Friday, July 29, 2016


SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

PHILADELPHIA — During her speech on Thursday accepting the Democratic nomination for president of the United States, Hillary Clinton again vowed to defend homosexuality and abortion if elected.
“We will defend all our rights—civil rights, human rights and voting rights—women’s rights and workers’ rights—LGBT rights and the rights of people with disabilities!” she declared to those gathered and those watching around the world.
“If you believe that every man, woman, and child in America has the right to affordable health care, join us. If you believe that we should say ‘no’ to unfair trade deals, that we should stand up to China, that we should support our steelworkers and autoworkers and homegrown manufacturers, join us,” Clinton said during another portion of her speech.
“If you believe we should expand Social Security and protect a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions, join us,” she stated.
Clinton concluded her talk by noting that the world is watching, and wishing God’s blessing on her supporters and the nation.
“Yes, the world is watching what we do. Yes, America’s destiny is ours to choose,” she said. “So let’s be stronger together, my fellow Americans. Let’s look to the future with courage and confidence. Let’s build a better tomorrow for our beloved children and our beloved country. And when we do, America will be greater than ever.”
“Thank you and may God bless you and the United States of America!” Clinton declared.
Her daughter, Chelsea, had also referenced homosexuality and abortion during her introduction of her mother, drawing applause.
“So, this November, I’m voting for a woman who is my role model, as a mother, and as an advocate. A woman who has spent her entire life fighting for families and children,” she said. “I’m voting for the progressive, who will protect our planet from climate change and our communities from gun violence, who will reform our criminal justice system, and who knows that women’s rights are human rights.”
“And who knows that LGBT rights are human rights,” Chelsea Clinton continued.
As previously reported, Donald Trump likewise addressed homosexuality in his acceptance speech, telling those gathered that he would work to protect homosexuals if elected.
“As president, I will do everything in my power to protect LGBTQ citizens from the violence and oppression of a hateful foreign ideology,” Trump declared, being met with applause.
“And, I have to say, as a Republican, it is so nice to hear you cheering for what I just said,” he said in response.
Both candidates have asserted that they are the best for the “LGBT community.”


France Announces Formation of National Guard as State of Emergency Continues

Militarization turning France into autocratic police state

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

The French government has moved to further militarize the country under an open-ended state of emergency following the latest terror attack.
In a statement released by the Elysee Palace on Thursday, the government announced a plan to form a national guard. “President of the Republic [Hollande] decided to establish the National Guard from the existing operating reserves,” the statement reads. Hollande said the government will “as soon as possible begin the establishment of this structure, which would serve to protect the French people.”
The Defense and Security Council will be officially notified of the plan in August and the national guard units will be formed in September, according to the statement.
The announcement arrives on the heels of a horrific attack and beheading of a priest at the Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray church in Normandy. Earlier this month, Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel went on a rampage with a truck in Nice on Bastille Day, killing 84 people. In November, terrorists launched coordinated attacks in Paris, killing 130 people.
The attack in Nice prompted Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve to call for “all willing French patriots” to sign up as reservists. Marine Le Pen, the National Front leader, demanded a return of compulsory national service.
Following the attack during the Bastille Day celebration, Hollande extended the state of emergency and added new measures. Police are permitted to search without a court warrant, detain children, seize data from computers and mobile phones, and to search luggage and vehicles without judicial approval.
Critics contend the measures will do nothing to prevent terrorism and are being used against political activists, for instance, environmental activists who were put under house arrest during the Paris climate summit in November.
In May, the law was used to ban activists from joining demonstrations against the government’s labor reform. The labor proposals touched off large demonstrations in the country.
It is not clear if the new French national guard will be used to enforce the state of emergency or will only be used following terrorist attacks.
According to Finian Cunningham, the French “trajectory in state power is in danger of becoming a self-reinforcing dynamic of increasing autocratic governance—dictatorship—where democracy, for all intents and purposes, ceases to exist. Even more disturbingly, this sinister watershed is hardly even questioned in public discourse…
“France is heading towards a militarized autocratic police state, not unlike Israel. Citizens are being conditioned to live permanently with fear and emergency powers that supplant democratic rights.”
Earlier this week, Germany also signaled it will begin domestic militarization.
In the aftermath of the Munich attacks last week, Bavarian Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann told the Welt am Sonntag newspaper it “would be completely incomprehensible … if we had a terrorist situation like Brussels in Frankfurt, Stuttgart or Munich and we were not permitted to call in the well-trained forces of the Bundeswehr, even though they stand ready.”
Following WWII and the defeat of the Nazis, the German constitution forbade the military, known as the Bundeswehr, to be used domestically except in instances of national emergency.
The Greens and members of the Social Democratic Party warned against “domestic calls for more surveillance, isolation and military [intervention],” and added the Munich attack would be exploited politically.
The German government, however, had planned to lift restrictions on Bundeswehr prior to the Munich attack.

Boosted reservist force a 'National Guard' for France, says Hollande


Published on Jul 28, 2016
Dinesh D'Souza discusses the criminality of the Clinton family as well as his latest film which shows them for what they really are.

Censored Hillary Hyena Video


SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

In light of recent unrest, President Obama has decided to go back on his promise to halt the militarization of local law enforcement.
As reported this week by Tech Dirt:
The images of police greeting protesters with assault rifles, armored vehicles, grenade launchers, and officers who appeared to mistake the Midwest for downtown Kabul apparently was a bit too much. It looked more like an occupation than community-oriented policing — something every administration has paid lip service (and tax dollars) to over the past few decades while simultaneously handing out grants that turned police officers into warfighters.
Apparently, though, it isn’t so much the danger of looting, but the power of lobbying that brought about the president’s change of heart.
In an exclusive interview with two “police organization directors” — Jim Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, and Bill Johnson, executive director of the National Association of Police Organizations — Reuters reports that the law enforcement lobbyists met with the president and Vice President Joe Biden on July 11, three days after the tragic murder of five police officers in Dallas.
After the meeting, President Obama ordered the administration’s chief legal counsel to review the ban on the transfer of military materiel to police departments and other law-enforcement agencies that the president announced in May 2015.
While speaking at an event in Camden, New Jersey, on May 18, 2015, President Obama announced that in response to the riots in Ferguson, Missouri, the previous August, he was banning the sale of certain military equipment to local law enforcement. "We've seen how militarized gear can sometimes give people a feeling like they're an occupying force, as opposed to a force that's part of the community that's protecting them and serving them," Obama said at the time.
This policy was in made furtherance of procedures outlined in Executive Order 16388 that Obama issued in January 2015. In that fiat, the president set up a task force of federal officials to prepare a report on the potential use and misuse by local law enforcement of military-grade equipment.
Not surprisingly, within hours of the White House’s pronouncement, the police lobby was lobbing criticism at President Obama.
“The nation’s largest police union is fighting back against a White House plan to restrict local police forces’ ability to acquire military-style gear, accusing President Barack Obama’s task force of politicizing officers’ safety,” Politico reported in May 2015.
Well, their voice was heard, and the restriction lasted about a year. Now, thanks to the pressure from those police representatives, the pipeline of weapons more suited for waging war than serving warrants is open and flowing freely from the feds to the police.
Specifically, Reuters reports, the lobbyists’ warfighter wish list included “helmets, grenade launchers and tracked armored vehicles.”
While most stories published by traditional media outlets have focused on the 1033 program — the Defense Department’s program that takes decommissioned military gear and passes it to police — that well of war machines and materiel isn't nearly as deep as the one controlled by the Department of Homeland Security. This second source is rarely even mentioned in the context of controlling police access to military equipment, but Radley Balko, the author of books and articles revealing the depth and danger of the militarization of police, uncovers this virtually ignored arrangement between the feds and local law enforcement. He writes in the Washington Post,
Since 2003, for example, the Department of Homeland Security has been giving grants to police departments around the country to purchase new military-grade gear. That program now dwarfs the 1033 Program. It has also given rise to a cottage industry of companies that build gear in exchange for those DHS checks. Those companies now have a significant lobbying presence in Washington. I suspect that presence will now only grow stronger. So if the Obama administration really wants to roll back police militarization, this program needs reform, too.
Steadily and speedily, the forces of the militarized police are denying citizens the protections of fundamental civil liberties afforded us by the Bill of Rights. While there remain legions of law-enforcement officers devoted to protecting and serving their fellow citizens, the federal government’s proffer of powerful, free (or almost free) weapons, vehicles, gear, and tactical training is making the allure of becoming an unofficial branch of the armed forces irresistible.
The equipment being stricken from the list of items blocked from sale to the police is, the officers’ reps claim, necessary “to enhance officers' safety and their ability to respond to violent riots.”
Curiously, despite the recent spate of officer deaths, the current rate of such crimes is actually no higher than average and is lower than in recent years.
According to data reported by the National Law Enforcement Officers’ Memorial Fund, 31 police officers have been killed this year, putting the country on pace for a yearly total of 59. That is fewer than the number of officers fatally shot in 2007, 2010, and 2011.
Such facts don’t support the statists’ goal of converting local police into a sixth branch of the U.S. armed forces — a force armed and trained to exert absolute control over the civilian population they were ostensibly created to protect and serve.
The White House, of course, insists that the revision of the year-old policy is standard operating procedure and nothing to do with being leaned on by law-enforcement lobbyists.
Pasco, of the Fraternal Order of Police, told Reuters that President Obama thought that this type of arms and armor “intimidated people,” but after their confab he came to see that police couldn’t protect and serve without being outfitted with armored personal vehicles and grenade launchers.
One wonders how the goal of reducing violent encounters between police and the public is furthered by endowing the former with firepower capable of killing the latter en masse.
Moreover, there is something psychologically significant about a police officer being outfitted with a uniform, a helmet, and weapons that were obviously made to protect the wearer — a warfighter — from an enemy and to enable him to kill that enemy.
As TechDirt writes, “Put someone in war gear and they're going to be pretty sure they're in a war, rather than serving the public as a trusted member of the community.”
In light of the president’s bowing to pressure to green-light the federal government’s subtle subordination of local police and sheriffs through grants of money and materiel, Americans need to participate in grassroots activism to work to keep local law enforcement under the supervision of local elected officials and free from state and federal control or influence.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

In the top echelons of political power, there is only one major party in American politics, and that is the globalist war party. In case Americans needed more evidence that party labels are largely meaningless to the bipartisan ruling establishment, influential members of the establishment wing of the GOP — neocons, warmongers, globalists, and so on — are abandoning the Republican Party and in many cases jumping on board the Democrat Hillary Clinton campaign. From Bush-era war hawks who misled Americans into war to pseudo-conservative operatives of the globalist-minded Council on Foreign Relations, Republicans In Name Only (RINOs) are showing their true colors and allegiances. Blasting Donald Trump, more than a few of the globalist RINOs and neocon warmongers are now proudly on the Hillary Train.
In the massive history book Tragedy and Hope, Bill Clinton mentor and establishment insider Carroll Quigley explains succinctly how American politics works in the real world — and how the insiders like it. “The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers,” Quigley says matter-of-factly in what would certainly be news to most grassroots activists in both parties. “Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.” As far as the establishment is concerned, Trump, who proudly slams the Hillary-backed Iraq and Libya wars and blasts “globalism,” may be a threat to that whole “uniparty” idea.
Ironically, establishment media outlets are touting the establishment GOP defections to Hillary among neocons and globalists in an apparent effort to hurt the the Trump campaign. Apparently, they are oblivious to the fact that the defections of widely loathed establishment warmongers from Republican ranks actually bolsters Trump's arguments of a “rigged” system — not to mention his credibility in the eyes of supporters on both sides of the political spectrum, including among embattled “working class voters” and union members long considered reliable Democrats. Recent polls make that clear, with Trump's campaign surging ahead of Clinton's and attracting hordes of disaffected Democrats opposed to globalist “free trade” deals and endless wars.   
One of the many leftist media outlets celebrating the anti-Trump RINOs is the Daily Beast, a sort of wannabe establishment outlet that is unabashedly left-wing. The Beast compiled a list of some of the “biggest GOP names” backing Hillary Clinton so far. According to an alleged “source” within the Clinton camp, “highlighting Republicans who’ve crossed over will be a key fixture in campaign ads this fall.” If the list provided is representative of those “Republicans” to be highlighted, though, Clinton better hope Americans have a short memory. Indeed, aside from some no-name lobbyists and bureaucrats, the list is practically a who's who of the most politically toxic establishment globalists, banksters, and neocons on the planet.
Consider: At the top of the list of prominent alleged Republicans pushing Clinton is globalist bankster Henry “Hank” Paulson. Among other supposed accomplishments, the Goldman Sachs CEO and George W. Bush Treasury secretary helped oversee the redistribution of trillions of dollars in public money from middle class and poor Americans to billionaire Wall Street insiders. According to lawmakers, they were threatened by Paulson and his cronies with a declaration of martial law if Congress refused to approve the “banker bailout” heist. Now, Paulson spends much of his time pushing the discredited man-made global-warming theory hoping to profit from the radical policy schemes.  
Also featuring prominently on the list are many of the neocons responsible for squandering trillions of tax dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives — if not millions — on undeclared, illegal wars based on lies. Chief among them is neocon Robert Kagan, a senior fellow at the far-left globalist “think tank” Brookings Institution and a co-founder of the fringe Project for the New American Century that helped lead America into Iraq under Bush. Aside from his own non-stop warmongering seeking to send your children off to die in undeclared wars, Kagan is married to senior Obama official and fellow warmonger Victoria Nuland. Naturally, Kagan is on Team Hillary.  
Another senior neocon globalist on the Hillary Train is Max Boot, a left-wing Council on Foreign Relations(CFR) operative who claims to have been a “lifelong Republican” despite his love for Big Government. “[Hillary Clinton] would be vastly preferable to Trump,” Boot was quoted as saying, adding that he hopes the GOP will split. “What she basically espouses is a pretty mainstream view.” Of course, what Clinton espouses is so far from mainstream, it's hard to believe anyone, including fringe neocons, actually believes something so ridiculous. Just a few days ago, a poll showed eight in 10 voters want more restrictions on abortion, while Clinton wants even less restrictions and more tax funding for it. Almost no Americans except Hillary Clinton, the DNC, and fringe abortion activists support any tax funding for abortions. And that is just the start. 
Others on the list of disgraced “Republican” neocons, globalists, and establishment insiders who are pushing a Clinton presidency include Bush globalist and leading Iraq war booster Richard Armitage; Ken Adelman, assistant to Iraq warmonger Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and later a senior disarmament bureaucrat; Tony Fratto, deputy propagandist for George W. Bush; former “regional EPA administrator” Alan Steinberg, also from the second Bush administration; Mark Salter, a “former speechwriter” for embattled neocon globalist Senator John McCain of Arizona; and more. Also listed are people with politically toxic titles like “Republican lobbyist,” “Republican strategist,” and a handful of mega-donors and crony capitalists.
That is all wonderful news for the Trump campaign. Essentially, neoconservatism and globalism are now considered toxic in the GOP. And so, the neocon and globalist factions in the Republican Party have been preparing to migrate to the Democrat Party to join their ideological brethren. The preparations have been underway for some time. Indeed, the globalist mouthpiece New York Timesdescribed as a “propaganda megaphone” for war and the establishment by a former reporter, reported on the trend two years ago — long before Trump, running on an anti-globalism campaign, became the nominee. “Even as they castigate Mr. Obama, the neocons may be preparing a more brazen feat: aligning themselves with Hillary Rodham Clinton and her nascent presidential campaign, in a bid to return to the driver’s seat of American foreign policy,” an opinion piece in the Times noted in July of 2014. “It’s easy to imagine Mrs. Clinton’s making room for the neocons in her administration.”  
More recently, Politico was reporting that the Hillary Clinton campaign was courting major Bush donors — many of whom stand to lose big money if the cronyism, banker bailouts, and funding for the perpetual war machine start to dry up. According to the report, the Clinton camp told Bush's donors “that she represents their values better than Donald Trump.” And if Trump actually means what he says about stopping illegal wars, asking Congress for a declaration of war before waging one, withdrawing from globalist entangling alliances and pseudo-“free trade” regimes, putting America first, ending globalism, and so on, then the Clinton campaign is probably — in an unusual move — actually telling the truth in this case.  
The ultra far-left, Bernie Sanders-supporting wing of the Democrat Party has wondered if and when the opposite might start happening, with non-establishment Democrats joining the Trump bandwagon. “One might think that at least Bernie’s supporters would applaud Trump’s left-wing transformation of the old conservative, pro-corporate neocon Cheney-Bush core of the Republican Party,” explained two leftist analysts at the radical leftist website “But nobody had a single good word to say about Trump’s assertions that he would wind down confrontation with Russia, reduce military spending on the grounds that NATO is obsolete, and oppose the TPP and TTIP as well as rewrite NAFTA’s terms.” Indeed, many lifelong Democrats have already joined the Trump bandwagon, as chronicled by the pro-Clinton Daily Beast itself.
Meanwhile, the neocons will have to share the Democrat Party with proud communists and socialists, as evidenced by the numerous Marxists and other extremists on the Platform Committee. However, the ideological extremism of the neoconservative movement actually makes the factions natural allies. In his 1995 book Neoconservatism, Irving Kristol, the father of neocon Bill Kristol and of the neocon movement, made it plain. “I regard myself lucky to have been a young Trotskyite and I have not one single bitter memory,” Kristol gushed. Other founding fathers of the neoconservative movement such as Norman Podhoretz and Max Shachtman, a former Communist Party member, shared those feelings.
National Review editor, Skull and Bones secret society initiate, and CFR member William Buckley, masterfully exposed in the 2002 book William F. Buckley, Jr.: Pied Piper for the Establishment, played a key role in helping the neocons burrow their way into the GOP. But now, with National Review's reputation and influence in tatters, the most unsavory elements of the GOP are packing up and moving to the Democratic Party. As such, the Democrat Party is becoming the proud pro-war, pro-Wall Street Party under Clinton.
Neocons themselves are well aware of it. “I'm old enough to remember when the Republican nominee was pro-war, pro-TPP, and pro-Wall Street ... and proud of it!” lamented neocon leader and Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, the son of the Trotskyite founder of the neoconservative movement. The bizarre remark was a response to Trump's comment that Bernie Sanders had “abandoned his supporters by endorsing pro-war pro-TPP pro-Wall Street Crooked Hillary Clinton.” The globalists and neocons are not all dumb, though, as evidenced by the fact that some of them have not yet burned their bridges with Trump.
Whether Trump will actually stand by his pledges of a non-interventionist foreign policy, sensible trade policies, and an end to globalism remains to be seen. With no voting record but a documented history of funding the Clintons and other establishment politicians, more than a few real conservatives and constitutionalists have expressed concerns about Trump. If Republicans work hard, though, the exposure and exodus from the GOP of the globalist-neocon-warmonger faction, which includes almost zero actual grassroots voters, will mean that there is at least one major party in American politics not totally under the control of anti-American globalist neocons who love war and aim to sideline the U.S. Constitution.
Still, the real keys to making America great again include creating an educated electorate that understands the Constitution and the Judeo-Christian foundations of America, and electing good candidates to the House of Representatives who understand as well. Patriotic Americans should not lose sight of those facts amid the frenzied 2016 presidential election.
Related articles:



(Friday Church News Notes, July 29, 2016,, 866-295-4143) - 
SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

    The following is excerpted from “Putin Signs,”, July 8, 2016: “Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has signed into law legislation on so-called ‘missionary activity,’ further restricting the public expression of freedom of religion and belief, including in the media and online. The amendment--which has been rapidly introduced--caused widespread protests, but was signed on 6 July and the signing was made public at Moscow lunchtime on 7 July. It was published on the presidential website that day and comes into force on 20 July. Lawyers working to protect the right to freedom of religion and belief are already preparing for an appeal to the Constitutional Court. ... Against international human rights obligations, the amendments to the Religion Law restrict those who can share beliefs to people with permission from members of state-registered religious groups and organisations. This excludes people from groups which have chosen to operate without state permission, such as certain Baptist congregations. 
    The amendments also bar even informal sharing of beliefs, for example responding to questions or comments, by individuals acting on their own behalf. The amendments also restrict the beliefs that can be shared, specifies a restricted list of places where beliefs may be shared, and explicitly bans any beliefs from being shared in residential buildings, or on another association’s property without permission. An allegedly ‘anti-terrorist’ part of the amendments bars the conversion of residential property to religious use. There are now heavy financial penalties of up to 50,000 Roubles for individuals and up to 1 million Roubles for organisations who violate the amendments. A fine of 50,000 Roubles (about 6,500 Norwegian Kroner, 700 Euros, or 780 US Dollars) represents about six weeks’ average wages for those in work. Maximum fines for organisations would be up to 20 times as much.”