American and International Info Resources

I’ve written on the importance of listening to George Bush carefully in the past and have been attacked for doubting his “veracity”, “truthfulness”, and “his way of speaking”.

O.K.

Let’s try an experiment. Yesterday, February 21, 2005, he had this to say about the port deal with the United Arab Emirates:

“I can understand why some in Congress have raised questions about whether or not our country will be less secure as a result of this transaction. But they need to know that our government has looked at this issue and looked at it carefully… Again, I repeat, it’s - if there is any question as to whether or not this country would be less safe as a result of the transaction, it wouldn’t go forward.”

Reading that should make clear why he referred to his 2004 “victory” as a “mandate” and his reference to millions of protesters against the Iraq war as “some people” and “focus groups”.

First, he refers to “some in Congress”. “Some”?

Question, is he: 1) blissfully unaware of the Congressional (and State) reactions; 2) delusional; or is he 3) intentionally “misleading” that portion of the public that doesn’t follow the news but for the times when he speaks (a surprisingly large group for a people supposedly in love with independence).

Second, he refers to the “some” as “raising questions”. The line formed to squash this deal on both sides of the aisle is puzzlingly unnerving even to those whose deepest desire is to see bipartisanship return to Washington.

Third, when he says, “… they need to know that our government has looked at this issue and looked at it carefully.”

Really?

How, pray tell, would he know that at the time of making that statement. According to today’s press reports, he didn’t know about it until he heard it from the press. To further cast doubt on “our government” looking at this carefully consider the following response by Scott McClellan:

“He became aware of it over the last several days,” McClellan said. Asked if Bush did not know about it until it was a done deal, McClellan said, “That’s correct.”

So what part of the “government” is George Bush talking about?

He does say, “our government” and, the last time I checked, we still had 3 branches although two have been trimmed to the point of being nubs that may never sprout leaves or bear fruit again.

We know that Congress wasn’t informed and that his spokespeople claim he didn’t know about it until after the “filter” of the press informed him. Maybe Justices Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito were informed.

To his credit, he did clarify his statement:

“The more people learn about the transaction that has been scrutinized and approved by my government, the more they’ll be comforted…”

As Marty Kaplan points out on the Huffington Post, “The founding documents of our nation talk about the government, our government, a government, any government. If my,is used, it’s said on behalf of the citizens, not their rulers. “

P.S. the Katrina Review made by the Administration came out. It calls for direct military control in the event of a “natural disaster”. Homeland security adviser, Frances Fragos Townsend, when asked if this would violate the Posse Comitatus law and would it require new legislation responded that George Bush had been advised by his (presumably) legal staff that he already had the power to do what was recommended in the report.

So, in conclusion, FISA doesn’t apply to this White House, those pesky quaint Geneva Conventions (or just basic prohibitions against torture) didn’t, and don’t, apply to this White House, the recently overwhelmingly passed anti- torture legislation doesn’t apply to this White House, informing Congress that we’re giving the contracts for running our thus- far- still- unsecured ports to a foreign government with a questionable recent history of transferring money to terrorist groups and being the conduit for nuclear information and/or material to countries in the “axis of evil” doesn’t apply to this White House, and the general rule on submitting to a police interview after shooting a guy in the face don’t apply to this White House, etc.

It must be nice to have one of ‘em “my guvmunt” things.

With the landscape of American politics becoming extremely
polarized, the use of many different techniques to illicit a
positive or negative response from the voters are being
conducted outside of traditional radio and television methods. A
new method of communication is with the use of Robo Calling. A
taped voice being presented to the person who answers their
telephone. A new spin on the telemarketing concept. We all know
what high esteem the telemarketing industry holds in our
society, the question is, can Robo Calling elevate itself to a
status where individual households welcome and indeed listen to
these calls? Scott Radio (www.scottradio.com) is a radio
political voice and script writing organization recently
conducted an informal survey of over three hundred households
who had received a Robo Call during the last election. The
results were surprising. The vast majority did not find the call
negative. Most found them informative. A common reply was they
felt “included” in the process. If a friend had received a call
and they did not, it was considered a reason not to vote for
that candidate. Unlike sales people calling to ask for money,
the Robo call is not seeking money, rather a much more valuable
item, of which every adult has just one to give. A vote. The
overwhelming result of the survey is Americans remain proud.
While in the world of consumerism, some individuals are thrifty
while others spend until the credit card is declined, in the
matter of our one vote, we remain cautious and prudent on how we
use it. The one strong comment during the survey was the
approval of Robo Calls from male voices who were not aggressive,
yet were not drone. The research shows that Robo Calls from the
candidate were not well received. Candidates often delivered an
impression of being long-winded, begging or disrespectful. If
you are considering the us of Robo Calls, you need to do
everything in your power to ensure a benefit to your candidate,
rather than creating a negative impression that results in a old
fashion lynching on election day.

Jody closed the scrap book. They sat silently for a moment. Charlotte was the first to speak, rather cautiously. “Well done. Something said well that desperately needed saying. The book review serves as a splendid device. It offers the tool to foster passing of painful truths without a killing of the messenger.” “Yes,” sadly responded Jody, “you see, I completely understand McVeigh’s motivation. In time his outrageous deed may become more prophetic than pathetic.”

Jody had much to say about this event. He noted the outrage by those who survived or lost loved ones in the event, and that all others without exception, were so intensely hateful that no one dared to question any motivation that might have set McVeigh in motion. Could Jefferson have been a prophet for McVeigh or merely a crutch? Had our free republic gone too far in teaching abuse as Brandeis spoke of? For such as Jefferson, quoted by McVeigh, both tyrant and patriot must collide. Did McVeigh fully understand the consequences of such extraordinary act, and carefully identify his role? Had he not the sense to know the backlash would completely eradicate any noble curative action he might hope to make? No one seemed to make the slightest move to understand how anyone could feel any kind of ill will against soft federal workers, self serving, in paper shuffling jobs, for the most part, with even on the job baby sitting as collateral duty. No one seemed to realize how far socialism of employment and parenting and child care had saturated a free nation of free choice by using the taxes confiscated from a vast number of workers who made it independently on their own. No one worried then or now about federal government policing or the loss of freedom of choices. Rather, great haste was made to put in place of that flimsy building a sorry in your face monument that further promoted the government’s on the job permissiveness with little chairs for little people, so none must ever forget that they remain on the job in an adult work day world, and glorify this child abuse fostered by parents who never hesitate to put their children in the care of others no matter the expense or inconvenience to all others except themselves. No one ever howled out for tax breaks so one parent could stay home when children needed that kind of attention. No one complained about the planned bastards or later deserted children by one or both the parents. No one, not a single printing had been seen to explain how this way out socialism might move one who had once cared, to instability and an over reaching reaction. A young reporter watched the execution of McVeigh, who, it was reported, lay quietly, nodded calmly to each, one by one as he caught their eyes, and then with his eyes wide opened, fixed on the camera in the ceiling, calmly passed away.

“It was awful, it was evil,” said Jody, “such terror, such screaming silence, that none would dare to hear before desperation aggravated McVeigh to the point of deliberate destruction. Not before. Certainly not then. Then never, thereafter.”

“I hear you Jody, and I understand you, them and even maybe McVeigh, a little. His was a deep dastardly gash and will take a very long time to heal, even a little.” “Added to that,” said Jody “is the certain knowledge that not much will change for the good. Only more policing and oppression. Freedom destructive pro-active policing by a centralized government.”

“Talking of death and dying,” said Charlotte, rising, “I have one.” She shelved the scrapbook, and pulled down her slim volume. “Ready?”

Charlotte prefaced: “This speaks of an idealist I once knew. One who could not cope with realities and disappointments. One who turned to himself for a solution. That permanent solution to a temporary problem: Memory of a Dead Poet

After singing of Elizabeth and people and church and bells you in green-leafed dreaming once cried –O, Ecstasy! but quickly stilled that mystic joy searing otherworldly word-dreams into silence.

Departing a world that once tried to kill and failed you went leaving behind a lingering trail of sorrow and broken dreams to haunt the hearts of friends.

Journeying outward setting aside all thoughts of Elizabeth and quiet shy glances of love over cups of tea as the poetic flowering of your soul no longer sang or gazed at open skies, ecstatic trembling green leaves, Elizabeth, bells or tea.

As it oozed out the red-stained window blown through your skull.

“Jody, how can goodness go so wrong?” said Charlotte, quietly closing the book.

I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands: one Nation under God, indivisible,With Liberty and Justice for all. You’ve all said it in school, but did you really mean it, or did you just say it because you were told to, a real American says it with conviction and really means it.

It says that you’ll respect our land and it’s laws, if you desire to have the freedom that it provides, it says as long as we think as one entity, we can’t be divided or brought down, by saying it as a real American you are pledging to respect and defend our country, and it’s way of life, if you can’t even do something that simple, then get out.

In the pledge it says that if you respect our country, and follow it’s laws, then you will be afforded the freedoms and liberties that are due to you, and just think for a minute, that really is the case, you don’t need the proper paper work, just to drive across town, like you would in Russia, and the cops here can’t just lay a beat down on you because they want to like other places.

All you have to do to enjoy these freedoms, is have a little respect for our country, and how thing work here, and you will have the freedom that you deserve, but it also takes a lot of hard work to keep this a free country, and you have to do your part to, one of the most disrespectful things that I can think of is, people that move to our country, but are to lazy to learn the language.

Our American kids, should not be forced to learn Spanish in school, unless of course they want to learn it, they should be forced to learn our language, which by the way is English, if we were to move to their country, we’d have to learn their language, or just not talk to any of them, it’s just disrespectful.

By all means it’s disrespectful to move here, and the fly the flag of your country in the back window of your car for everybody to see, no wonder people get upset, a real American would get highly agitated about this, it’s just a hit below the belt, a hit where it hurts, and they don’t do it because they like this country.

There are two examples of blatant disrespect of our country, do you want me to keep going, because I can, they come here, and form their gangs, a bunch of people who deserve no rights, beat old ladies and take their SS checks, steal cars and dismantle them for profit, do burglaries, and believe me, they would be glad to hit your house next, shoot people for no reason, but for some reason we have to be nice.

In that last sentence are five more forms of disrespect for our country, and it’s way of life, and that’s just the tip of the iceberg, things will continue to get worse unless we do something about it, have you ever heard the definition of insanity, it’s do the same thing, the same way everyday, and expect a different outcome, just think about it, that is what were beginning to do here.

Muscle car restoration

Our trade deficit is directly proportional to our attacks on US Businesses and Entrepreneurs. We do not have an upside down trade deficit because we cannot compete. We can compete with any nation. We have bad policies, over regulation, too many lawyers and lawsuits. We have judges and juries ruling for unbelievable sums to send a message to the businesses and industries as if it were the job of the court to dictate policy.

Now then with everything and everyone against the businesses, there probably will not be many businesses in the future and therefore the jobless rate will peak out. We also must take care of the brain drain and technology transfers to our competitor nations who steal our patents and trademark materials. Meaning if we do not get moving and fix these things the US as we know it will be passed by the Pacific Rim, and EU as mega players in the future. If we allow our country to act as the United Countries rather than the United States, we can expect more of the same, not less of the same. I think all aspects of society ought to stop calling the kettle black and back off of this doomed direction because this road leads us down hill. Business needs a voice, a voice of reason. Luckily the Democratic candidates who are anti-business are no longer pandering to and now back peddling a little from the crybaby constituency they have in the past catered to, in order to get incoming donations for their campaigns. This means maybe they will lighten up on the issues of attacking businesses. Sarbaines is not running for re-election, good.

Any politician in my professional opinion has no business pointing fingers at corporate America. No politician who has not run a business needs to be elected. No Professor who has never run at least a small business ought to teach anything but ART Appreciation basic 101 classes at the community college level. Opinion and that is exactly what this liberal academia thinking is, because if you have never been there, how would you know what it is all about, lifer academia is idealistic and full of the PC acid of our society is doing to this great country. News reporters who have an axe to grind ought to be in a format designated for that, such as the Factor, Scarborough or such. Not in a format of news only. There is a time and a place for opinion. Mine included and if you will note it is usually on a private website blog or in an article like this one where I let you have it; straight from the gut; but the gut of an entrepreneur who has had to deal with the blob of bureaucracy all his professional life.

Look here is the deal, we are never going to balance the trade deficit until we get real and realize who built this nation and start letting those capitalists and entrepreneurs do their jobs, what they do best; build and create, without attacking them every time they invest in our economy or want to expand their endeavors. If we have to take Caesars advice and kill all the attorneys, we may as well, because it is just a matter of time before the Chinese come over here and do it for us and then take care of all of us too. We need to negotiate from a position of strength. That means a strong economy and business community too. Think about it.

“Lance Winslow” - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/wttbbs/

The collapse of socialistic block by the late 1990s gave rise to doubts as to timeliness of the North Treaty Alliance Organization that in fact had accomplished its mission and essential role. Realistic logic concerning military alliances, based on historic experience of the Cold War, gave reasons to believe in incapability of either military block to outlast the collapse of the other.

American and European experts and politicians who shared these ideas, adhered to the opinion of necessity to disband NATO or at least limit this organization in its claims. For instance, Germany, represented by the Minister for Foreign Affairs Hans Ditrih Gensher and backed by the Czechoslovakia, pursued a policy towards “deeper institutionalization” of the CSCE, trying to transform this forum into decisive element of new European security system. Moscow in early 1990s gave rise to the idea of “European Security Council” which would consist of the largest European states.

Nevertheless, drastic measures taken by the USA and its closest allies not desiring to turn down time-proved mechanisms of transatlantic ties in late 80s-early 90s ensured NATO’s survival as defense alliance.

Except NATO-centric project, all other rival projects of European security architecture were rejected. Paris Summit demonstrated reluctance of many influential states to give preference to the CSCE in ensuring European security, while the concept of “All-European Security Council” failed to succeed due to its contradiction with processes of international relations democratization after the end of Cold War.

NATO’s central role and American influence on European security could have been put into question only by development of integration processes in foreign policy and security within the framework of the European Communities converted into the European Union. Notwithstanding intense economic cooperation with the USA, Western Europe, along with South-Eastern Asia, in 1990s and especially in early 2000s wasn’t very inspired by the prospect of unconditional support of the USA in carrying out their “global mission” which required huge resources and geographically broad interpretation of European countries.

The United Stated in their relying on closest European allies needed, on the one hand, to back up European initiatives in security sphere, and on the other hand, to guide its partners in necessary direction evading degradation of American-European political-military connection.

Understanding the directions of NATO reforming to maintain the organizations’ vital activity emerged in American political circles quick enough. Already in 1992 Colin Powell, then chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, in his speech in London International Institute for Strategic Research mentioned NATO’s new peacemaking tasks and switch of the alliance to more definite actions on spreading democracy and political liberalism throughout Europe. Then, the task of the American administration included elaboration of strategy for carrying out the actions proclaimed along with reaching consensus on necessity of those actions among the concerned international subjects - American allies in NATO and Central Eastern Europe as well as American domestic political forces.

The next sections will reveal the evolution of the USA towards the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and include analysis of such issues as NATO enlargement to the East and shift of organization’s purposes, tasks and functions. The particular attention will be attached to the American policy evolution towards NATO’s purposes and functions as for now and place of this military alliance in the US foreign policy.

Patrick Hume is professional political scientist. With a Master’s degree in International Relations, Patrick specializes in writing on political history and international issues of current importance. His reviews and articles can be found at the site of the company Patrick Hume writes for, Your Personal Writer. More information on Patrick Hume is available at Custom Writing Assistance. Your Personal Writer helps you handle all your problems with writing research papers. Apply to us to receive professional support, advice, assistance, tutoring and writing services. Your satisfaction is guaranteed.

It is undeniable that Cambodia is changing. When I arrived in Cambodia in 1995, one in three Cambodians I met carried a weapon. Arms were for many the only way to ensure security. Yet, in the decennium I live in Cambodia, I have never seen one used against me or anybody, except for one: a policeman shot some game in the forest but didn’t catch it.

I’ve collected weapons. 5 years ago, I travelled to Dey Krohom village in Kratie province along roads which the year after were de-mined because the road was part of what once was the National road from Phnom Penh to Kratie and Stoeung Treng and is was going to be rebuilt into what Cambodians cal a “speedway”. I’ve seen the mines when a year later, I travelled the same road again to inspect my development projects.

Each one might have killed me. Do you know that mines tend to float under the soil and move where no-one expects any mines.

>From 2000 to 2004, I worked for the EU ASAC, an EU weapons management programme for establishing weapons security to the country. My job was to help collect weapons from the civilian population which was only a small part of a much more encompassing programme. My job also included implementing police support regarding to security as a complement to the weapons collection.

The programme was implemented on the request and with the full support of the Cambodian government. Next week, the government will destroy some 8,000 weapons and thus bring the total of destroyed weapons since the start of the EU peace plan to more than 175,000 weapons.

These weapons include not only weapons from the civilian population, but also military surpluses. Some argue that it is the oldest weapons that were destroyed, but all of the weapons in the destruction were usable. Being usable - if only for spare parts -, they could be sold on the black market and used in other conflicts in the region.

By destroying those weapons, the Cambodian people acts as true Buddhists, choosing for Peace in the Region. “Put down your weapon, take up the Dharma” edified the Buddhist Teachers. And that is what Cambodians are doing.

The EU has been the initiator of the multi-facetted peace programme. Two Japanese organisations are fulfilling the promises of European initiators: if you make peace development will come. Cambodian people have turned their weapons. JSAC and JCCP, two Japanese organisation now offer development projects to the villages, communes and districts that have surrendered all their weapons and are proven weapons-free. Clean water wells are in some places the highest priorities, elsewhere schools or school toilets were built.

The principle of the weapons collection project was not to pay for the weapons, but to offer community-owned projects instead. Every weapon that was collected from the civilian population had to be destroyed and was.

The military surplus weapons are those that are left over from the EU ASAC Weapons Registration and Safe Storage project. Here safe storage buildings for weapons and computerised registration system have been provided to the Cambodian Army and Gendarmerie.

The weapons are destroyed in public ceremonies in the presence of the population. These ceremonies are called “Flames of Peace.” EU, Cambodian or Japanese experts count the weapons as part of the process and check that no more ammunition remains in the weapon that could turn the celebration into a tragedy.

The EU assistance programme has also supported the National Committee for weapons management, the draft of a new arms law and oversees the implementation of that law.

Next week, two of those bonfires take place in Cambodia. On Monday 26 September, 3,430 weapons will be burned ceremoniously in Siem Reap province with Japanese support and on Tuesday about 4,500 in Sihanoukville with European support.

The Japanese destruction ceremony will take place in Angkor Chum district, there where the people have turned them in. The ceremony in Sihanoukville will take place on Ochheuteal Beach and is open to any visitor. If you happen to be in Sihanoukville, this is a unique occasion to witness the Cambodian contribution to peace building.

Death may not be dignified in any light but the way it is perceived, handled and finally dealt with can be under certain circumstances even less dignified. The cause Cindy Sheehan has undertaken may or may not be worthy depending on who you ask. I choose not to ask anyone but rather I would ask a question of a different sort. It is not a question of the Presidents moment of accountability but of her son’s accountability. I would ask this question to her or anyone who might dare to question his moment of accountability. He did have one, let us examine it.

In August of 2003 Casey Sheehan re-enlisted in the United States Army. He was fully informed that his unit would be deployed in the Iraq theatre at some time in the future. Casey belonged to the 1st Calvary where he plied his skills as a Humvee mechanic. On April 4th of 2005 Casey was killed in a place called Sadr City in Iraq. He was twenty four years of age. Indeed a Hero of the highest order and a young man that according to all accounts would make any mother or any American proud of him.

In every state in this country there is a general consensus about when a person reaches the age of accountability. That consensus has found its way to the legislative annuls of every state in the form of various laws that credential it as the will of the people. Federal law too has been formed on the basis of this general consensus. Although the laws vary from state to state they all seem to fall into a very close and familiar expression of what is the age of accountability. For instance in most states the age limits for mandatory enrollment in a public or private school is up to age sixteen. The age at which a person can buy and consume alcohol goes between eighteen and twenty one in most states. Most states also will hold young people accountable for serious crimes somewhere between the ages of sixteen and eighteen. The US Military has similar age restrictions for anyone volunteering for duty. What does all this mean?

At some point in his life Casey Sheehan believed he had reached the age of accountability. Exactly when that moment came for Casey may only be known by him. But even if he shared it with his mother or others it was still his moment, his passage to manhood or to any other place he perceived it to be. It is not a moment that any mother can alter nor do they have a right to. When Casey signed on the line not once but twice, it was his moment of accountability. Perhaps he was never braver even in battle than he was in that moment. By the time he re-enlisted he knew a great deal about the military and what to expect, but at the moment he put his signature on the line for the first time there were only a world of unknowns, he faced them alone, he became accountable.

Without raising a single word about our Presidents honesty, a single word about Casey’s reasons or fears, it would still be undignified and less than honorable to cast aspersions on that moment. The moment when a young man made the decision of a man should not be diminished by the outcome of that decision. As far as President Bush being given a moment of accountability I would tread lightly in this area. He is accountable to all of us in this country, but if that weren’t enough both he and all of us in this country are accountable to a much higher power.

Those of us that put our trust in God do so in the midst of a world where life and death are all around us. We see children starving, hospitals full to capacity, wars we don’t always understand, crime and injustice on every hand, but we continue to have faith in God. Life did not come with a promise or a contract. We may die young or wish we could die because we feel so old but we believe he holds our hand throughout the journey long or short. This is more than faith it is trust and loyalty and it is the proof that no matter what we may endure we have shown ourselves to be accountable. May we always do so, and in the end will be found in good company along with other good men and good soldiers like Casey Sheehan.

Rev Bresciani has written many articles over the past thirty years in such periodicals as Guideposts and Catholic Digest. He is the author of two books available on Amazon.com, Alibris, Barnes and Noble and many other places. Rev Bresciani wrote “Hook Line and Sinker or what has Your Church Been Teaching You,” publisher, PublishAmerica of Baltimore MD. He also wrote a book published by Xulon Press entitled “An American Prophet and His Message, Questions and Answers on the Second Coming of Christ.” Rev Bresciani’s website is,

http://americanprophet.org

Conor MacDari was a Mason but his Masonry deplored the British ‘alehouse and tavern denizens’. Jim Shaw and many other top Masons have written as much truth as they know. There are many heads or names in the ‘octopus’ of Freemasonry and we have only touched upon a few of them including the Bilderbergs. Barrett gives us the beginning of a glimpse into the influence of Masons on the founding of America, albeit a misleading one that he could be excused for not knowing in any one specific instance (such as Paine’s Druidic involvement) but when taken together seems to be a ‘damage control’ exercise of the ’stonewalling’ nature.

To return to both influences ‘on’ Freemasonry, and the influence ‘of’ Freemasonry, Martin Short {Author of a weak but influential early book in the effort to expose what is going on, called ‘The Brotherhood’.} spends pages showing how much Freemasons had infiltrated nineteenth-century society; it was Masons, for example, who ’succeeded in erecting Cleopatra’s Needle’ on Victoria Embankment in London in 1878; when its twin was raised in New York in 1880, the celebration was ‘a brazenly Masonic affair’; while the Washington monument was dedicated in another dose of fraternal self-congratulation.’ (1) It may well be that Freemasons had a particular interest in Egyptology at the time, and were involved in the erection of the monuments; but this was more likely because, first, they simply reflected one of the intellectual fascinations of their age and, second, at that time many men of importance were Freemasons - again, a societal reflection. Like many similar critics, however, Short is confusing cause and effect.

The words spoken in 1992 {As he quotes promotional literature and videos put out by Masons he is avoiding details and truth. He is also showing his own ‘roots’ are not far removed from what he admitted, which we quoted earlier about the British Secret Service and the Masonic ‘club’ nature of it and the whole establishment there.} by Edgar Darling, Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, apply even more strongly to the Masons of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries: ‘Masons are movers and shakers, dreamers and builders, and above all we are free-thinkers.’… (2)

Other ‘free-thinking’ religious philosophies strong in the eighteenth century included Unitarianism - related to Arianism - and Universalism, which also doubted the Trinitarian definition of God, and which believed, like the Brethren of the Free Spirit {A 13th century largely female based group called the Beguines and the Cathars are of the ‘no hell’, ‘no sin’ or all are saved, and limited priestly interpreters akin, to the ‘Shakers’ of more recent time.}, that all men will be saved.

Whatever beliefs individual Freemasons today might hold, there is no doubting that from the start Deists and other free-thinkers had a major influence on Freemasonry in Britain, in France, and in North America; among the great luminaries of American history, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson were all Deists, although of these three, only Franklin is known to have been a Freemason.” (3)

Thomas Paine and Benjamin Franklin were members of the Council of Three which is the highest Masonic ‘octopus’ degree in any one country although there may well be supranational organizations of higher import. This Council of Three is Rosicrucian and that IS Masonic. True there are some Rosicrucian rogue elements and the like, but in this case make no mistake Barrett knows more than he is saying. Is an error of omission as serious as an error of commission in this instance? Is it a LIE?! You need more proof, you say. If you do then it is coming over the next few pages. If you don’t, you can skip these pages that deal with the start of an experiment we are now all governed by - ‘The Enlightenment Experiment’ known as America. Paine was also an active participant in the French Revolution.

My experiences include many friends, employees and contacts in the ‘octopus’ who make me able to say with absolute certainty that this is true and I’m certain Barrett knows the connection from this book and many entries therein. A web piece of literature from a decidedly right wing Christian group gives us the following and it is confirmable in many other places (in the main).

“Thomas Paine
Thomas Paine, a theist, published his pamphlet ‘Common Sense’ in January of 1776, which turned the tide of public opinion in favor of declaring independence. Paine’s arguments against all forms of monarchy dissolved any lingering attachment to Great Britain. On July 4, 1776, the Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence {One of my paternal ancestors, Rufus King, was a Freemason who signed the Constitution as noted in the Masons own web site that uses an ‘Anti-Masonry’ title which can be viewed at http://www.ncmason.org/book1/ANTI-M~1.HTM .} declaring the colonies free and independent states. Although Paine quoted Scripture to denounce the concept of monarchy, his later work, Age of Reason, is a treatise on the implausibility of the Bible and the irrationality of Christianity. Paine believed in one God, but rejected all religions, saying:

‘My own mind is my own church.’ He also maintained an interest in Freemasonry {MacDari says was originally ‘Phre=Sun’-Masonry and shows the linguistic similarity between ‘Ph’ and ‘F’ that we have covered regards the Phoenicians and Finn, the Irish king(s).}. His pamphlet, Origin of Free-Masonry, proposed that Masonry’s embodiment of the sun worship of ancient Druidism was a legitimate alternative to Christianity. He notes that Freemasonry’s god, ‘…Osiris and Isis, theologically represented the Supreme Being and universal Nature…’ (4)”

One doesn’t have to know about the Rosicrucian Council of Three to see Paine is part of the ‘octopus’ in his own written words. It gets more difficult with Jefferson and Adams, though it is well enough known that the Adams family is Druidic. I was inclined to write a story about my ancestor Rufus King and Thomas Jefferson that I was going to call ‘Tuckahoe Mud’. {Which I have gone ahead and done.} The other player of significance was to be Frederick Douglass who my research showed was born of a white father on the Randolph estate in Virginia where Thomas Jefferson had spent his youth from ages 2 til 5. Jefferson had retired late in life to this estate and was near Tuckahoe Creek when Douglas’ mother bore him into this world. Jefferson died a year or two later. (I have since written this book and I discovered my ancestor was a double or triple agent who probably engaged in many of the rituals Franklin did - including trepanning to get Thalami to eat.)

It was Jefferson’s ideas about ‘miscegenation’ that turned me off the project which was originally going to be called ‘The Early Abolitionists’. My ancestor was the first to free his slaves in New York City and went on to England in the ambassadorship Franklin had held before him. The French and Napoleon gave Louisiana and the west to the young ‘experiment’; and their pirates played a major role at New Orleans which is part of larger and other later entries in this segment. Rumors surrounded Jefferson about his religion and he had to keep a low profile because of his work on the separation of Church and state. Although Barrett credits Jefferson with the writing of the Declaration, Jefferson himself says he drew upon Paine’s work mentioned in the above quote.

The book by Fawn Brodie is an excellent beginning for the interested Jeffersonian to understand the complexities of the man and his motivations or psychological flaws. The Jefferson family just allowed their black cousins to the family reunion just a few years ago, and the issue of Sally Hemmings who was 13 when free in France with Thomas and his daughter (who Jefferson controlled in a near, if not actual incestual manner) is now accepted. I suspect the whole Merovingian or Dragon intrigue has been into miscegenation of the races since the dawn of history.

There is another person by the name of Short who played an important part in the esoteric reality of Jefferson’s life. I am near to certain he was brought for a one year tutorial for Thomas Jefferson. He was a professor at William and Mary who introduced and encouraged these things in Jefferson’s Newtonian alchemic appreciations. To be called an slchemist is the highest accolade that the Rosicrucians know in the realm of esoterics. I know this because my work has been recognized by inner sanctum Rosicrucians as being alchemic. Labels or titles are not my quest anymore and I wouldn’t deem to call myself an alchemist even though I may be a hermeticist. Truth is my quest, as it was for Jefferson. So when people want labels for Jefferson and they wonder why he was kin to Masons, that is the reason. But let us see what this article on the web has to say.

“Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson, a Deist, wrote the Declaration of Independence, which opens with a statement of rights deriving, not from the God of Holy Scripture, but Nature’s God and the Natural Law.

‘When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.’

In THE JEFFERSON BIBLE: THE LIFE AND MORALS OF JESUS, Jefferson describes his views of Jesus Christ, the Christian religion, and his own religious beliefs. In a Syllabus which he appended to his Bible, he compared the teachings of Jesus to those of earlier Greek and Roman philosophers, and to the religion of the Jews {Seneca and Pythagoras would join Aristotle in the syncretism of a Jeffersonian erudition.} of Jesus’ time. The following excerpt is from a letter discussing the Syllabus. Of significance is his statement,’ (Jesus) preaches the efficacy of repentance towards forgiveness of sin; I require counterpoise of good works to redeem it…’

{And Jefferson did enough good work for me to still think of him as a hero despite his foibles and peccadilloes. He was a supporter of the Physiocrat/Merovingians and Illuminati.}

‘But while this syllabus is meant to place the character of Jesus in its true and high light, as no imposter Himself, but a great Reformer of the Hebrew code of religion, it is not to be understood that I am with Him in all his doctrines. I am a Materialist; but he takes the side of Spiritualism; he preaches the efficacy of repentance towards forgiveness of sin; I require counterpoise of good works to redeem it, etc., etc. It is the innocence of His character, the purity and sublimity of his moral precepts, the eloquence of His inculcations, the beauty of the apologues in which He conveys them, that I so much admire; sometimes, indeed, needing indulgence to eastern hyperbolism {His correspondence with the younger John Quincy Adams retained even during the falling out with John Sr. was often about Taoist philosophy. The elder Adams was upset by Jeffersonian support for the Illuminati who had taken a leading role in Masonry. This lead to the fromation of the Anti-Masonic Party which became the Whigs.}. My eulogies, too, may be founded on a postulate which all may not be ready to grant. Among the sayings and discourses imputed to Him by His biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others, again, of so much ignorance {The Pharisaic Rabbis tell us that Paul and the Romans are the perpetrators of these parts. The ‘Father of Biblical Archaeology’ W. F. Albright, tells us the Phoenicians are the designers of the beauty.}, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same Being. I separate, therefore, the gold from the dross {A key alchemic principle that Cleopatra, whose alchemic treatises still exist, would like.}; restore to Him the former, and leave the latter to the stupidity of some, and roguery of others of His disciples. Of this band of dupes and imposters, Paul was the great Coryphaeus, and first corruptor of the doctrines of Jesus. These palpable interpolation and falsifications of His doctrines led me to try to sift them apart. I found the work obvious and easy, and that His past composed the most beautiful morsel of morality which has been given to us by man. The syllabus is therefore of His doctrines, not of mine. I read them as I do those of other ancient and modern moralists, with a mixture of approbation and dissent…’” (5)

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND NOTES:

1) Inside the Brotherhood, by Martin Short, Grafton, 1989, pgs. 120-122.

2) Spoken at the 275th anniversary of the founding of the first Grand Lodge, Earls Court, 1992, video, ‘Freemasonry, Today, Tomorrow’, from ‘Secret Societies’ see below.

3) Secret Societies, by David V. Barrett, esoteric expert of British Intelligence, Blandford, London, 1997 & 1999, paperback edition, pgs. 109-110.

4) http://kjb-av-1611.lima.net.pe/mason.html,10/7/00, pg. 4 of 13.

5) Ibid., pgs. 4 & 5.

Author/Activist trying to cause people to wake up and see what they are doing or is being done to them. There is no difference really, if you vote and support the paradigm you are karmically and ethically giving your approval to what is done in your name.

But the average good person won’t fight City Hall and is hypnotized by deceit in education, religion, and through media owners who only employ people willing to do their lying for them.

Recently in Professional Builder a cover article discussed how the industry was concerned about the anti-dumping tariffs of Canadian Lumber. I understand how they fill from a cost stand point, however let us discuss the hardships that Canadians have placed on trucking companies going into Canada with US goods. They have been a royal pain in the ass, while their trucks drive like crap, too fast on back roads-two lane highways, causing accidents and acting very inhospitable towards US motorists.

Their trucks full of cattle (beef still on the hoof) and lumber always speed and are unsafe in their driving. Their border crossings are hostile towards Americans, while we are friendly. They took advantage of our hospitality and are somewhat demanding. When I am at a truck stop in my motor home, I am going first and they can friggin wait. They always try to cut in lines. They do not obey our driving laws for hours allowed to drive before sleep and cheat the laws here. They are cutting down major checkered boards of open space without allowing proper re-growth, they are depriving native Indians of their land and hunting grounds. No, I am not an environmentalist, but we need level playing fields and we all suffer from global warming effects from such cutting down of vast sections and areas of trees. We are having major opposition in our lumber industry; it has killed the paper mills coupled with the environmentalists in this country. We have companies like Potlatch growing fast growing trees in rows like orchards to appease the environmentalists for use in paper products.

We have done so much here and the Canadians have not appeared to even be close to the same page. Yes they have more trees, but they do not have significantly faster growth. I find that the prices of increased lumber might cost first time home-buyers from qualifying, but if we are really concerned about that, there are free market levers from the Fed such as interest rates to prevent a housing bubble burst situation. We need to level the playing field with Canada, we have a huge trade deficit with them. We protect their nation since they have only 8,000 in their military. They are clear cutting and destroying their environment and we have laws yet the environmental aspects know no boundary drawn in the land by mankind. How about a little cooperation from the Socialist Government over there AYE?

Let’s think about fair trade and then we can talk about free trade. If you don’t like my opinion then you are not living in the right country or looking at it from both perspectives; AYE?

“Lance Winslow” - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/wttbbs/