewellyn added, “The Lodge and Brother Bjelajac (the leader of the local lodge, known as a Worshipful Master) want to make sure this isn’t a continuing effort.”
Among the group’s concerns, he said, is that a separate petition is circulating among some of the other local lodges in Georgia to convene a special session of the Grand Lodge. “It doesn’t say why, but we have reason to believe it is to revoke our charter. We believe it would be without due process.”
The attorney said the lodge hopes to settle the suit through an agreement “so that there will be clear rules that have to be followed, and people can’t punish us because they don’t like us. We also hope what comes out of the statement by the Grand Master is a recognition of truth – that Freemasonry does not discriminate on the basis of race.”
Masons perform a considerable amount of charitable work throughout Georgia, and have done so for years with little publicity because of secrecy rules governing its recognition signs and rituals. The lawsuit and accompanying publicity provides a rare look behind the curtains at internal controversy that usually is handled in private.
“Our first message for the Honduran people is of solidarity and encouragement”, affirmed Cuban President Raul Castro during the extraordinary session of the Summit of the Rio Group held in Managua, Nicaragua last Monday.
During the meeting, important agreements were approved in favor of reinstating constitutionally elected President Manuel Zelaya as the legitimate representative of Honduras, after being brutally ousted in a coup perpetrated by the right wing military serving the country’s oligarchy.
The withdrawal of Latin American ambassadors from Honduras, the cutting of oil supplies, the closure of the Honduran border with other Central American nations, a surging wave of international condemnation, the suspension of economic agreements and bank credits with the country while the power remains in the hands of the de facto government, are just some of the measures agreed on by the heads of states that attended the Managua Summit.
These are valid accords in favor of truth and democracy on behalf of the member nations of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our Americas and the Rio Group.
Meanwhile, the UN General Assembly held a session condemning the coup
and President Manuel Zelaya’s determination to return to Honduras, a
dignified gesture from someone who decided to stand alongside the humble
and challenge the hegemony of the powerful. At the time, in the land of
Francisco Morazán tanks and guns are repressing the people who do not
give up their strong protests as they stage a general strike.
Bro. O’Brien exchanged freemason secret handshakes when he joined Bro. Leno on the set for his final Tonight Show episode on Friday night. Bro. Leno was recruited to the Tonight Show to replace Freemason Johnny Carson in 1992 after many guest spot appearances. Bro. Leno supported the careers of many Freemason entertainers and politicians during his 17 year run, mirroring Bro. Carson’s masonic habits. Bro. Leno also ‘cut’ quite a few masonic recognition handsigns during his final monologue, a practice which he will no doubt continue in the fall on his ‘new’ program.
Jay Leno ended his 17-year run on NBC’s “The Tonight Show” with one for the record books. His send-off drew the highest Friday overnight ratings during his tenure on the program.
In the top 56 local TV markets, Leno scored an 8.8 rating/20 share in households, according to early data from Nielsen Media Research. That more than doubled the 3.9 rating Leno has averaged in the second quarter of this year. And it was the highest-rated “Tonight” for any night of the week since President Obama visited the program on March 19. Final ratings, including total viewer numbers, will not be available until Thursday.
“Tonight’s” ratings are being closely watched because NBC is about to undertake a risky programming experiment. On Monday, the “Tonight” slot will be taken over by Conan O’Brien, who was previously the host of NBC’s “Late Night.” And in a network bid to reduce program costs, Leno will this fall host a new prime-time talk show at 10 p.m. weeknights.
Spero News’ Mary Ann Kreitzer relates this story of a Notre Dame Barack Obama protester who was arrested for ‘belligerance’ for holding up an anti-abortion sign while police permitted pro-obama supporters free curbside motorcade access.
After six hours of joining in the protests off campus, Karen and Sonny left to begin their long ride back to Virginia. But they got turned around and pulled into the parking lot of a credit union bordering the university campus to get their bearings. As they did, they noticed a group of police cars gathering and officers putting up barricades which appeared to mark the route of the Obama motorcade. So Karen and Sonny got out and Karen pulled out her sign, a half posterboard sheet, that read, “Shame on Notre Dame!”
A few minutes later a police officer came over and told them they’d have to move back 50 feet from the road which they did even though others were standing closer. As they walked back with the officer, they objected to being singled out and asked why those walking on the sidewalk weren’t being moved back. The officer spoke into his phone and a minute later they were surrounded by cops and Karen was summarily arrested, handcuffed, hauled off, and charged with criminal trespass.
In the meantime Sonny, still in the credit union parking lot, watched as a growing crowd gathered, one person carrying a sign that read, “We’re proud of Notred Dame” and another with a sign praising Notre Dame president, Fr. Jenkins. Sonny went over to the officer who spoke to them originally and asked why Karen was arrested and these people weren’t. The officer claimed Karen “was belligerant” (if you dare to ask a question, you’re “belligerant”) and then threatened Sonny with arrest as well.
Sonny stayed in the parking lot another fifteen minutes or so and watched the officer sit in his car twenty feet from a group of about 80 people not 50 feet from the street, not ten feet, but actually sitting and standing on the curb practically in the street itself. Apparently none of those who came to worship at the feet of the abortion president was trespassing even though they gathered in the same place, even closer to the street, on ground forbidden to my friends because of Karen’s sign, an unwelcome form of speech.
Now, let’s recap this and make everything perfectly clear. Approximately 100 people ended up milling around in the same area as my friends, some much closer to the street within the forbidden 50 foot zone. But the only individual singled out for arrest FOR TRESPASSING was a woman holding a sign that said, “Shame on Notre Dame!” Those bearing signs of approval were unmolested. If this isn’t a first amendment violation and a case of false arrest I don’t know what is.
The Department of Homeland Security may have pulled their “right-wing extremist” report, but it’s clear that pro-lifers are in the sites of law enforcement who will use any pretext to shut them up and make sure the abortion president won’t be embarrassed by their signs.
Just weeks after announcing he would make the images public, administration officials said the president had told his legal advisers that releasing the photos would endanger troops.
The change of heart is thought to have come after senior military officials gave warning the release could cause a backlash against troops.
CIA ignored warnings from US soldiers that torture and extreme stress would not workMr Obama now wants the issue to go back to court, although federal appeals judges have already ruled the photos should be released.
The proposed release of the photographs had threatened to reignite the scandal surrounding Abu Ghraib prison in 2004.
It came after a legal action by the American Civil Liberties Union and followed a political firestorm over alleged torture of detainees under President George W. Bush.
The images relate to more than 400 separate cases involving alleged prisoner abuse between 2001 and 2005.
Sharafuddin Sharafyar
Reuters North American News Service
May 08, 2009 05:39 EST
KABUL, May 8 (Reuters) - Residents of two villages hit earlier this week by U.S. air strikes have prepared lists with the names of 147 people killed in the attacks, the deputy governor of the province where the strikes took place said.
Farah Province deputy governor Yunus Rasooli told Reuters residents of the village of Geraani had provided 90 names and residents of neighbouring Ganj Abad village another 57. The two villages were struck by U.S. warplanes during a battle in another nearby village on Monday and Tuesday.
Rasooli said the lists included eight school children whose names were provided by the Ministry of Education.
Abdul Basir Khairkhah, a member of the provincial government’s investigating team, confirmed that the villagers’ lists contained 147 names. He said he had seen two mass graves and more than 40 individual graves in the two villages.
Chiesa news
http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1338321?eng=y
8.5.2009
Here is the second part of an address to the plenary assembly of the pontifical academy of social sciences, delivered at the Vatican on May 1, 2009:
Obama and Blair. Messianism reinterpreted
by Michel Schooyans
The election of Barack Obama as president of the United States has raised many expectations all over the world. In the United States, the voters chose a young, mixed race, brilliant president. He is expected to keep his promise of correcting the errors of the president who preceded him. Some excessive terms have even been used, for example the assertion that the time has come to “rebuild” the United States, or to reorganize the international order. This shows the influence of Saul D. Alinsky (1909-1972), one of the intellectual guides of the new president and Hillary Clinton. There has been no lack of zeal among the dynamic new president’s admirers, who demonized the beleaguered president George W. Bush, calling for the dismantling of the politics that he developed as soon as possible. Now the Bush administration, although it did have its merits, was characterized by failures that have been acknowledged, even by the president’s inner circle. Nonetheless, on one essential and fundamental point, President Bush promoted a policy worthy of respect and continuity: he offered both unborn children and medical personnel legal protection, certainly less than sufficient but still effective.
The voters who put Barack Obama into the presidency did not perceive the weakness and ambiguity of the statements made by their candidate concerning this decisive point. Moreover, once elected, one of President Obama’s first actions was to revoke President Bush’s measures to protect the unborn child’s right to life.
President Obama is thus reintroducing the right to discriminate, to “set aside” some human beings. With him, the right of every human person to life and liberty is no longer recognized, much less protected. As a result, President Obama disputes the reasoning invoked by his fellow African-Americans when they demanded, rightly, the recognition of the right of all to the same dignity, to equality and freedom. In its prenatal version, racism has been restored in the United States.
The new president is thus dragging the law into a process of regression that is altering the democratic nature of the society that elected him. In fact, a society that calls itself democratic but whose leaders, invoking subjective “new rights,” permit the elimination of some categories of human beings, is a society that has already set out on the road of totalitarianism. According to the World Health Organization, 46 million abortions are performed worldwide each year. By revoking the legal provisions protecting life, Obama is expanding the gruesome list of the victims of criminal laws. The way has been opened for abortion to become a legal demand. The law itself can be thrown into disrepute whenever it is exploited and twisted to legalize anything whatsoever, and is put, for example, at the service of a plan to eliminate the innocent. From this point on, the reality of the human being no longer has any importance.
The evident result of the change determined by Obama is that the number of abortions in the world will increase. President Bush had cut funding for programs that involve abortion, particularly outside of the United States. The reversal of this measure by the new administration limits the right of medical personnel to conscientious objection, and allows Obama to increase funding for public and private organizations, both national and international, that develop programs of birth control, of “maternity without risk,” of “reproductive health” that include and promote abortion among their methods of contraception.
President Obama thus inevitably appears as one of the main proponents of the aging of the population in the United States and in nations that “benefit” from birth control programs that are presented as a precondition for development. How can a well-informed political leader ignore the fact that a society that aborts its children is a society that is aborting its future?
The measure taken by Barack Obama is destined to have repercussions on a worldwide level. Traditional American “messianism” boasted that it offered the best model of democracy to the world. With the permission to kill innocent people legally, this claim is growing dimmer. In its place is emerging a “messianism” that proclaims the extinction of the moral principles written in the Declaration of Independence (1776) and in the Constitution of the United States (1787). From now on, the reference to the Creator is rejected. No human reality can assert itself anymore by virtue of its intrinsic dignity. What matters now is the will of the president. According to his own words, the president no longer needs to make reference to the moral and religious traditions of humanity. His will is the source of law. What does the American congress think about this?
Now, since the influence of the United States is what matters most in international relations, bilateral and multilateral, and especially at the UN, it can be predicted that sooner or later abortion will be presented at the UN as a “new human right,” a right that permits demanding abortion. The result will be that there will no longer be any room in the law for conscientious objection. This same process will allow the president to express his desire to put other subjective “new rights” on the list, like euthanasia, homosexuality, unilateral divorce, drug use, etc.
Remake religion? Remake Christianity?
President Obama can count on support for these programs from Tony Blair and his wife Cherie Booth. One of the aims of the Tony Blair Faith Foundation, the think tank founded by the former British prime minister, will be that of remaking the major religions, just as his colleague Barack Obama will remake global society. With this purpose, the foundation in question will try to expand the “new rights,” using the world religions for this end and adapting these for their new duties. The religions will have to be reduced to the same common denominator, which means stripping them of their identity. This cannot be done without establishing international law as inspired by Hans Kelsen (1881-1973), and charged with approving all of the laws of sovereign nations. This system of law will also have to be imposed on the world religions in such a way that the new “faith” may be the unifying principle of global society. This new “faith,” this unifying principle, must allow the advancement of the Millennium Development Goals. These goals include “Promote gender equality and empower women” (number 3) and “Improve maternal health” (number 5). We know very well what these expressions cover and imply. The launching of the Foundation’s program has been announced with a campaign against malaria. This is part of goal number 6: “Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases.” The announcement was made in such a way that subscribing to this campaign will mean subscribing to the Millennium Development Goals as a whole.
In fact, Tony Blair’s project extends and amplifies the United Religions Initiative, which appeared several years ago. It also extends the Global Ethic Declaration, one of the main proponents of which is Hans Küng. This plan cannot be realized except at the price of the sacrifice of religious freedom, of the imposition of a “politically correct” interpretation of the Sacred Scriptiures, and of the sabotage of the natural foundations of law. Machiavelli had recommended that religion be used for political purposes . . .
The former British prime minister’s highly propagandized “conversion” to Christianity, as well as his interview with the gay magazine “Attitude” in April of 2009, make Tony Blair’s intentions concerning religion even more clear, beginning with the Catholic religion. The Holy Father’s statements, especially about condoms, belong to another generation. The fresh “convert” does not hesitate to explain to the pope not only what he must do, but also what he must believe! Is he Catholic? Blair does not believe in the authority of the pope.
So now we are back in the time of Hobbes, if not of Cromwell: it is civil power that defines what one must believe. Religion is emptied of its distinctive content, its doctrine; nothing remains but a residue of morality, as defined by the Leviathan. It is not said that one must deny God, but from now on God has nothing to do with the history of men and their rights: it is a return to Deism. God is replaced by the Leviathan. It is up to this to define, if it wishes, a civil religion. It is up to this to interpret, if and how it wishes, the religious texts. The question of the truth of religion no longer has any relevance. Religious texts, in particular the biblical ones, must be understood in their purely “metaphorical” sense; this is what Hobbes recommends (III, XXXVI). At the most, only the Leviathan can interpret the Scriptures. Religious institutions must also be reformed to adapt them to the changes. Some religious figures must be taken hostage and made to approve the new secularized “faith,” that of the “civil partnership.”
The rights of man as understood in the realist tradition are here put to the sword. Everything is relative. There are no rights left, except for the ones defined by the Leviathan. As Hobbes writes, “The law of nature and the civil law contain each other and are of equal extent” (I, XXVI, 4). Nothing remains of the truth, except for what the Leviathan says. It alone decides how the change should take place.
The return of the two-headed eagle
Blair’s project cannot be realized without bringing back into question the distinction and relations between Church and state. This project threatens to set us back to an age in which political power was ascribed the mission of promoting a religious confession, or of changing it. In the case of the Tony Blair Faith Foundation, this is also a matter of promoting one and only one religious confession, which a universal, global political power would impose on the entire world. We also recall that the intellectual foundations for the Blair project, impregnated with New Age thinking, were laid by the United Religious Initiative and by the Global Ethic Declaration, and it is supported by many similar foundations.
This project clearly recalls the history of Anglicanism and its foundation by “defender of the faith” Henry VIII. In effect, the realization of this project presupposes the creation of a worldwide government and a global thought police. As has been seen in the case of Barack Obama, the architects of the worldwide government are dedicated to imposing a system of legal positivism that puts law behind a supreme will, which determines the validity of particular laws. In short, if Blair’s project should ever be realized, the agents of the world government would impose, as a new Act of Supremacy, a single religion, validated by the interpreters of the supreme will, the Vicar General of which may already have been found (Hobbes, III, XXXVI).
What the analysis of Barack Obama’s decisions and Tony Blair’s project reveals is that an alliance is coming between two converging intentions, one aimed at subjugating law and the other at subjugating religion. This is the new version of the two-headed eagle. Law and religion are exploited to “legitimize” anything at all.
This twofold exploitation is deadly for the human community. This is what emerges from the various experiences that have taken place in the context of the nanny state. This, by virtue of wanting to please individuals, has multiplied subjective “rights” of attribution, for example in the areas of divorce, sexuality, the family, population, etc. But by doing this, the nanny state has created countless problems that it is incapable of resolving. With the extension of these “rights” of attribution on a worldwide scale, the problems of instability and marginalization are increased to such an extent that no world government will be able to solve them.
The same is true for religion. Since the separation of Church and state was achieved, it has been inadmissible for the state to use religion to reinforce its own dominion over hearts, bodies, and consciences. As Archbishop Roland Minnerath says, the state cannot shackle religious truth, and must even guarantee the free search for this.
Toward political-legal terrorism
Through these channels, and with the support of the Blairs, the president-jurist Obama is preparing to launch a new American messianism, in a totally secularized form. He is supported in this by his faithful colleague, a presumed candidate for the presidency of the European Union. The supreme will of the president of the United States will ratify the law of nations and the law concerning relations among nations. In his footsteps, the “Thirty-Nine Articles” of the new religion will be promulgated by his British colleague.
From the summit of this pyramid, the will of the Prince is destined to circulate through the international channels of the UN to the individual national channels. In perspective, this process, as can be guessed, extinguishes the authority of the national parliaments, abolishes the authority of the executive branch, and ruins the independence of judicial power. These are the reasons why, in Obama’s thinking, an international criminal court should have a larger role, and must be armed in order to coerce the recalcitrants – for example, the Catholics – who reject this view of power and law, of law as a servant of power. How can one not see this blinding truth: that we are witnessing the emergence of an unprecedented form of political-legal terrorism?
To finish, let us make the effort to remember that the Church does not have a monopoly on respect for the human right to life. This respect is proclaimed in the greatest moral and religious traditions of humanity, which often predate Christianity. The Church fully recognizes the value of arguments from reason in favor of human life. As Archbishop Minnerath has admirably demonstrated, the Church completes and consolidates this argumentation by drawing on the contribution of theology: respect for creation; man as the image of God; love of neighbor; the new commandment; etc. These arguments are frequently presented in the Church’s statements, and in the many Christian documents on this question.
But when the highest authorities of the nations, and even of the world’s leading power, waver on respect for fundamental human rights, it is the Church’s duty to appeal to all men and women of good will to unite for the purpose of creating a single front to defend the life of every human being. The first attitude required of all, according to the responsibilities of each one, is conscientious objection, which Obama is trying to circumscribe. But this objection must be accompanied by efforts in the political sphere, in the media and the universities. The mobilization must be general and must have the central objective of all morality, and especially all Catholic morality: to acknowledge and love one’s neighbor, beginning with the smallest and most vulnerable.
Recent Comments