{ (Fair Use Notice ) : This web site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance the understanding of humanity's problems and hopefully to help find solutions for those problems. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. A click on a hyperlink is a request for information. Consistent with this notice you are welcome to make 'fair use' of anything you find on this web site. However, if you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. You can read more about 'fair use' and US Copyright Law at the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. This notice was modified from a similar notice at Information Clearing House.} ~~~ Xaniel777 ~~~
May 22,2010 ~ NEWS
Israel's Ongoing War Against the Press !
from www.jnoubiyeh.com/
~ JNOUBIYEH ~ 10:20 AM ~ By Michael Corcoran ~ TruthOut ~~~
The recent arrest of an Israeli journalist who allegedly leaked materials to a reporter, and the gag order that followed, is just the latest in a long string of Israel's systematic attacks on press freedom.
Today in Israel, a nation so often hailed by Western commentators as the lone shining beacon of freedom and democracy in the Middle East, sits Anat Kamm. Kamm is a 23-year-old muzzled female journalist, under house arrest for her role in exposing a secret Israeli assassination plot by leaking government documents to Ha’aretz, one of Israel's most prominent dailies. She faces the possibility of life in prison. Uri Blau, a reporter for Ha'aretz who covered the covert plot, has fled to London, fearing for his safety and freedom.
Kamm's story has been difficult to piece together, since there was a gag order that kept anyone from covering her arrest and surrounding events until April 8. Violating the gag order can carry harsh punishments, including shutting down a publication. We do know from recent reports that Kamm’s house was vandalized by Israeli settlers, and that Blau will be returning leaked documents to the government. But the details are foggy. Israel essentially made a journalist - and her story - disappear.
Dov Alfon, the editor-in-chief of Ha'aretz, acknowledged his paper is challenging the gag order and standing by their reporter, telling the UK Guardian that, “Israel is still a democracy and therefore we intend to continue to publish whatever public interest demands and our reporters can reveal."
Alfon is absolutely right to make the connection between freedom of the press and democracy. One cannot truly exist without the other, and this point is often made by staunch defenders of Israel when they attack nations such as Iran for lacking press freedom. This is precisely why this incident should be so troubling to Americans. In the US, it is often taken for granted that Israel, which receives more than $3 billion annually from the US in aid, is a true democracy, despite its harsh treatment of Arab citizens in Israel and in the Occupied Territories. President Obama has claimed that the US-Israel relationship is "mutually beneficial" as both countries "share common values, histories, and a dedication to democracy." But clearly the values are not identical. Unlike Israel, in the US freedom of press is seen as essential to a functioning democracy.
As stunning as the Kamm affair may seem, it is far from an isolated incident. Over the years, Israel, known for its restrictive military censorship laws, has become notorious for thwarting journalism in various ways: they have repeatedly barred journalists from covering certain issues, prohibited reporters from entering Gaza during Operation Cast Lead, engaged in violent attacks against foreign journalists, bombed and attacked media outlets, and jailed reporters on numerous occasions. These abuses show that, in addition to the crimes committed as part of its occupation of Palestine, Israel has shown contempt to the basic rights of Israelis as well. Worse, it lessens the ability for people all over the world to understand the important issues and events taking place in the Middle East.
Systematic Censorship: Israeli Censors in Action
Despite its glowing reputation as a strong democracy, Israel has a systematic, institutionalized system of censorship. While the country's Supreme Court has "affirmed that freedom of expression is an essential component of human dignity," according to Freedom House's annual report on press freedom, "the country’s basic law does not specifically address the issue."
All news articles are subject to censorship by the Israeli Military Censor, and while not all articles are screened, those about especially sensitive military issues, such as nuclear weapons or military actions, are watched very closely. In 1982, the New York Times published an article titled "Censorship by Israel: How It's Carried Out." It reported that Israeli military censorship "applies to foreign newspaper and wire service dispatches transmitted from Israel during both war and peacetime on military and security issues," and noted that articles on sensitive issues "are to be submitted to the censor before they are sent abroad.
This censorship has been used very recently, not only in the Kamm arrest, but also in Operation Orchard, when Israel bombed an alleged nuclear reactor site in Syria. In 2005 a BBC reporter was banned from the country for not showing the nation's censor video footage of an interview he did with nuclear whistleblower, Mordechai Vanunu.
Perhaps no issue has been as heavily censored as Israel's nuclear program. Israel is widely known to have a large stockpile of nuclear weapons, but refuses to allow any international oversight, or even admit to having them. This is rather ironic, given Israel's regular refutations of Iran for not cooperating enough with international inspectors with its nuclear program. Aluf Benn, writing in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, observed the Orwellian nature in which Israel is "censoring the past," engaging in what he calls, “an offensive … aimed at trying to conceal the country’s nuclear history, much of which has already seen the light of day." He described how Israeli officials arrested various authors who published books about sensitive issues, such as Avner Cohen, author of ”Israel and the Bomb.” Benn asks: "Is it illegal even to ask questions about nuclear matters? Do former officials have to die with their lips sealed? Is there no time limit on old secrets?" These questions reveal the extent of Israel's insistence on keeping the public from understanding the reality of its policies.
The Gaza Blackout and Restricting the Foreign Press
Israel's infringement of the press extends beyond Israeli journalists. Since Israel controls access to the Occupied Territories, it can exert a great deal of control over the ability of foreign journalists to enter the territories, and for Palestinian journalists to leave. This control over freedom of movement is one crucial way that Israel attempts to keep its actions hidden from the public.
Israel's refusal to let Western journalists enter Gaza during the 2008-09 invasion was especially disturbing, as it enabled numerous war crimes to take place with minimal press oversight. The decision was condemned by news outlets and press freedom groups all over the world, and prompted Freedom House to downgrade its status from "free" to "partly free." Not even The New York Times had a reporter in Gaza during the invasion.
The policy had the desired effect. "An Israeli official told me they were delighted at a BBC TV correspondent broadcasting from Ashkelon in a flak jacket," wrote Chris McGreal in the UK Guardian, “reinforcing the impression that the Israeli city is a war zone when there is more chance of being hit by a car than a rocket."
What the journalists did miss was the collective punishment of the "people of Gaza as a whole," concluded the Goldstone Report, a fact-finding mission of the United Nations Human Rights Council. The Goldstone Report called the war an effort to "humiliate and terrorize a civilian population, radically diminish its local economic capacity both to work and to provide for itself, and to force upon it an ever increasing sense of dependency and vulnerability."
A small sample of the carnage that most media members were unable to cover (but were chronicled by the Goldstone Report and other human rights organizations) include: the bombing of the Al-Maqadmah mosque while hundreds of people were praying inside that killed 15 people; the killing of 21 members of the al-Samouni family, including children, who were located in a house by the orders of the Israel Defense Forces; and the use of white phosphorous in attacks on two hospitals filled with filled ailing civilians. Israel also bombed the United Nations-run Al-Fakhura school, killing 35 people.
Speaking on this issue, Danny Seaman, Israel's press officer, openly expressed pleasure about how the absence off the foreign press - who he called a "fig leaf" for Hamas - greatly benefited Israel." Take the UN school [where 42 people were killed by an Israeli shell] for example," he told McGreal. "There's a lot of questions as to what actually happened. If the foreign media had been there, it would have had much more of an impact on the conflict than it has at the moment. For the first time, when Israel raised questions, journalists had to address these issues and not get caught in feeding frenzy of reporting the story."
Another example of Israel's infringing on foreign journalists was on display earlier this year when, in January, Jared Malsin, a young Yale graduate attempted to fly back to the West Bank , where he worked as an editor for Ma’an, a Palestinian agency that covers the occupation, after a trip with his girlfriend outside the country. While at Ben Gurion International Airport, he was held and interrogated for eight hours by Israeli officials, before being jailed for a week and then deported out of the country.
Malsin was guilty of merely doing his job. He was, as he described his job as the English editor of the paper, giving "voice to people who don't have a voice,” by telling stories that would otherwise go untold. Israel officials gave no real explanation for the detention and deportation, other than to acknowledge that Malsin was "criticizing the State of Israel," from “inside the (Occupied) Territories.” But few doubt the motives were political. His jailing sends a stern message to other journalists who might consider covering the plight of the Palestinians.
The move was sharply condemned by press groups throughout the world. "We condemn this intolerable violation of press freedom," said Aidan White, the head of the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), a global union of media professionals. "The ban of entry in this case appears to be as a reprisal measure for the journalist's independent reporting and that is unacceptable ... This kind of interference has no place in a democracy." Similar condemnations were made by many other groups including Reporters without Borders, the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate and the International Press Institute, which made the astute observation that Israeli "authorities should recognize that the right of press freedom applies to all journalists, not just to reporters who write favorably about Israeli government policy."
The health of Israel's democratic values have also been called further into question light of Israel's refusal to allow the entry of iconic academic and critic of US and Israeli policy, Noam Chomsky, to the West Bank from Jordan last weekend. This comes on the heels of rejecting the entrance of others who are well known for expressing critical views of Israeli policy, such as Norman Finkelstein and Richard Falk. The meaning of blacklisting critical voices and what it means for Israeli democracy is not lost on many Israeli commentators. "The decision to shut up Professor Chomsky is a decision to shut down freedom in the state of Israel," wrote Boaz Okun, Yedioth Ahronot's legal affairs commentator and a retired Israeli judge, of Israel's decision to reject Chomsky from entering the West Bank.
Violence Against the Media
Even worse than jailings and deportations, other media organizations and journalists have been violently attacked and intimidated.
On July 13, 2006, just a day into Israel's 34-day long devastating invasion of southern Lebanon, Israel bombed Al-Manar, the Beirut-based television station of Hezbollah. Even though Israel was fighting with Hezbollah, this bombing was a clear violation of international law. As Human Rights Watch noted when condemning the attack, "It is unlawful to attack facilities that merely shape civilian opinion; neither directly contributes to military operations."
Much like Israel's (along with the US) isolation compared with international consensus on solutions to the peace process, they were once again at odds with most of free world on the issue of targeting press outlets in combat.
"The bombing of Al-Manar is a clear demonstration that Israel has a policy of using violence to silence media it does not agree with,” said White, the General Secretary of the IFJ. “This action means media can become routine targets in every conflict. It is a strategy that spells catastrophe for press freedom and should never be endorsed by a government that calls itself democratic.”
Israel was so irked by White's statement they threatened to leave the organization, according to the Jerusalem Post. This is consistent with Israel's contempt for international institutions that attempt to hold Israel up to reasonable standards of transparency.
Violence against smaller groups of journalists has also been a frequent issue of late. In late January, Israeli forces attacked Rami Swidan, a photographer for Ma’an News Agency, Ashraf Abu Shawish, a cameraman for Palmedia, and Reuters photographers Abdel Rahim al-Qusini and Hassan Titi. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), Swiden said, "Israeli soldiers told the journalists they were not allowed to take pictures because the area was a closed military zone. When the journalists refused to stop, soldiers hit them and attempted to take their cameras before throwing teargas canisters and stun grenades."
The incident came just months after two other journalists were assaulted "while covering clashes between settlers and Burin’s residents,” CPJ reported. Just recently, CPJ has documented seven cases of attacks or harassment of journalists, and asked Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak in a letter to please "take decisive action to end the harassment of journalists and bring the IDF’s practices in line with international standards of press freedom, allowing journalists to conduct their work safely and without deliberate interference."
Why This Matters to Americans
Israel is not the only country to crack down on press coverage they don't agree with. But given its reputation as a democracy, which is often hailed as a major reason they are the largest recipient of US foreign aid in the world, Israel’s long record of harassment, censorship and violence against reporters is especially unfortunate.
It is crucial that journalists from other countries such as the US, which are often able to say what Israeli reporters are not, bring attention to suppressed issues in the region. Ideally, the US government would also apply pressure by threatening to withdraw military aid if it does not reform its press policies, though this seems unlikely given the US refusal to take similar measures to end settlements.
A major reason for Israel's crackdown on media is that it allows the occupation of Palestine to continue with minimal scrutiny. American taxpayers who subsidize the Israel military, and all citizens of the world who wish to expose the suffering of those on the receiving end of state violence, should fight hard to enable the truth to come to light in such an important part of the world.
April 26, 2010 ~ NEWS !
WHEN WILL ISRAEL ATTACK THE U.S..... AGAIN ??
from BushStole04.com
~~~ April 26, 2010 posted by Jeff Gates ~~~ Israel has long been waging war on the U.S. by way of deception. To date, its operatives have worked from the shadows hoping not to be detected. Their duplicity typically includes the displacement of facts with what the American public can be deceived to believe. Thus the need to create a widely held belief around Iraqi WMD, Iraqi ties to Al Qaeda, Iraqi meetings in Prague, Iraqi mobile biological weapons laboratories and Iraq’s purchase of uranium from Niger. Though all five “facts” were false, only the last claim was conceded as phony prior to inducing our invasion of Iraq. There lies our national security challenge as the groundwork is being laid for another 911. The same fact-displacing modus operandi is again at work. In the parlance of national security analysts, psy-ops specialists are “preparing the mind” to accept another generally accepted truth at odds with the facts. This time the objective is Iran. Or Pakistan. Except that this time national security is shining a bright light in the shadows where such operations are launched. The Displacement Process As a reasoning species, we depend on rationality to stay alive and thrive. That’s why the displacement of facts requires preparation. First the public’s shared field of consciousness is flooded with thoughts and impressions to ease the displacement process. A decade before the thematic Clash of Civilizations was used as a rationale to invade a nation that played no role in 911, Harvard professor Samuel Huntington published this thesis in Foreign Affairs, a publication widely read by opinion-makers. The Clash premise first appeared in the writings of Bernard Lewis, a Jewish-Zionist academic at Princeton. By the time Huntington’s book with that title appeared in 1996, 100 organizations were prepared to promote it. As that process gained momentum, the Cold War consensus was replaced by a new generally accepted truth: the Global War on Terrorism. The widespread embrace of that theme was catalyzed in September 2001 by a mass murder on U.S. soil. Such a seamless segue from one generally accepted truth to another requires both mental preparation and an emotionally wrenching event. In combination, those two influences create an ideal framework for explaining to ourselves what we now know was a pre-staged storyline. A myth need not be true; it need only be plausible—and only temporarily so. Prompted by false intelligence fixed around a predetermined goal, The Clash emerged as the latest generally accepted truth. With the rebranding of Saddam Hussein, a former ally, as a plausible Evil Doer, the stage was set. As the war began, the term “Islamo fascist” crept into the rhetoric to reinforce the theme that a new enemy had emerged—by consensus. Anyone not outraged at this mental and emotional manipulation is ill informed about the common source of this ongoing deceit. In the Information Age, this is how wars are catalyzed. And how treason is committed in plain sight and, to date, with legal impunity. The Next Provocation With chilling consistency, the Myth Makers responsible for this latest corruption of U.S. intelligence have proven adept at inducing serial conflicts that hollowed out our economy, damaged our credibility and undermined our faith in our own government. There was no Gulf of Tonkin incident, the rationale that took us to war in Vietnam. Israel was not endangered in 1967 when it began the Six-Day war. Phony intelligence rationalized a massive land grab guaranteed to provoke antagonisms that undermined our security. In rationalizing the war in Iraq, who deceived us? Who had the means, motive and opportunity? Are our minds again being prepared to wage yet another war that is not in our interest? Are we again being subjected to a seductive psy-ops as a prelude to war, awaiting only the emotional catalyst of another mass murder? The mental threads have been laid. For example, in March 2005, author Jerome Corsi published Atomic Iran urging that either the U.S. or Israel kill the “mad mullahs” of Iran. In July 2006, Corsi released Minuteman. Citing the president’s “failed immigration policy,” this Israeli asset claimed that Iran-supported terrorists are “invading from Mexico” to stage another 911. “We have definitive proof that we have Hezbollah—the terrorist group that Israel is fighting today—sleeper cells that are here.” This prepare-the-minds publication appeared two weeks after Israel invaded Lebanon to combat “Hezbollah terrorists.” Where was the book launched? If you answered Ground Zero, the 911 site in Manhattan, you understand how psy-ops experts deploy the power of association to displace facts with fictions. Such “associative” duplicity can only succeed in plain sight. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer broadcasts from “The Situation Room” with its White House-associative branding. What “the most trusted name in news” fails to tell you is that Blitzer worked 17 years for The Jerusalem Post and authored a sympathetic book on Israeli master spy Jonathan Pollard. Treason in Plain Sight The mental preparation is well advanced. The missing ingredient is another mass murder. Strongly provoked emotions are critical when staging psy-ops designed to displace facts with what “the mark” can be deceived to believe. Plus, of course, it helps to muster some evidence that plausibly links the attack to Iran or Pakistan. That will suffice. Or perhaps not. This time around, those who took an oath to defend this nation from all enemies—both foreign and domestic—may well have better tools to do their job. There is but one possible source able to sustain such operations with impunity inside the U.S. Only one nation has the requisite intelligence capabilities to operate from within our government in plain sight yet non-transparently. As yet, few dare speak its name. Instead, four-fifths of those in “our” Congress recently proclaimed themselves loyal to a foreign nation and insisted that our commander-in-chief maintain an “unbreakable bond” with what the facts confirm is an enemy within. Will the U.S. again be attacked? If so, will we focus our forces on the real enemy? Our veterans’ community is 27 million strong. Let your voice be heard. Our nation is at stake. ~~ END ~~
EVENT - July 24 - 31, 2010.
Meet David Wilcock July 24-31, 2010: 8 day Mystic England Crop Circle Tour
Day 01: Saturday, July 24 USA – LHR: Depart US Gateway on your overnight flight to London, England. Dinner served shortly after take off followed by in-flight entertainment.
Day 02: Sunday, July 25 London: Arrival into London’s Heathrow Airport. Here you’ll be met by an English Speaking Assistant and transferred to your downtown hotel. Check in to your hotel where you are then free to rest, relax or independently explore. Dinner and overnight at the Ibis Earls Court Hotel, London.
Day 03: Monday, July 26 London: After Continental breakfast at your hotel, you are completely free to discover London on your own. Dinner and overnight at your hotel. This afternoon from 2 to 6. David will be giving a formal lecture.
Day 04: Tuesday, July 27 London – Amesbury – Swindon: After breakfast at your hotel, you’ll be met by your tour escort and escorted to your coach; You will travel southwesterly via Chiswick and North Waltham to Amesbury in Southern Wiltshire. From here you’ll visit the great and ancient stone circle of Stonehenge which is one of the wonders of the worlds, a powerful witness to the once great civilizations of the Stone & Bronze Ages. On then a short distance to Swindon for your dinner and overnight at the Menzies Swindon Hotel.
Day 05: Wednesday, July 28 Swindon – Glastonbury – Swindon: After a hot buffet breakfast at your hotel, you will travel via Trowbridge, situated on the River Biss, and the Cathedral city of Wells to Glastonbury. Here you’ll view Glastonbury Tor, a hill in Glastonbury that features the roofless St. Michael’s Tower. Here you visit the holy Chalice Well located at the foot of Glastonbury Tor. This well has been in constant use for over 2,000 years. Water issues from the springs at 25,000 gallons per day and has never failed even in a drought. Return to Swindon for dinner and overnight at your hotel.
Day 06: Thursday, July 29 Swindon – Avebury – Swindon: After a hot buffet breakfast at your hotel, you’ll travel the short distance to Avebury. Here you’ll visit the Avebury Stone Circle, this is the largest stone circle in the world, and it covers an area of 28 acres and is about 5,000 years old. Then a view of the Silbury Hill Ancient Site, the largest artificial mound in Europe. The original purpose is unknown but continued exploration demonstrates its importance through time. Here at Silbury Hill a visit to the Neolithic tomb, the West Kennett Long Barrow. Finally a view of the Windmill Hill Camp, a famous causeway camp, used as a communal gathering place for religious observances. Return to Swindon for your dinner and overnight.
Day 07: Friday, July 30 Swindon – Salisbury - London: After breakfast you’ll depart Swindon and travel via Salisbury, located on the banks of the River Avon. A city known for its Cathedral which has the tallest spire of all English cathedrals (404 Feet). On then to London, where you’ll bid farewell to your tour escort, as you check into your hotel. Remainder of your day on your own. Dinner and overnight at the Ibis Earls Court Hotel, London. This evening David will be giving a formal lecture.
Day 08: Saturday, July 31 London – USA: After Continental breakfast at your hotel, with English Speaking assistant you will be transferred to the airport for your flight home. Arrive home the same day.
Your Tour Will Include:
Six (6) Nights First Class Hotel Accommodations, rooms with private facilities
Continental Breakfast while in London, hot buffet breakfast outside London, except day of arrival
Six (6) Hotel dinners
Visits/admissions to: Stonehenge, Chalice Well, Avebury Stone Circle, West Kennet Long Barrow
City tour of Amesbury, Half day sightseeing tour of Glastonbury, and full day sightseeing tour of Avebury.
Round trip local transfer service with assistant for pick up and drop off (Airport – Hotel – Airport)
Long distance touring vehicle to begin services and tour escort from July 27 to drop off at London hotel on July 30, 2010
Porterage of one (1) suitcase per person
Tips and taxes in England. Note: Gratuity to the driver and tour escorts, etc. is not included.
Celtic Tours flight bag and portfolio of travel documents
Lectures by David Wilcock
Price $ 2,299.00 per person land only, airfare to England not incl
Deposit of $300.00 per person due at sign up., Final pay due May 24, 2010
Final payment due May 24th, 2010
Initial deposit $ 300.00 non refundable
Cancellations 30 to 60 days out 50% non refundable
Cancellations within 30 days 100% non refundable
*Please note, the activities in the schedule may be moved to allow for spontaneous crop circle investigation. It is David’s intention to experience and investigate a crop circle during this trip.
Contact Kevin Fitzgerald at betravelsavvy@aol.com betravelsavvy@aol.com or call (805) 587-7734 for more information.
Bible Fraud - What was the Church Afraid of? ~ by Robert Adams ~ New Dawn Magazine. ~~~ When I first spoke to a close Christian friend of mine about the publishing of Tony Bushby's The Bible Fraud, her reaction was one that many Christians have expressed, and one that made me aghast. She didn't want the book available because it would "persuade them away from the Bible and the word of God." Further discussions with her and many other Christians around the world about The Bible Fraud all result in the Bible being quoted as the ultimate reference for the apparent "words of God," and therefore the basis for their arguments. The problem lies in that they believe the Bible is infallible.
If we examine the oldest known Bible to date, the "Sinai Bible" housed in the British Museum (I believe that, during his many years of research, Tony had a private viewing of this priceless book), we find a staggering 14,800 differences from today's Bible and yet it still remains the word of God?
As Tony points out, the history of our 'genuine' Bibles is a convoluted one. Firstly we cannot be sure that we have the full version as it was originally intended. In 1415 the Church of Rome took an extraordinary step to destroy all knowledge of two second century Jewish books that it said contained the true name of Jesus Christ. The Antipope Benedict XIII firstly singled out for condemnation a secret Latin treatise called "Mar Yesu" and then issued instructions to destroy all copies of the book of Elxai. The Rabbinic fraternity once held the destroyed manuscripts with great reverence for they were comprehensive original records reporting the life of Rabbi Jesus.
Later, Pope Alexander VI ordered all copies of the Talmud destroyed, with the Spanish Grand Inquisitor Tomas de Torquemada (1420-98) responsible for the elimination of 6,000 volumes at Salamanca alone.
Solomon Romano (1554) also burnt many thousands of Hebrew scrolls and, in 1559, every Hebrew book in the city of Prague was confiscated. The mass destruction of Jewish books included hundreds of copies of the Old Testament and caused the irretrievable loss of many original handwritten documents.
The oldest text of the Old Testament that survived, before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls" was said to be the Bodleian Codex (Oxford), which was dated to circa 1100 AD. In an attempt by the church to remove damaging Rabbinic information about Jesus Christ from the face of the earth, the Inquisition burnt 12,000 volumes of the Talmud.
In 1607, forty-seven men (some records say fifty four) took two years and nine months to re-write the Bible and make it ready for press. It was, by the order of King James, issued with a set of personal 'rules' the translators were to follow. Upon its completion in 1609, it was handed over to the King James for his final approval. However, "It was self evident that James was not competent to check their work and edit it, so he passed the manuscripts onto the greatest genius of all time... Sir Francis Bacon"
The first English language manuscripts of the Bible remained in Bacon's possession for nearly a year. During that time ... "he hammered the various styles of the translators into the unity, rhythm, and music of Shakespearean prose, wrote the prefaces and created the whole scheme of the Authorized Version. At the completion of the editing, King James ordered a 'dedication to the King' to be drawn up and included in the opening pages. He also wanted the phrase 'Appointed to be read in the churches' to appear on the title page.
The King James Bible is considered by many today to be the 'original' Bible and therefore 'genuine' and all later revisions simply counterfeits forged by 'higher critics'. Others think the King James Bible is 'authentic' and 'authorized' and presents the original words of the authors as translated into English from the 'original' Greek texts. However, as Tony points out, the 'original' Greek text was not written until around the mid fourth century and was a revised edition of writings compiled decades earlier in Aramaic and Hebrew. Those earlier documents no longer exist and the Bibles we have today are five linguistic removes from the first bibles written. What was written in the 'original originals' is quite unknown. It is important to remember that the words 'authorized' and 'original', as applied to the Bible do not mean 'genuine', 'authentic' or 'true'.
By the early third century, it became well noted that a problem was occurring . politics! In 251AD, the number of Presbyter's (roving orator or priest) writings had increased dramatically and bitter arguments raged between opposing factions about their conflicting stories. According to Presbyter Albius Theodoret (circa 255), there were "more than two hundred" variant gospels in use in his time. In 313, groups of Presbyters and Biscops (Bishops) violently clashed over the variations in their writings and "altar was set against altar" in competing for an audience and territory.
When Emperor Constantine conquered the East in 324, he sent his Spanish religious advisor, Osius of Cordoba, to Alexandria with letters to several Biscops exhorting them to make peace among their own. But the mission failed and Constantine, probably at the suggestions of Osius, then issued a decree commanding all Presbyters and their subordinates "be mounted on asses, mules and horses belonging to the public and travel to the city of Nicaea" in the Roman province of Bithymia, the country of Asia. The Presbyters were instructed by the Emperor to bring with them the manuscripts from which they orated to the rabble (that's us!) "wrapped and bound in leather".
Constantine saw in this developing system of belief the opportunity to make a combined state religion and protect it by law. The first general church council was thus convened and the year was 325.
On 21 June, the day of the Summer Solstice, (and under those cult conditions) a total of 2048 "presbyters, deacons, sub-deacons, acolytes and exorcists" gathered at Nicaea to decide what Christianity really was, what it would be, what writings were to be used and who was to be it's God.
Ancient church evidence established that a new 'god' was to be approved by the Roman Emperor and an earlier attempt (circa 210) to deify either Judas Khrestus or his twin brother Rabbi Jesus (or somebody else) had been 'declined'. Therefore, as late as 325, the Christian religion did not have an official god.
After a long and bitter debate, a vote was finally taken and it was with a majority show of hands that Judas Khrestus and Rabbi Jesus both became God (161votes for and 157 votes against). The Emperor effectively joined elements of the two individual life stories of the twin brothers into a singular creation. The doctrine of the Celtic / British church of the west was democratically attached to the Presbyters stories of the east.
A deification ceremony was then performed 'Apotheosis'. Thus the deified ones were then called 'saviours' and looked upon as gods. Temples, altars, and images with attributes of divinity were then erected and public holidays proclaimed on their birthdays.
Following the original example set by the deification of Caesar, their funerals were dramatized as the scene of their resurrection and immortality. All these godly attributes passed as a legal right to Emperor Constantine's new deity, Jesus Christ.
The Emperor then instructed Bishop Eusebius to compile a uniform collection of new writings "bound together as one" using the stories from the large collection of Presbyters as his reference source. Eusebius was to arrange for the production of "fifty sumptuous copies ... to be written on parchment in a legible manner, and in a convenient portable form, by professional scribes thoroughly accomplished in the art". This was the first mention of finished copies of a Christian 'New Testament' in the history of mankind.
As one can imagine, to condense the real life of the Jesus Christ, the Church and His teachings with supporting evidence into a short article is very difficult. It is therefore wise for those who wish to have supportable evidence to read and study Tony Bushby's epic work, The Bible Fraud, along with it's detailed blood lines (family trees) and over 869 references. (see www.thebiblefraud.com)
However, attempting to summarize what Tony has written..... in 325 AD, the first Christian council was called at Nicaea to bring the stories of twin brothers, Jesus 'the Rabbi' and Judas Khrestus into one deity that we now know as Jesus Christ. Tony says they were not born of virgin birth but to Nabatean Arab Mariamne Herod (now known as the Virgin Mary) and fathered by Tiberius ben Panthera, a Roman Centurion. The brothers were raised in the Essene community and became Khrists of their faith. Rabbi Jesus later was initiated in Egypt at the highest of levels similar to the 33rd degree of Freemasonry of which many Prime ministers and Presidents around the world today are members. He then later married three wives, one of whom we know as a Mary Magdalene, a Druidic Princess, stole the Torah from the temple and moved to Lud, now London.
Tony believes the reason Jesus stole the Torah was that he said it contained "a very special secret", which he was going to reveal that secret to the world. He was stoned to death and the Torah taken from him before he could.
The elder brother, Judas Khrestus, with his "Khrestian" followers conspired to take the throne of Rome, his royal birthright, and was captured, tried, and was sentenced to be crucified. (The "Khrestians" and the Essenic army, the Nazarenes, would today be likened to terrorists.) At the trial, Judas exercised his royal birthright to have a replacement in Simon of Cyrene (Luke 23:41) and then was sold as a slave to live out his days as a carpenter in India.
Rabbi Jesus spent a considerable amount of time at the Palace of the British in Rome and sometime around 48 AD, he left for Egypt to pursue his greatest esoteric goal. The spiritual knowledge from his secret education in the Essene and Druid movements was soon to be elevated to the highest level possible - initiation into the innermost rite of the Egyptian temples.
It was probable that Rabbi Jesus' earlier initiation into both the Essene and Druid schools played a major part in his acceptance into the Egyptian school. The Druids could claim a very early origin and the essence of their wisdom was also that of the Essenes. In the case of the Essenes, it is possible to show that their movement was specifically established to preserve secret information, for they knew and used the sacred writing of the Initiates. The full meaning of the point being made by Bushby is that in the case of all Secret Schools, the inner and ultimate Mystery was revealed only to a High Initiate.
Those who were initiated into the Ancient mysteries took a solemn oath never to reveal what had passed within the sacred walls. Every year only a comparatively few Egyptian initiations were conducted, and the number of persons who knew their secrets was never at any time large. The initiations always took place with the onset of darkness and the candidate was entranced for periods of varying length, depending upon the level of the degree for which he had entered.
The first initiatory step involved a forty-day procedure that basically involved purification, not only in physical form, but dissolving all tendencies to evil thoughts, purifying the mind as well. It appears that he would have fasted, alternatively on vegetables, juices and very special herbal concoctions.
The New Testament recorded that this happened to Rabbi Jesus who "was led into the desert.... and he fasted forty days and forty nights" (Matt. 4:1-2).
This trial period involved more than just fasting. During the forty days and nights' ordeal, Tony says the candidate was required to study astronomical charts to supplement his skills in astronomy and memorize charts of the heavens. They were also given a particular ritual from which to memorize certain passwords, secret signs and handclasps, skills that are still practiced to this day in Freemasonry.
These initiations were not limited to Egypt. The ancient civilizations inherited these Mysteries from a remote antiquity and they constituted part of a primitive revelation from the gods to the human race. Almost every people of pre-Christian times possessed its institution and tradition of the mysteries. The Romans, the Druids of Britain, the Greeks, the Cretans, the Syrians, the Hindus, the Persians, the Maya and the American Indians, among others, had corresponding temples and rites with a system of graduated illuminations for the initiates.
The modern world knows little of these ancient rites yet they were conducted in a huge variety of buildings the world over.
The 'Towers' that are found throughout the East in Asia were directly connected with the Mystery-initiations. The candidates for initiation were placed in them for three days and three nights, whenever there was no temple with a subterranean crypt close at hand.
In this aspect of the initiatory procedure, Tony points out a direct Gospel parallel with Rabbi Jesus saying, "After three days I shall rise again", for he knew the finishing process he was to undertake would take three days being a symbol of the period of time required to complete a condition of development. The ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic texts speak of an initiate as 'twice-born', and he was permitted to add to his name the words 'he who has renewed his life', so that on some ancient tomb-inscriptions archaeologists still discover these phases descriptive of the spiritual status of the deceased person.
So little did the later Gospel writers understand the initiatory process that they never perceived they were developing a story that included a Rabbi's (and Arch Druid of Britain) experience in an Egyptian Mystery School.
St Austin (c. 380) asserted that it was generally known in church circles that Rabbi Jesus had been initiated in Egypt, and that "he wrote books concerning magic". In the Gospel of Nicodemus, the Jews brought the same accusation before Pontius Pilate, "Did we not tell you he was a magician?" Celsus (c. 178) spoke of the same charge. In the Clementine Recognitions, the accusation was brought against Rabbi Jesus that he did not perform any miracles but practiced magic and carried about with him the figure of a seated skeleton.
Jewish tradition invariably asserted that Rabbi Jesus learned 'magic' in Egypt. Bushby says the kernel of this persistent accusation may perhaps be reduced to the simple historical element that Rabbi Jesus went to Egypt and returned with far wider and more enlightened views than those of his former religious associates.
Now, I'm sure that many of you are having trouble grasping some of the ideas presented in this article and I congratulate you on taking the effort to read this far. We all need to demand our local Church, the Church scholars, theologians and media make an open examination of the evidence compiled in Tony Bushby's The Bible Fraud. It may rattle some core beliefs but what is more important to you . the truth or what sits comfortably because it's what you've known all you life?
I leave you with a quote from one of the conspirators
"How well we know what a profitable superstition this fable of Christ has been for us." Pope Leo X (1513-1521)
Article first published in New Dawn Magazine No 71, March 2002
NEWS TO REMEMBER :
DEATH AVOIDABLE ~ fro Remember Denise.org. On the morning of November 6, 2007, a dozen or so armed agents/officers wearing flak jackets and with guns showing, from and/or associated with the Criminal Division of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), served a search warrant on the Fort Wayne, Indiana residence of Jim and Denise Simon, while Jim Simon was working in Europe. Denise, at the time, was home preparing her youngest child, a ten year old daughter, for school. The extensive search continued from early morning until late into the evening. Denise was so affected by the events and the deplorable treatment of her by the agents that three days later, on November 9th, she took her own life. She left a typewritten suicide note which stated:
"I am truly innocent of any attempt to evade taxes, launder money, commit fraud or the other things I am being accused of … I also have no faith in the legal system or the ability of the government to seek the truth." Written in her own hand under the typed portion of the note, Denise further wrote, "With my dying breath I swear Jim and I are innocent."
The Simons were completely blindsided by the aggressive actions of the IRS, as they had not been contacted by any government representative about any legal concerns before the raid, nor had they received any summons or subpoenas requesting documents or questions to be answered. They had not been in trouble with the federal government before with their taxes or with regard to any other federal law for that matter. They simply were unaware the IRS had any concerns about their income tax returns. Immediately following the raid, the Simons hired an attorney to advise them and in particular seek out information as to what triggered the IRS investigation and what accounted for the unexplained excessive aggression of the IRS. Inquiries were made about the basis of this.
WHAT HAPPENED?:
Let others know what can happen to them. Place our website on your other favorite social web sites, like Face Book. The more people know about what happened to Denise Simon, the more that can be done to protect all of us from experiencing the same horror.
Tell us YOUR story. We are interested in learning about
any "surprise" IRS searches; searches which were not preceded by audit notice, subpoena and/or summon. Write to us at
info@rememberdenise.org
.
Court Filings &
Legal Documents
On the morning of November 6, 2007, a dozen or so armed agents/officers wearing flak jackets and with guns showing, from and/or associated with the Criminal Division of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), served a search warrant on the Fort Wayne, Indiana residence of Jim and Denise Simon, while Jim Simon was working in Europe. Denise, at the time, was home preparing her youngest child, a ten year old daughter, for school. The extensive search continued from early morning until late into the evening. Denise was so affected by the events and the deplorable treatment of her by the agents that three days later, on November 9th, she took her own life. She left a typewritten suicide note which stated "I am truly innocent of any attempt to evade taxes, launder money, commit fraud or the other things I am being accused of … I also have no faith in the legal system or the ability of the government to seek the truth." Written in her own hand under the typed portion of the note, Denise further wrote, "With my dying breath I swear Jim and I are innocent."
The Simons were completely blindsided by the aggressive actions of the IRS, as they had not been contacted by any government representative about any legal concerns before the raid, nor had they received any summons or subpoenas requesting documents or questions to be answered. They had not been in trouble with the federal government before with their taxes or with regard to any other federal law for that matter. They simply were unaware the IRS had any concerns about their income tax returns. Immediately following the raid, the Simons hired an attorney to advise them and in particular seek out information as to what triggered the IRS investigation and what accounted for the unexplained excessive aggression of the IRS. Inquiries were made about the basis of this conduct to no avail.
Soon thereafter, Attorney Frank Gray filed a motion in the United States District Court requesting Judge Springmann to unseal the probable cause affidavit used to obtain the search warrant. The U.S. Attorney’s Office eventually agreed and filed its very own motion to unseal the probable cause affidavit. The Court approved the unsealing of the probable affidavit commenting that the motion to unseal was "well taken", and an order to unseal was issued and received on June 28, 2008.
In reviewing the probable cause affidavit submitted by agent Paul Muschell, professionals were astounded to find what they consider to be numerous factual and legal errors, clear misrepresentations, and testimony which appeared to them to deliberately mislead the Court. In the opinion of the professionals, the affidavit not only failed to present a case of reasonable probable cause, it failed to provide the essential information necessary for the Court to make a proper judicial determination as to whether a search warrant should be issued. The mere fact the affidavit’s “conclusion” is one long “run on phrase,” and not a grammatically complete sentence, supports a common view that the affidavit was not even appropriately and carefully reviewed before its submission to the Court.
The fact that the investigating agent (Special Agent Paul Muschell) was allowed to continue to head the case investigation for more than two years after Denise’s death (the point at which he arguably became personally interested in the outcome of the case) is a truly troubling fact …troubling enough to raise serious issues of possible additional wrongful conduct by various IRS supervisors and managers. Astoundingly, Muschell continued to work the case as late as of February 2, 2010, long after the impropriety of his involvement was pointed out to the government.
Disappointingly, the probable cause affidavit did not reveal what triggered the IRS investigation. Moreover, all Jim Simon’s subsequent efforts and requests to obtain information through the Freedom of Information Act failed and/or were denied. In April of 2009, notice was given to the United States government that it was liable for, among several things, the wrongful death of Denise Simon. The government denied these claims in September of 2009. On October 30, 2009, on behalf of the Simon family, a lawsuit was filed against three IRS agents, and an unknown number of unknown individuals, for, among other things, the violation of constitutional and due process rights.
What happened to Denise Simon and her family is truly horrific and tragic. But sadly it appears the Simons’ experience is just one example of a persistent systemic problem within the IRS, a problem that has concerned Congress for over a decade.
In 1999, shortly after Congress passed the Internal Revenue Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, which was expected to curb improper collection efforts and other problems within the IRS, a task force, known as the Webster Task Force (also known as the Webster Commission), was formed at the request of the then new IRS Commissioner. That task force conducted “…an independent review of CI (Criminal Investigation) and assess(ed) Cl's effectiveness in accomplishing its mission as the Service's criminal enforcement arm.” On April 9, 1999, the Webster Task Force reported its findings and listed 25 important specific recommendations for improvement of CI. Among the findings of the Webster Task Force was the following:
Unlike other federal law enforcement agents, CI Special Agents may employ only the “least intrusive means” necessary to investigate their cases effectively. Although search warrants are appropriate and often indispensable tools in the investigation of allegations of tax violations, CI agents do not routinely make detailed analyses of whether search warrants are the least intrusive means necessary to investigate their cases.
The Webster Task Force went on to recommend:
CI agents who wish to seek search warrants should produce a thorough written evaluation as to why conducting a search in the case is the least intrusive means necessary to obtain evidence.
Although the Webster Task Force stated that they found no evidence of systemic abuse by CI of search warrant authority, clearly, the Webster Task Force was concerned about abuse and/or the potential for abuse because it stated in its report:
The issue of whether CI is abiding by its own internal policy of employing minimally intrusive means in all cases, and whether it is making the additional assessment required by IRM 9.4.6.1 in tax and tax-related cases, was raised by a number of sources. The Commissioner asked that the use of search warrants be evaluated to determine whether “CI is adhering to the IRS policy of employing the least intrusive investigative techniques possible …” The Senate Finance Committee raised these same issues. Additionally, members of the American Bar Association Section of Taxation claim that CI agents are applying aggressive tactics from non-tax cases to tax investigations, ignoring the requirement that an assessment of intrusiveness be made.
The Webster Task Force also found that:
Fewer than 25% of the affiants interviewed (by the Task Force) were able to articulate a specific necessity for the search warrant…. Frequently, Special Agents stated that search warrant decisions were justified because the Assistant United States Attorney and the United States Magistrate Judge agreed with the agent’s assessment that probable cause existed. While this adequately meets the legal threshold, it is not the sole determinate under CI internal policies of whether a search warrant is appropriate in a particular case. No agent stated, nor was there any documentation to show, that the evaluative criteria of IRM 9.4.6.1 were considered, or that any other determination was made that the use of the warrant satisfied IRS policy.
The Webster Task Force concluded on this issue:
…there is insufficient evidence that CI has consistently assessed the relevant intrusiveness criteria prior to acquisition of the search warrants. It must do so, and must document it. While this may make the search warrant process more cumbersome, it is the only way to ensure compliance with IRS policy.
The IRS subsequently adopted the Webster recommendations. In mid 2001, TIGTA (Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration) audited the IRS to ascertain how well the IRS had implemented the Webster recommendations. TIGTA reported in June 2001 that the IRS had satisfactorily implemented all but three of the 25 recommendations. One of the recommendations which were not properly or fully implemented was the Webster Task Force’s recommendations concerning search warrants and specifically the use of search warrants only as the least intrusive method of gathering evidence as required by IRS policies.
Specifically, TIGTA reported:
Criminal Investigation Management Needs to Monitor Special Agents’ Search Warrant Activities
The CI function needs to enhance its existing practices to ensure special agents’ search warrant activities are appropriately monitored. This process must be effective to ensure special agents’ use of search warrants is the least intrusive means necessary to obtain evidence. The CI function has not required periodic reviews to ensure the consistent preparation of search warrant and risk assessment documentation. Periodic reviews of search warrant documents are essential to ensure that the CI function is not at risk of jeopardizing its criminal investigations. Search warrants are used to obtain evidence of potential violations of the federal internal revenue laws under the CI function’s jurisdiction. To obtain a search warrant, law enforcement agencies must show that there are sufficient facts and circumstances to believe that a crime was or is being committed and the property subject to seizure is on the premises to be searched (probable cause). The IRS policy requires the CI function to determine whether the use of a search warrant is less intrusive than a wiretap or any other method used to obtain the evidence.
The Webster Commission reviewed the CI function’s use of search warrants and concluded there was insufficient documentation that the CI function had consistently assessed whether the use of search warrants conformed to the IRS’ policy of using the least intrusive means to obtain evidence. The Webster Commission recommended that the CI function establish procedures for a thorough written evaluation on the use of search warrants, a written approval process with the Special Agent-in-Charge (SAC) as the approving official, and uniform classification of risks. In addition, the Webster Report recommended that the preparation of a post-operational memorandum identifying and quantifying the force actually employed during the execution of the search warrant be mandated and that a uniform policy for file maintenance be established. The CI function took steps to address the concerns raised by the Webster Commission. For example, in November 2000, the CI function completed a review of search warrants issued between October 1, 1999, and February 29, 2000. The CI function concluded that adequate documentation was not prepared to support the use of search warrants as the least intrusive means to obtain the evidence, the Risk Assessment Guide was often inadequately completed, and use of the Post Enforcement Operation Summary Form was optional rather than mandatory. The Chief, CI, took immediate action to notify the CI executives and managers of the problems identified concerning the lack of documentation on intrusiveness and the minimizing of risk. To eliminate confusion, the Chief, CI, also issued instructions to the SACs making the use of the Post Enforcement Operation Summary Form mandatory. Without sufficient documentation, the CI function cannot ensure the IRS Commissioner or the public that its use of search warrants is the least intrusive means for obtaining evidence.
Conclusion:
The IRS has had eight years to “get it right” when it comes to the use of search warrants: April 1999 (date of the Webster report) to November 2007 (date of Denise Simon’s death). However, they failed to get it right …and in spite of the criticism reflected in the 2001 TIGTA audit report. At this time not all the facts are known. For example, it is not known if the special agent in the Simon case did or did not make a determination that a search warrant was the least intrusive method to obtain evidence (as required by IRS policy); or if he did make a determination, whether he documented it; or if he did make a determination and did document it, that his determination and documentation was properly reviewed by others. What is known is that the IRS did not use the least intrusive means of investigation, as required by the IRS’s own policies. It is known because the IRS did not contact and inform the Simons of any of their concerns before the raid. The Simons did not receive any requests for information from IRS investigators before the raid, and no summon or subpoena was served upon the Simons before the raid. (Even today, more than two years after the raid, the IRS has not sought any information directly from Jim Simon or other surviving family members). It is believed that if the least intrusive means necessary were used, the Simons would have responded appropriately, no search warrant would have been sought and issued, and most importantly, Denise Simon would most likely be alive today. And, the untold pain and suffering experienced by Denise Simon and her family would have been avoided.
Despite the fact the IRS has denied Simon's requests for information, enough is now known to reasonably conclude that the actions taken by the IRS, which led to Denise’s death, were wrongful and unnecessary. And, it is fair to conclude that the Simon family members, and in all likelihood untold other citizens across our country, are victims of a serious systemic problem within the IRS, a problem identified and voiced by the American Bar Association, the Senate Finance Committee, the Commissioner of the IRS, the Webster Task Force, and TIGTA over 10 years ago.
As matters stand today, Congress and TIGTA agree that search warrants should be used only when less intrusive means are not available. IRS policy even reflects such agreement. However, we know today that the policy is not being appropriately monitored and enforced as evidenced by the death of Denise. Moreover, we know that IRS agents are aware that they are free to ignor the IRS policy to utilize least intrusive methods necessary because agents Muschell, Porter, and Patton in their February 26, 2010 answer to the Simon suit against them (paragraph 26) state that the IRS "Manual is for internal guidance and does not confer substantive rights." ...Unless something is done, more suffering and abuse lies in wait to harm more citizens.
One possible solution to the problem would be to require the IRS as a matter of law, to conduct a stringent review of all search warrant applications by special agents to assure that if granted the search warrants would constitute the least intrusive method of investigation, as is the policy of the IRS. We suggest more specifically that (1) each special agent’s request and affidavit for search warrant be reviewed by the agent’s group manager, the special agent in charge (SAC) and the Assistant United States Attorney assigned to the case; and (2) that each of these individuals be required to prepare written documentation and an affidavit attesting to the fact that they reviewed the affidavit and have properly and independently determined that the request for search warrant is proper and meets all of the IRS’ requirements and policies, including a factual finding that the issuance of a search warrant is indeed the least intrusive method of investigation available to the IRS. Moreover, we support enactment of federal law so that any failure to follow proper procedures (by any individuals involved in reviewing, processing, and/or approving an IRS search warrant application) would constitute a federal crime. Additionally we support enactment of federal law which would require, that in the event there is a judicial determination that less intrusive means were available to the IRS and were not fully utilized prior to applying for a search warrant, any search warrant so obtained would be deemed wrongfully obtained, and any and all evidence obtained from (or led to) as a result of such wrongfully obtained search warrant would be inadmissible in any proceedings against any taxpayer.
Certainly, what should not stand is the current situation in which the IRS on one hand assures the public and Congress that taxpayers are protected by IRS policy as stated in the IRS Manuel, which mandates the use of least intrusive means necessary, while on the other hand the IRS willfully fails to monitor and enforce that very same policy. Such failure to appropriately monitor and enforce its own policies constitutes a most serious violation of the public trust and an outragious wrongful assault on the rights of all citizens. If Congress had adequately addressed this problem in 1999, when the Webster Report was published, or in 2001, when the TIGTA Audit Report was published, Denise Simon would most likely be alive today.
What can be done? Support an enactment of a new federal law; a law that will assure you and no one else, will ever suffer, at the hands of the IRS, the horror suffered by Denise Simon and her family. If new federal law is enacted and the IRS, as a matter of law, is required to simply enforce its own policy (to use the least intrusive means necessary when conducting investigations), Denise Simon’s death will not have been in vain and all our rights will be better protected.
NEWS~ 03,April 2010.
Saturday, April 03, 2010 -
The Ethics of Tax Resistance. From the Daily Bell by Dr.Tibor Machan.
Governments hate it when you succeed at escaping their tyrannical reach and so we have been witnessing extensive efforts by the feds to curtail tax dodging and avoidance. This has led to some considerable pressure exerted on banks in Switzerland, Lichtenstein and other places with serious bank secrecy laws, to release the names of those who bank there hoping to escape the IRS. (The U. S. government wields not only military might!) Extorting money from the citizenry is the bread and butter of governments. No serious effort has ever been made even in America to find and implement ways of funding the legal system without using extortionist methods. Yet, how could one have an unalienable right to one's life and liberty and such while government puts a gun to one's head saying, "Your money or you go to jail"?
Tax resistance may be morally defended on grounds nearly identical to resisting any kind of aggression against oneself. If one is accosted on some city street and threatened, one has the right to defend oneself. The right of self-defense is derivable from the basic right one has to one's life, one that rests on one's nature as a human being as a moral agent. If one carries on in one's life peacefully and is nonetheless attacked, one is justified – has the right to – resist. This also holds if the attack is aimed at confiscating one's resources, even if one misuse these – wastefulness may not be criminalized in a free society unless it involves dumping, imposing it on others, as in pollution.
Government sanction of conscription may, even ought to be resisted. Draconian cases could be cited here, involving slaves or concentration camp victims taking measures to escape. There is no moral doubt about whether resisting being subjected to these is ethically justified (although in nearly all such cases government apologists defend themselves via either the doctrine of implied collective consent or invoking some "greater good")! The gist of the errors of such systems can be seen in the Declaration of Independence where instead of governments, it's individuals who have sovereignty. Or, in other words, instead of divine rights for monarchs, it's individual human beings who have basic, unalienable rights, including to their lives, liberty and property (the term Thomas Jefferson used in an early draft based on the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which referred to "property and pursuing happiness.").
Taxation, which is extortion, has no place, any more than serfdom, in a just legal order so whether it's ethically justified to dodge or avoid it should not pose an insurmountably difficult moral problem. (There are, of course, considerations as to the proper means by which tax laws, as others that are unjust within a substantially just system of laws, would need to be resisted.)
What we face here is akin to what confronted abolitionists in the era of chattel slavery who were often urged to refrain from using radical means by which to resist. Arguably, one size does not fit all in how oppression of any kind ought to be resisted, opposed, combated, and so forth. Different victims could be justified in taking very different steps to counter oppression, including taxation. For some it would be most appropriate to make use of the available political processes, for some other means could be best. Taxation could, for some, be a minor although impermissible imposition, especially if they are wealthy enough so it makes little difference to the way they choose to live their lives. The context is relevant to how one is justified in addressing oppression. (For a simple example, if one is a large, powerful individual then being assaulted could be nearly inconsequential and not worth spending the time and resources to resist.)
Although there could be variations in how one ought to resist (dodge, avoid, legally contest, etc.) taxation, the answer to whether those subject to the institution are ethically justified in making the effort to resist it is in the affirmative. Yet, as with all matters of conduct involving other people, a sort of moral due process is required. One may not resist a trespasser by killing him and that kind of consideration would apply in how one goes about resisting an evil such as taxation.
In any case, the often voiced objections to tax dodging and tax avoidance are without merit.
U.S. Census is Getting Personal !
NEWS ~ 27,March 2010.
STATES REBEL AGAINST WASHINGTON ! By Patrik Jonsson, Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor / March 27, 2009
Atlanta
There's an old joke in South Carolina: Confederate President Jefferson Davis may have surrendered at the Burt-Stark mansion in Abbeville, S.C., in 1865, but the people of state Rep. Michael Pitts's district never did.
Obama defends recovery plan, cites progress
Some states may shun stimulus funds
Audio: Reporter Patrik Jonsson
With revolutionary die-hards behind him, Mr. Pitts has fired a warning shot across the bow of the Washington establishment. As the writer of one of 28 state "sovereignty bills" – one even calls for outright dissolution of the Union if Washington doesn't rein itself in – Pitts is at the forefront of a states' rights revival, reasserting their say on everything from stem cell research to the Second Amendment.
"Washington can be a bully, but there's evidence right now that there are people willing to resist our bully," said Pitts, by phone from the state capitol of Columbia.
Just as California under President Bush asserted itself on issues ranging from gun control to medical marijuana, a motley cohort of states – from South Carolina to New Hampshire, from Washington State to Oklahoma – are presenting a foil for President Obama's national ambitions. And they're laying the groundwork for a political standoff over the 10th Amendment, which cedes all power not granted to Washington to the people.
The movement's success will largely depend on whether Washington sees these legislative insurgents as serious – or, as Pitts puts it, as just "a bunch of rednecks."
"There's a lot of frustration when someone quite distant from you forces you to do something you don't want to do," says Steve Smith, director of the Weidenbaum Center on the Economy, Government and Public Policy at Washington University in D.C. "That's the root cause, and it ends up being rationalized in constitutional terms."
Resurgent states
The reversal of the federal stem cell research ban, a stimulus package widely seen as a backdoor grasp for more federal power, and fears about gun control have accelerated a state sovereignty movement that began taking shape under the Bush administration. In the past, both liberals and conservatives have used states' rights arguments for political expedience. That may be the case now as ousted conservatives try to force issues out of Washington and into states, where they have a better chance of winning them.
"Where power resides and who gets to do what – there's been an ongoing interpretation of that through our history," says Idaho State Rep. George Sayler of Coeur d'Alene, who voted against a states' rights bill that passed recently in the Gem State. "Sometimes the federal government asserts a stronger role, and it looks now like we might be getting into a period where the states" push for more power.
Some examples:
•The Idaho House began considering Wednesday a law against introducing "vicious animals" into the state – a direct rebuttal of the federal wolf reintroduction program.
Montana and Tennessee have introduced proposals to expand gun rights. Tennessee State Sen. Doug Jackson says his bill to ban proposed federal "microstamping" of ammunition could spark a movement. "The trampling on our rights to possess firearms is symbolic of a power grab by the federal government on a much larger scale," said Senator Jackson, by phone from Nashville.
Obama defends recovery plan, cites progress
Some states may shun stimulus funds
Audio: Reporter Patrik Jonsson
•Oklahoma and Georgia are both considering limits on stem cell research in response to Mr. Obama's reversal of the federal stem cell ban. It's the flip side of the Bush era when several Northeastern states allowed such research despite the federal ban.
The status of "state sovereignty" resolutions are largely up in the air, with a few passed, some moving through committee, and some voted down. New Hampshire's resolution, the only one with a "nullification" of the Union clause, was voted down largely along partisan lines.
A response to federal expansion
Although the idea of states' rights took hold in the run-up to the Civil War in order for the South to preserve, among other things, the institution of slavery, today's debates are really about whether there's any power left for the states to carve out of the Constitution.
"If you set up the principle where the federal government can do everything, then, yes, eventually they will do everything. If not, where's the line they can't cross?" says Michael Boldin, president of the Tenth Amendment Center in Los Angeles. "That's the Constitution, I believe."
The courts mainly stood by as federal power expanded by great leaps in the 1930s and the 1960s. There's been another burst of federal expansion in the 2000s, including Mr. Bush's USA Patriot Act and Obama's proposed overhaul of banking regulations.
The fact is, "there's no longer any effective limitations on federal power," says Randy Barnett, a Georgetown law professor who argued for California's medical marijuana law in front of the Supreme Court.
Yet the state sovereignty movement is by no means frivolous and could have significant political firepower. The medical marijuana case in California, for instance, showed that Washington can be forced to scale back its ambitions in the face of populist sentiment.
And although Pitts hails from Abbeville, the place where the South's first secession votes were cast, he insists that today's efforts to check federal power aren't limited to regional pockets or even political affiliation. "The mainstream media would portray some of us as rednecks, whether we're from Pennsylvania, Oregon, or South Carolina," says Pitts. "But this is a wake-up call. And if Washington doesn't heed that wake-up call, revolution is on the horizon."
NEWS 24,March2010.
from TAX HOLIDAY - by JackRabbit.
Situation Possibly Hopeless - no signs of life from the media...
Right now - I have to honestly chronicle here - the situation is ..... not even close to normal and definitely all f'd up.
Our media is a nest of traitors - snakes - liars - and people with loyalties to something other than the United States of America -the personalities polluting the airwaves here in Charlottesville are exemplary.
Coy Barefoot or whatever his name is on AM radio - condemned the Tea Party movement today - for.... nothing. His entire show - including guest appearance from the ever-busy congresstool that represents me - consisted of condemning the Tea party movement for an attack on the gas lines of this congresstool's brothers' house - but we don't know who did it - don't know why - don't even know if it is for real - especially since the incompetent police-pussies in this town hadda' call in the FBI to solve the crime.
We've got a town-full of useless turd so-called lawyers - not one called in to straighten out good-ole-Coy:
Wikipedia knows what this means:
"Post hoc ergo propter hoc, Latin for "after this, therefore because (on account) of this", is a logical fallacy (of the questionable cause variety) which states, "Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one." It is often shortened to simply post hoc and is also sometimes referred to as false cause, coincidental correlation or correlation not causation. It is subtly different from the fallacy cum hoc ergo propter hoc, in which the chronological ordering of a correlation is insignificant.
Post hoc is a particularly tempting error because temporal sequence appears to be integral to causality. The fallacy lies in coming to a conclusion based solely on the order of events, rather than taking into account other factors that might rule out the connection"
To decode for the stupid (Coy Barefoot and the frightened Central Virginia Audience minus benefit of Jefferson-trained law men):
This means that a gas line cut at congresstool's brothers' house after brothers' address is supposedly published on a Tea Party blog on the internet - and NO facts are in means .........ready?.....wait ....for .....it.....NOTHING! This was hyped to the extreme to where out-of-breath grandmas and soccer moms (preparing their precious ones for duty in Iran) called into the show calling for the arrest of these Tea Party people!
But none of these idiots ever asked the jackass in the mirror why they themselves didn't commit a violent act when the Tea Party published this address. Maybe because they are Albemarle County residents - the smartest people in the universe - immune themselves to such instigations - but ready to lock up anyone for saying things that will effect those weaker-minded crazy people out there. Thanks Coy for your hard work diffusing and educating this under-educated population of robots in a land of high tax rates. As long as you've been on the air Coy - why is your flock so uninformed? Maybe YOU ARE NOT DOING YOUR JOB - nah - deny deny deny.
But boy oh boy the radio station had a field day here in TJ's home-town in between Randi Rhodes and Glenn "shoot-him-in-the-head"Beck and the rest of the Thom Hartmann crowd (between mutual pats on the back for their "service to the country"). Pathetic and embarassing. What is the tuition at Thomas Jefferson's academical villiage? WAY TOO MUCH! THAT'S HOW MUCH! HA HA HA. Yeah - I know - it really isn't funny - it is tragic.
Anybody spending their money sending their kid to school at the University of Virginia is either naive, stupid, or just wants to get'm outa' the house 'cause this school is a complete waste of time. Where are the "professors?" Sitting on their asses doing zip-shit while the airwaves are consumed with contumele. Shame or guilt - pick your poison you pukes - for me - I wouldn't give you a penny. I don't believe in wasting money.
The FBI has to come in to solve a crime? Why? Don't the police officers coming to work at 7AM downtown in the old woodland camo have the training to solve the crime with the big van with the slogan on it?
Calling the FBI in to solve a politically motivated crime is like calling in Al Capone to investigate bootlegging! But that's the situation here in Charlottesville, Virginia - where the kids wear the helmets in the showers until they can be shipped off for duty as 7.62X39mm bullet-catchers in the next oil-war as soon as they reach the age of 18. Stupid soccer moms - I'm still trying to get used to that paradox.
Hey have we bombed Iran yet?
It's ironic - the FBI just ordered silenced 20mm cannons - obviously so they can use violence to achieve an 'aim' somewhere quietly - while the media screams non-violence to the public. That's odd. The Feds constantly use violence - albeit - from a distance - via TV screens outside of Las Vegas to control drones firing missiles into wedding parties in Pakistan - to control - via violence - people they don't like in sovereign nations - but tell the public "don't ever use violence." Whatever you do - repeated over and over and over again - "don't ever use violence" - while what they really mean is " that's for us when we are ready for YOU to SHUT UP!" Sorry - but unless you are a complete idiot that is the exact situation - any argument to the contrary falls on deaf ears at American's Journey.
Is it me or is there a double-standard here? I wish these useless scum would stop the violence and practice what they preach. But I guess Muslims are the target for today - and there are plenty of followers of Jesus to pull the trigger when they get out of church and get the kids home safely on Sunday.
I've spent enough time tryin' to talk sense into this public. Not only don't they react to the absurd - they react to whatever they've been conditioned to react to - like whether or not junior has a neck-ache. In my house - neck-aches didn't exist because there was work to do. Hey mommy - wait till they pick up the rucksack, rifle, grenades and ammunition - then wait till they carry it - over a couple of mountains a couple of times. Then you will hear about a neck-ache - maybe permanent injury - maybe PTSD - maybe they'll come home in a box - but the neck-ache etc... will pale in comparison.
Sorry for the rage - but you Amerikans make me sick. But it doesn't matter. As the bombs fall on Iran and the war finally comes home for real - you will bear the burden while those like me who finally wised up and got busy saving ourselves instead of playing Paul Revere - will get out our lawn chairs out to watch.
I hope y'all enjoy your war in Iran!
Have fun!
