H1N1 (Swine) Flu Update No 60, in Today's News 01.14.10

H1N1 (Swine) Flu. As the swine flu hoax slowly dies its miserable death, it is important to realize the disaster this thing was for the cryptocracy. They had a big campaign all planned out to accustom the population to their inoculation shot, and the result has been just the opposite: a greater public wariness of vaccines.

The Center for Disease Control and other organizers of the swine flu hoax had planned for months to launch the cryptocracy's big effort. The had the perfect bug. It resembled normal flu, so the CDC could count on people actually getting sick from the flu. They lined up leading figures to make appropriate scare statements as part of an ambitious plan to scare the daylights out of the public. They convinced local governments, the medical establishment, and community groups that swine flu was a deadly threat and that they should make appropriate preparations. All this was designed to stampeded the public into lining up without resistance for their shot(s).

And so they launched their ambitious plans. And what happened? To the great credit of the intelligence of the American people, no one bought in. Despite being hit with a barrage of propaganda, the response of the public was basically apathetic. The intensity of the propaganda only increased the receptiveness of the public to the well-founded reports of the dangers of vaccines.

Then the hoax organizers' own incompetence kicked in. First, they did not allow enough time to adequately test the swine flu vaccine. And so they had to rush through some assurances that the vaccine was really okay. The public was skeptical. Second, they failed to plan enough in advance to have adequate supplies of the vaccine available. All the scare tactics came to naught when only a few could actually get the vaccine. Third, the organizers' propaganda was so shrill and over-the-top and not conforming to reality that it became difficult for anyone to believe anything they said.

The organizers had warned that emergency rooms and hospitals would be overwhelmed. It didn't happen. The deaths that were reported from swine flu almost always were a result of complicating factors.

The organizers had businesses draw up special plans to cope with high absentee-ism. This turned out to be a colossal waste of effort.

The organizers at first advocating closing schools at the first sign of flu. Then, when they realized this action would essentially shut down the country, they hurriedly backed off and said schools should make special plans.

The number of swine flu cases was so small that the CDC had to repeatedly change their way of counting to make the 'pandemic' seem real. For example, they began counting normal flu cases as part of the swine flu count.

The final coup-de-grace was the small number of flu illnesses at all this year. 

The latest news is that governments are canceling orders for the vaccine. Germany canceled 30%. France wants to cancel 50 million doses out of 90 million. The United Kingdom, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Spain are seeking to trim orders.

Will the CDC and others admit they were wrong? Don't count on it. They will go on their merry way planning the next hoax.

The cryptocracy must be flabbergasted at the incompetence of the people they put in charge. The whole idea was to take a giant step towards making people more agreeable to accepting without protest their shots. In the long run, the crpytocracy has big plans for inoculating the public for all kinds of things, including to tranquilize large numbers. But the implementation of the plan actually set things back. People are now more critical and less willing to receive their shots.

It is not often that the cryptocracy has a set back. But here is one, and it is worth a celebration.

Gay Marriage, in Today's News 01.13.10

Gay Marriage. Today's media theme for the gay marriage case in San Francisco federal court is that the judge is "quirky," having an "unconventional approach", and "libertarian leaning."

The obvious goal here is to portray Judge Walker as independent and unbiased. His pro-gay-marriage decision therefore would have all-the-greater authority. Because the cryptocracy wants to use this trial to settle the debate over gay marriage, they are pulling all the stops to make sure the final decision is as authoritative and definitive as possible.

The media is almost conscious of their role in this. Here's a quote from the WSJ on the judge's decision on the evidence to be allowed, "While many of the judge's decisions to include far-reaching evidence in the case may seem odd...they could increase the likelihood that the court's decision stands in the long run." [Emphasis added.]

A bad omen occurred on the first day of the trial when Walker "repeatedly asked the lawyers: Why don't states 'get out of the marriage business? It would solve the problem.'" [Quote is from today's Wall Street Journal.]

Were the 'states to get out of the marriage business' it would mean that anyone and everyone could and would issue marriage licenses or certificates. Churches, community groups, private businesses, professional associations all could get in on the act. 

Such a free-for-all would in actuality mean no marriage at all because there would be no standards and no regulation. Marriage could therefore be defined any way anyone wanted.

In other words, Walker's proposal leads to exactly the situation that gay marriage would lead to: marriage meaning nothing at all.

Another bad omen on the first day of the trial: Judge Walker made clear that he doesn't think procreation has anything to do with the legitimacy of marriage. He told of a marriage of a 95-year-old and an 83-year-old, saying "I did not demand that they prove they intended to engage in procreation." In other words Walker is searching for examples and precedents that show that the traditional view of marriage doesn't stand up even today.

Opponents of gay marriage need to be aware of the trap that is being set up in this trial. A way has to be found to explain to the world that the fix is in and that the cryptocracy goal in the trial is to finish-off the issue. The lawyers in the case obviously can't say these things without undermining their standing in the court. But there are plenty of pro-family organizations who could and ought to make the point.

Beware of this trial. Broaden the fight against gay marriage beyond the legal front where the cause can get easily trapped.

Health Care, in Today's News 01.12.10

Heath Care. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement today which contains the following quote:

"Provisions against abortion and in favor of conscience protection, affordability, and immigrants' access to health care must be part of a fair and just health care reform bill, or the final bill must be opposed."

Is the reader therefore to take it that if these subjects are included the final bill it can be supported? That certainly is the implication. And that certainly is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Fully more than half the country is opposed to this awful legislation. Their opposition for the most part is against a costly bill that will institute a bureaucratic, government controlled, cost-control, rationing, protocol-laden method of medical care in place of the existing (although feebly) system of compassionate health care. The health care that Americans are used to and which was originally inspired by the thought of Jesus himself is directly endangered by this legislation.

The new system is designed to carry out the wishes of the cryptocracy to drastically cut the societal costs of health care. That means a whole new world of health care where cost restraint predominates resulting in a rationing of health care.

If passed the average person will be faced with a system where profiles dominate. That is, medical care is dispensed to those who fit the profile for the particular health care method. If one doesn't fit the profile, for age or weight or whatever reason, then he or she will have to pay extra for the care. Similarly, doctors who don't follow the profiles will be punished. The profiles will be dictated by faceless bureaucrats in the medicare establishment or from insurance companies. The decisions will be compassionless and extremely difficult to fight or appeal.

The bishops have been at working on the health care legislation for many months now, and still they can not see the most fundamental problem with the bill, a problem that is abundantly obvious to the average American. They are so anxious to be 'good guys' and 'to play the game' without rocking the boat, that they are on the verge of seeing the destruction of the system of medical care that was originally started by the Church itself, implementing the compassionate thoughts of Jesus.

The headline on an article describing the bishop efforts is "US Bishops Launch Massive Effort To Keep Abortion Out of Health Legislation." And just what is their massive effort? They propose that everyone send a letter to their congressman and senator!!!

One is compelled to wonder if they are kidding. Letter-writing is their last minute effort? These bishops couldn't lead the way down the street if they had to. Perhaps they might consider a national campaign of the rosary and prayer to appeal to God for help in stopping this terrible legislation. There are millions of American Catholics, and perhaps their political weight ought to be brought to bear on the situation. How?Through public manifestations of the faithfuls' heartfelt feelings. Through the direct lobbying efforts of every Catholic.  

In short, turn the creative energy of the faithful loose. Make clear to them that this legislation must not pass, and let them develop means to stop it.

Such efforts, of course, appear to be completely beyond the bishops' imaginative powers or their backbone. Whether they will ultimately support a legislation that overturns Catholic-inspired health care remains to be seen. The one good thing going in the situation is that the bishops' desired provisions most certainly will not appear in the legislation. So, in spite of themselves, the bishops may end up opposing the legislation. It would be for the wrong reasons, but at least they might oppose it.

 

Secularity, in Today's News 01.12.10

Secularity. Pope Benedict XVI in his address to the ambassadors to the Vatican made the following statement:

"It is clear that if relativism is considered an essential element of democracy, one risks viewing secularity solely in the sense of excluding or, more precisely, denying the social importance of religion." [Emphasis added.]

One would be justified to be astounded by the Pope's assertion. Since when did the Church consider [the Catholic] religion to be acceptable because of its social importance, as opposed to being that which saves mankind? 

It is almost as if the Pope is saying that the smooth functioning of society requires religion. Such a thought is pure sociology and has little to do with how the Church has always seen itself as the guidepost leading people to Jesus and salvation, and to the worship of the Father.

On this occasion, as on many others, the Pope seems to be acting as a 'world leader' and not as the Chair of Peter who provides spiritual direction to the faithful. His statement appears to be one of begging the other world leaders to please, oh please, let there be a role for the Church in the new world order.

But one's role is one's own decision. The Church will carve out its place in the world by what it seeks to do. Being pleasing to the powers-that-be leads to one role, and leading the faithful to imitate the way of Christ leads to another role.

******

And what is this about "if relativism is considered an essential element of democracy?" Is Benedict conceding that relativism is accepted? Benedict on numerous previous occasions has spoken against relativism. Here, though, he seems to be not contesting relativism, but only seeking a place for the Church in the relativistic world of today.

And once again these are not the words of some one leading the Church. They are the words of some one striving to be a world leader, or at least to be accepted by other world leaders.

Gay Marriage, in Today's News 01.12.10

Gay Marriage. The opponents of gay marriage would be well-advised not to put all their eggs in the basket of the US District Court case in San Francisco on California's Proposition 8.

The federal trial is a carefully contrived endeavor to end the controversy over gay marriage once and for all. The idea is to air all the arguments pro and con in a very public manner, and then render a decisive opinion in favor of gay marriage ratified by the US Supreme Court. The aim of the cryptocracy is to end the disputes over gay marriage and get on with the project to destroy western, Christian culture.

The judge in the case appears to understand his role. He went so far as to rule that the trial proceedings were to be broadcast over closed-circuit television to federal courthouses and to be posted on YouTube. The US Supreme Court had to call him to order by ruling that the broadcast could not occur. After all the idea is to promote the settling of the issue, not provoke a nation-wide debate in every major city.

And, by the way, how did the judge know that the other federal courthouses were amenable to the idea? And how did the Supreme Court get so involved so quickly in the issue? Big stakes indeed are involved here.

A good indication that the fix is in is that one of the principle attorneys for gay marriage is Theodore Olson. Olson was the solicitor general for the Bush administration. His wife was killed in 911, but before that she was a regular and consistent conservative voice on the talk show circuit. One would normally expect Olson therefore to be a defender of marriage. But as a loyal servant of the cryptocracy he is lending his authority to the cause of gay marriage. Such a presumed switch in position ought to help make the final pro-gay-marriage decision all the more decisive. 

Another indication is location of the trial in San Francisco, the capital of the gay lifestyle.

The battle to turn back gay marriage has to be a broad social struggle. A very public and ambitious drive by the Church for recruits would help tremendously, as would a nation-wide rosary and prayer campaign to ask God for help.

The pro-marriage forces need to be alert to avoiding the trap of letting the San Francisco trial become the event that definitively decides the issue.

Environmentalism and the Pope, in Today's News 01.11.10

Environmentalism and the Pope. Pope Benedict XVI, in his annual address to the ambassadors to the Vatican, emphasized environmental protection. In so doing, he aligned himself and the Church with one of the central campaigns by the cryptocracy to control world affairs.

The cynical, manipulative, Talmudic beings who control the world banking systems and who conspire daily to influence world affairs to their benefit, have two purposes in mind in sponsoring and monetarily supporting the environmental movement.

1). The cryptocracy sees the environmental movement as a key access road to a world government. Such government will first appear, as it has, in the form of international commissions that have the power to override national governments on particular issues. A conglomeration of these commissions along with the United Nations will eventually coalesce into the desired government that supersedes any other government. 

Environmentalism addresses problems that go beyond any national entity. Issues such as the alleged 'global warming,' for instance, require action by many nations acting together. As the environmentalist see it, the saving of the planet means that world-wide coordinated efforts will have to occur.

The cryptocracy, of course, could care less about saving the planet. Their long term plans are to super-exploit the planet and its inhabitants to increase their wealth. But the activity of thousands of "useful idiots" in environmental causes well serves their aims. And through the cryptocracy's power they will transform any environmental commission into a body that they control to push around individual governments.

2). The cryptocracy means to use the environmental movement to increase greatly their control over the world's population and thereby to increase their wealth. 

Steve Milloy, in his book Green Hell, has the following quote, "Green ideologues are bursting with an impatient zeal to begin dictating, through force of law, your mobility, diet, home energy usage, the size of your house, how far you can travel, and even--as we shall see--how many children you can have." In all cases this means less of whatever for everyone and more for the cryptocracy.

One of the greens' favorite expressions is to cite the need for 'behavior change' by humans to save the environment. The idea is for everyone to lead a life that suits the environmentalists, who just happen to have goals that coincide with the cryptocracy's.

Environmentalism is a perfect issue for the cryptocracy because it serves their needs yet it is difficult to oppose. Environmentalism is next to motherhood in sacredness at the present time. And there are legitimate environmental concerns in a world dominated by profit-taking.

For Benedict to declare support for environmentalism without explaining how the Christ-hating enemies of the Church plan to use the movement is a great disservice to the Church, the faithful, and the world's population. Benedict's stance allows the cryptocracy to go forward without worrying about what the billions of Catholics might do.

Benedict even goes so far as to parrot a cryptocracy theme by saying, "...the causes of the situation which is now evident to everyone are of the moral order, and the question must be faced within the framework of a great program of education aimed at promoting an effective change of thinking and at creating new lifestyles." [Emphasis added.] At least he didn't call for a world government as he did during the economic crisis! One doesn't know what Benedict has in mind for this new lifestyle, but one can be sure that the cryptocracy will use his declaration to promote their ends. 

The Church can be proud of its record on the environmental issue. Just visit any monastery, seminary or convent in the world and you will see the Catholic attitude toward caring for and developing God's creation. Moreover, the Church has always been an advocate of the simple life in accord with God's wishes for His creation. The way of living initiated by Christ's sacrifice is the most pro-environment way in the history of the world. Benedict should not shy away from saying just this.

The real enemy of the environment is the cryptocracy who have fomented a century of war and destruction during their assent to power. Humankind has never known such craven disregard for nature and people as in the twentieth century when innocent millions and millions were sacrificed to the cryptocracy's mad rush for wealth. The countless wars of the last 100 years caused unimaginable environmental damage, not the least of which was the destruction of Europe and the polluting of Russia.

Instead of 'going along' with the current trends and movements, the Church leaders ought to proudly and forthrightly state that the way of Christ is the way of saving the environment.

Gay Marriage, in Today's News 01.09.10

Gay Marriage. The Wall Street Journal today has a opinion piece titled "Washington, Gay Marriage and the Catholic Church." The point of the article seems to be to convince the Church not to do anything foolish now that the DC City Council has passed legislation legalizing gay marriage.

"By passing gay marriage, the City Council has put...the Archdiocese of Washington, in an awkward position. Either the church will have to recognize gay marriage or it will be forced to abandon a large portion of its charitable programs."

The article has the following advice to the Archdiocese, "...follow in the footsteps of Gerogetown University, the District's largest Catholic organization. There, an employee, whether gay or straight, married or not, receives full benefits for himself plus one legally domiciled member of his or her household. This would allow the archdiocese to save face by pretending it isn't knowingly recognizing gay marriage."

This gambit of placing the Church in this position has occurred in a number of places, most notably the United Kingdom. It seems to be one of the favored tactics to discredit and weaken the Church.

Will the Archdiocese take the WSJ advice and duck the whole issue? Time will tell. The history up to now has not been so great. The Archdiocese only provided "polite" opposition to the proposed legislation. "The archdiocese was not a particularly strong advocate against gay marriage in the District, but it did press for a religious exemption to be added to the same-sex marriage bill." Of course, the request for the exemption lost.

Had the Church leaders provided a principled and very public opposition complete with an educational effort on what gay marriage means to the future of the Church and country, things might be different now. The Church leaders also failed to mobilize the faithful to lobby and to prayer.

In short the Archdiocese leaders response to this deliberate provocation of the Church was pathetic; completely pathetic. 

And so, now, the Archdiocese will have to pay the consequences. It is in a lose-lose situation. And it has made itself vulnerable to pressure from the civil authorities to make nice and play along, quietly sweeping the Church's teaching under the rug.

One wonders how many times the Church will be kicked around before the Church hierarchy gets the message that there are very strong forces out there who want to destroy the Church, and that they had better do something a little more decisive to stop the attacks.