For October 21,2011
Rev. Father Deacon Christopher Herman News (DCHN) Presentations:
note, opinion and commentary:
Rev. Father Deacon
Christopher Herman, the son of our former spiritual father, Vladyka Michael
Peter Herman of reposed memory for providing us the articles and their various
We believe that what is presented is a step in
the right direction to bring our Orthodox Faith alive to all and a means to cure
some of the ills that separate our Roman faithful from the root, ground and base
of all things Christian: being Orthodox Catholic Christianity that began in the
A.D. 800's and culminated in the official schism of the Roman Jurisdiction of
the Catholic Church from Orthodoxy in 1054 A.D.
By presenting these
articles and informational pages and
subsequent, hoped for, weekly presentations, this endeavor will reach a wider
audience and provide a means for dialogue. For it is in and through the
Life and Teachings of Jesus Christ, our Savior, that love, compassion and
understanding may come about. In saying this truth, it also means that we
make another attempt to fulfill the ideal of why we are called "Christian" ...
Orthodoxy is not a religion. It is CHRISTIANITY itself! To a true
Christian, the events taking place through out the world and locally in the USA
is important because of how it may (and in some instances has) affected our
religious rights and freedoms here in the U.S.A and in some other Western World
Initially we had begun by "Subject" but found
that by "DATE" is a better format. Thus, the former entitled "Concerning"
below are a form of archival resources while the remainder is by dating.
As Thou, Father, art in
me and I in Thee; that they also may be one in Us. (John 17:21)
Share with Christopher and 2 others in your new group:
Immigration, Multiculturalism and Defending the Nation State
This group is Open, which
means anyone can see the group, its members, and what members post.
What can you do in your group?
Members can post and comment on updates, chat with everyone at once,
schedule group events, create shared docs, and
"The law allows the government to set prices in an economy it deems “hyper-monopolised”,
and forces banks to divest assets including insurance companies, asset
managers and brokerages. It also allows the president to override its
requirements via simple executive decree, as long as such a decision “favours
the public interest” or represents “affirmative action in favour of the
popular and solidarity economy.” Fines handed out by the antitrust watchdog
will run from 8-12% of the preceding year’s sales—a figure that runs in line
with international standards, but is high enough that it could bankrupt
companies altogether and wind up reducing competition if it is not employed
"Regardless of what happens to his reputation, Dubrinsky says he's worried
about losing longtime staffers who he describes as good workers as well as
good people. "They're like family to me," he says. Despite a national
unemployment rate above 9 percent, he says that finding non-Latino workers
willing to toil in his hot kitchen for modest pay has not been easy, just as
many farmers are having a hard time finding non-Latino workers willing to pick
"It's easier said than done," says Dubrinsky.
To prepare for his vacancies, Dubrinsky offered a job to a woman at $8.25 per
hour a couple of weeks ago. After initially accepting, she called back to say
she couldn't take it because she'd lose her food stamps and government-funded
health care. More recently, Dubrinsky hired a man to work the grill in the
kitchen. He showed up on Sunday but didn't last long.
Dubrinsky says the man disappeared after just two hours, leaving only an apron
in his place."
The Government Accountability Office has weighed in on the controversy
over whether the federal gove...
"A mob-abetted execution isn't the ideal way to inaugurate an era of liberty.
That Libya's interim government couldn't even match the low standard of
justice set by Iraq's trial of Saddam is a reminder of how far we are from a
successful end. Few political arrangements are more horrible than the reign of
a corrupt autocrat. But rule by 'armed militias that answer to no central
authority' might just be one of them."
"It's hard not to feel a certain mordant satisfaction at the ignominious
way that one of recent hist...
Even though I suspect I would be more inclined to the educational position of
the corporate donors, my point here is the interaction of monied interests and
local elections, which is newsworthy by itself...
Wow! At least one thing I can agree with Obama about!
This demonstrates that however far the message of Austrian economics has been
spread, it hasn't yet made its way to Hollywood - the people who pride
themselves on being open-minded are not aware of this intellectual current...
"We like to think of the 1 percent as evil bankers — oh, and they totally are.
But it is also our movie stars and television icons, and their fans are making
that inequity possible. As Brent Cox explained for the Awl last month, even
adjusted for inflation, Hollywood has never before paid the kind of psycho
money it’s hemorrhaging on its stars now. In 2011 money, Marilyn Monroe would
have clocked in at a modest under $2 million for “The Misfits.” Leonardo
DiCaprio, in contrast, stands to make $50 million for “Inception.”
To pay for the stars, studios have gutted the number of movies they make by 20
percent. And while Depp earns enough to buy himself a small planet, Jack
Sparrow’s home at Disney is laying off hundreds of employees. This is the same
studio whose sense of proportion is so out of whack that it prides itself on
sticking to a $215 million budget for a remake of “The Lone Ranger,” starring,
of course, Johnny Depp. In a harrowingly grandiose statement of out-of-touchness,
Jerry Bruckheimer told the Hollywood Reporter this week, “For the smaller
scenes [we] laid off the extras, the effects people, the makeup people … We
bunched together scenes with Tonto and the Lone Ranger, so we had a much
smaller crew. We saved about $10 million just by doing that.” Wait, that’s how
you saved money? Laying off effects people?
Now imagine a studio looking at its bottom line and saying to a star, “Yeah,
maybe $10 million bucks and a small cut of the profits is plenty for this one,
pal.” Honest to God, what, aside from Will Smith’s or Angelina Jolie’s pride,
would make that insulting? And in the meantime, with more funds freed up,
Hollywood could go about the business of taking risks and nurturing new talent
and making more movies. That we audiences might even support. With our money.
Because we’d have some freaking jobs.
And what if we invested in ourselves once in a while, too? If we put the price
of a movie ticket toward helping someone in need? You can text REDCROSS to
90999 to donate $10, right from your phone. What if we gave that ticket price
to Donors Choose, to help a school fund a dream project or get needed
supplies? What if, instead of spending an hour watching “NCIS,” for which Mark
Harmon will earn $13 million this year, we spent that hour working with the
local outpost of Habitant for Humanity?"
$.99 Kindle edition of the book "Climate Coup" available NOW on Amazon (this
"Like no one else on the planet, Michaels once again puts sizzle in the global
warming debate. Michaels and his distinguished authors pull back the curtains
on Climategate, cap-and-trade, the scientific review process, and motives for
various policies. What they expose will keep you reading page after page."
– Robert C. Balling, Jr., Professor, Arizona State University
"Dr. Ramzi Amri, of Harvard Medical School, believes that Jobs, who had a mild
form of cancer which is not usually fatal, may have ushered along his own
death by delaying conventional treatment in favor of alternative medicine.
Dr. Amri wrote his theory in a detailed post to Quora, an online Q&A forum
popular among Silicon Valley executives: "Let me cut to the chase. Mr. Jobs
allegedly chose to undergo all sorts of alternative treatment options before
opting for conventional medicine. Given the circumstances, it seems sound to
assume that Mr. Jobs' choice for alternative medicine has eventually led to an
unnecessarily early death."
Dr. Amri said neuroendocrine tumors are so "mild" that "in my series of
patients, for many subtypes, the survival rate was as high as 100% over a
In Jobs's case, surgical removal may have saved him if performed early enough,
writes Dr. Amri: "In many cases, a simple enucleation (just cutting out the
tumor with a safe margin around it) is enough and leaves no residual
Noting that the cancer also spread to all the major parts of Jobs' liver, Dr.
Amri says: "The only reason he'd have a transplant would be that the tumor
invaded all major parts of the liver, which takes a considerable amount of
Dr. Amri said the Whipple procedure and liver transplant were clear signs the
cancer was out of control and should have been stopped earlier.
"It seems that even during this recurrent phase, Mr. Jobs opted to dedicate
his time to Apple as the disease progressed, instead of opting for
chemotherapy or any other conventional treatment."
When contacted by Gawker.com, Dr. Amri expressed his "profoundest respect" for
Jobs and said that "I do not pretend to know anything about the case on a
personal level and I never participated in the care of Mr. Jobs. I base all my
cancer figures on my own research or sources from biomedical research known to
me... I have done 1.5 years of research on the type of tumor that affected
Steve Jobs and have some strong opinions on his case.""
"Most pancreatic cancers are aggressive and always terminal, but Steve was
lucky (if you can call it that) and had a rare form called an islet cell
neuroendocrine tumor, which is actually quite treatable with excellent
survival rates — if caught soon enough. The median survival is about a decade,
but it depends on how soon it’s removed surgically. Steve caught his very
early, and should have expected to survive much longer than a decade.
Unfortunately Steve relied on a diet instead of early surgery. "
"Predictably, first out of the box is the despicable crank known as Mike
Adams. As I've written about in the case of Patrick Swayze, Tony Snow, Farrah
Fawcett, and others, Adams has made a not-so-savory name for himself for
ghoulishly (and gleefully) taking advantage of the death of celebrities in
order to blame "conventional" medicine for having killed them. It's a
depressing and predictable pattern that continued with Steve Jobs. Indeed,
Adams produced an article on Steve Jobs' death so quickly (within hours of the
announcement of Jobs' passing) that I have to wonder if he had already had it
written and teed up, just waiting for Jobs to die. Whatever the case, Adams
entitled his article, again predictably enough given his past history, Steve
Jobs dead at 56, his life ended prematurely by chemotherapy and radiotherapy
for cancer, which begins with a typical charge (from Adams):
It is extremely saddening to see the cost in human lives that modern society
pays for its false belief in conventional medicine and the cancer industry in
particular. Visionary Steve Jobs died today, just months after being treated
for cancer with chemotherapy at the Stanford Cancer Center in Palo Alto,
California. In recent months, he appeared in public photos as a frail shadow
of his former self. The thin legs, sunken cheek bones and loss of body weight
are all classic signs of total body toxicity observed in chemotherapy and
Or, of course, it could have been the recurrent cancer progressing. Cancer
does that, you know.
Adams then goes on and on about how gaunt Jobs looked in his last few public
appearances, and, indeed, it's true. Jobs did start to look quite unhealthy in
the time leading up to his liver transplant in 2009, and, even after
recovering from his surgery, he never quite looked the same; certainly his
gaunt appearance never quite rebounded. In public photos, Jobs never looked
truly healthy again, and speculation abounded about the cause. Again, I've
discussed this in detail multiple times before, most recently in my repost. In
2008, I speculated that maybe he had dumping syndrome from his Whipple
operation, and this was before his liver transplant was ever revealed. After
his transplant, the reason was less clear.
Be that as it may, Adams then concludes, again quite predictably for him:
In other words, there is no question that Steve Jobs underwent multiple
conventional cancer treatments, including surgery, chemotherapy and
In the end, however, even Steve Jobs could not overturn the laws of
biochemistry. When you poison the human body, the result is the deterioration
and eventual shut down of the body. Chemotherapy does not work! This fact
should now be obvious, and yet every year, more and more people choose
chemotherapy to their own demise -- people like Farrah Fawcett, Peter
Jennings, Patrick Swayze, Michael Douglas and many others (http://www.naturalnews.com/027047_c...).
Don't they see that conventional cancer treatments do not work?
Yet his remaining life was stolen from him by the cancer industry and its
poisons. This is yet another frustrating example of how the modern medical
system harms our society. It steals from us the longevity of visionary
individuals who have so much more to offer our world in terms of creativity
Of course, you can't blame the cancer industry for causing Jobs' cancer in the
first place. Some other cause had to have been present to get the cancer
growing -- probably a combination of nutritional deficiencies and exposure to
environmental toxins. And yet the cancer establishment says nothing to people
about correcting obvious nutritional deficiencies that lead to cancer, even
when most cancers can be prevented for mere pennies a day.
The truly ironic thing, of course, is that Jobs lived a lifestyle very similar
to the one that Adams touts as an all-purpose cancer preventative. For
example, Jobs was widely reported to be a vegan. Indeed, Jobs' veganism was
such "common knowledge" that comedy pieces were written about it. Actually,
it's not clear that Jobs really was a vegan. For instance, it's been widely
reported that he was in fact a pescatarian, which is a vegetarian who will
sometimes eat fish, and was a Zen Buddhist. It is, however, clear that Jobs
did not eat meat and that the animal rights group PETA has paid homage to him
after his death for being a vegetarian and sympathetic to animal rights
causes. The point, of course, is that Steve Jobs ate a diet and lived a
lifestyle far more similar to the kind that Adams touts as a cure-all or
prevent-all for cancer than the "typical" fat- and meat-laden American diet
that Adams lambastes.
It goes further than that, though.
As I discussed back when it was first revealed, when Jobs was first diagnosed
with his cancer, he decided to try to avoid surgery by undertaking a special
diet. Indeed, in the Fortune story (The Trouble With Steve Jobs) that first
reported this, Jobs was described as "skeptical of mainstream medicine" and
having decided to "employ alternative methods to treat his pancreatic cancer,
hoping to avoid the operation through a special diet.""
It's been a mere two days since Steve Jobs died. Although it hasn't yet
been revealed what his speci...
"EDITOR'S ALERT: Holy Bailout! Federal Reserve Now Backstopping US$75 Trillion
of Derivative Trades ... That's the headline over at the Daily Bail (no
relationship to us) reporting on a Bloomberg wire that "Bank of America Corp.
... has moved derivatives from its Merrill Lynch unit to a subsidiary flush
with insured deposits..." It brings the Fed closer to the target that we have
set in previous articles of US$100 trillion. That's what we long-ago estimated
the bailout would eventually cost the American taxpayer, and apparently this
day is rapidly approaching. In fact, since there is perhaps US$750 trillion in
notional derivatives, the total is virtually limitless should the Fed actually
have to step in. It's stupid money, of course, and the main reason we have
been writing for several years that the dollar reserve system is basically
dead. "This is a recipe for Armageddon," writes the Daily Bail, "Bernanke is
"It seems quite remarkable, even outlandish. Given the graveness of the
charges and the outlandishness of the story, we want to view it with some
skepticism. We should also keep in mind that the Iranian government gets
blamed for lots of things, not all of which it does, and the United States
government makes lots of claims, not all of which prove to be accurate.
With regard to the sloppiness, the Iranians tend to be very, very
professional, but they can also be very amateurish. If this is the first time
they operated on US soil, they probably don't have the assets or the network
to do it the way they otherwise might.
Assuming this did come from the Iranian government, we don't know who in the
government actually authorized it. We know that Iranian terrorist operations
are sometimes authorized and sometimes they are not. In the case of the
Mykonos restaurant assassinations in Berlin in 1992 (when three
Iranian-Kurdish opposition leaders and a translator were killed), it's clear
that the government did authorize them. But in 2009, according to the
information available, the Revolutionary Guard seized British sailors on its
own. That, too, would be an operation where any Westerner would ask 'Why
didn't they have the approval at the highest levels to do this?'"
"Romney scored with a basic truth here–the individual mandate is a Republican
idea, which came out of the way-conservative Heritage Foundation in the early
90s and that Gingrich supported it. This is an absolutely crucial truth about
both Obamacare and Romneycare: its most basic provisions–the individual
mandate and health-care exchanges (the superstores where consumers will be
able to shop for coverage)–are both Republican ideas. To be sure, Obama’s vast
expansion of Medicaid did not come out of the Heritage foundation and it isn’t
a very good idea in the long term. But this was, as the President might say, a
teachable moment. It is important for rank-and-file Republicans to understand
that their idea factories gave birth to Obamacare."
Dr. Ross' focused on the science related content in Job, which he found was
the book in the Bible that had the most comprehensive information creation and
science. As he continued his research he discovered more treasures in the book
of Job. He found connections between the biblical account of natural history.
He also says Job emphasizes how the higher animals are designed to teach us
about God and ourselves, and it predicted global warming and cosmic darkness.
Dr. Ross feels that Job is a forgotten resource for science-based apologetics
and hopes Christians will consider the science and creation content in Job to
help answer their questions about the Christian faith, heal divisions within
the church, and challenge nonbelievers with biblical evidence they may not
have thought about.
CREATION AND SOULISH ANIMALS
The book of Job shows many mistakes in Darwin's ideas. Genesis 1 describes
three distinct origins of Earth's life: life that is physical (plants and
insects); life that is physical and soulish (birds, mammals, and reptiles);
and life that is physical, soulish; and spiritual (only humans). Job also
gives significant information about these three sets of life-forms, how God
designed them, and how they relate to one another. Genesis 1 also refers to
the physical and soulish category of life by the Hebrew term nepesh. This is
the word used for “soulish” creatures, or animals with the capacity for a
limited range of thought, choice, and feeling, but without the spiritual
[qualities] that humans have. Job shows how these higher animals relate to
humans and how God gave each soulish animal unique capacities to serve and
please humans in their own way. Ten specific animals (lion, raven, goat, deer,
donkey, wild ox, ostrich, horse, hawk, and eagle) are shown to help in the
launch of civilization and sustaining humans today. There are several lessons
that humans can learn from observing and relating to animals.
LESSONS FROM THE ANIMALS
In Job 12 it says to look at the beasts and they will teach you. Here are some
lessons we can learn from the animals:
*Animals will do what they normally wouldn’t do in their natural habitat to
please and serve humans. When we develop a powerful relationship with God we
will rise to the occasion and achieve what we
normally wouldn’t achieve
*We were created to serve God, but sin caused us to run from God. Just like
sin causes animals
to run from humans.
*Like animals can form a strong bond with humans, we can form a strong bond
*Every single animal species that is created serves a specific purpose. It is
the same with humans.
Dr. Ross has always loved hiking. In his early 20s he wanted to do an
experiment. He chose an area where the animals had no human contact in remote
part of Canada. After a period of time the animals came close to him and
interacted with him. They showed no fear. Dr. Ross concluded that this was how
God originally intended it to be before sin entered the world.
I have seen several "Vendetta" masks in the footage of the crowds...
Up until now we’ve been relying mainly on the incoherent ramblings of
Occupy Wall Street activists t...
"The appeal to the anti-conservative fallacy is in any event not the only
dubious aspect of liberal and libertarian criticism of conservative attempts
to "legislate morality." For as we've seen, liberals and libertarians
themselves appeal to certain moral principles in defending their favored
policies. So how can they consistently criticize conservatives for doing the
same? Isn't the liberal trying to "legislate morality" when he advocates
redistributing wealth in the name of fairness? Isn't he thereby "imposing his
moral views" on the wealthy? Aren't libertarians also "imposing their moral
views" on liberals by trying to stop such redistribution? If libertarians who
think that redistributive taxation amounts to theft could enact a law
forbidding it, wouldn't this too amount to "legislating morality"? And if a
liberal or libertarian responded by saying "Well, my moral views are the right
ones!" why wouldn't this be just another instance of the same sort of dogmatic
intolerance that conservatives are so often accused of?
The claim that "we shouldn't impose our personal moral views on other people"
is in fact a very curious one. It seems to convey the idea that all moral
views are merely "personal" in the sense of reflecting nothing more than
individual tastes or preferences, and thus cannot justifiably be "imposed" on
those who do not share those tastes or preferences. Their constant appeal to
this idea in criticizing conservative policies is thus probably the main
reason liberals and libertarians are often suspected of being moral
relativists. But since, as we've noted already, liberals and libertarians can
be quite absolutist about their own moral beliefs, and are not at all
reluctant to tell others that they ought to abide by them, it is evident that
their views are not genuinely relativist at all. Indeed, the idea that "we
shouldn't impose our personal moral views on other people" sounds itself like
an absolute moral imperative. So what exactly is going on here?
It seems clear that what liberals and libertarians really mean when they
criticize conservatives for "imposing their moral views on others" is not that
there is anything wrong with letting moral views, even controversial ones,
guide public policy. Rather, what they mean is that specifically conservative
moral views shouldn't be allowed to guide policy -- either because such views
are not, strictly speaking, really views about morality per se in the first
place but are rather mere expressions of personal taste, or because they are
views about morality, but views that happen to be false. To state their
objection to conservative policies more frankly, though, would be less
rhetorically effective. If a liberal or libertarian said "My views are
genuinely moral ones, and conservative views are mere expressions of personal
taste" or "My moral views are correct and conservative views are not," then it
would be obvious that he was making what are nothing more than undefended and
highly debatable assertions. Far better, then, to say something like "No one
should impose his personal moral views on other people." That way, the liberal
or libertarian seems to be saying something obviously true (namely that no one
should impose idiosyncratic and subjective personal tastes on others) when in
fact he is making an extremely controversial claim for which he has offered no
justification (namely that liberal or libertarian moral views, but not
conservative ones, should be allowed to guide public policy).
Rhetorically effective as this move is, though, it is intellectually
dishonest. To be sure, liberals and libertarians who talk this way probably
don't consciously realize that they are engaging in a kind of sleight of hand.
Most of them are no doubt just muddle-headed, and don't see the
inconsistencies and confusions inherent in their view. But the inconsistencies
and confusions are there all the same. If you are going to take a
controversial position to the effect that all discrimination or wealth
redistribution is wrong (as liberals and libertarians, respectively, would
say) and therefore ought to be forbidden by law, you can't consistently say
that controversial moral views shouldn't be enforced via legislation. If you
believe that your own favored moral principles are objectively valid and
binding on everyone, you shouldn't speak in a way that conveys the misleading
impression that moral judgments in general are as idiosyncratic and subjective
as tastes in ice cream. And of course, whatever other objections you might
have to conservative policy proposals, it is hardly legitimate to rely on
fallacious reasoning in criticizing them -- as those who commit what I've
called "the anti-conservative fallacy" do.
Not all moral principles ought to be enforced by the power of government, but
almost everything government does is based on some moral principle or other.
It is fatuous, then, to hold that "we shouldn't legislate morality," if this
means that controversial moral principles shouldn't guide public policy. And
almost every moral principle is controversial to a significant extent: even
when people agree that murder is wrong, they often disagree about what counts
as murder, as the disputes over abortion, euthanasia, and even the killing of
animals attest. The question, then, is not whether controversial moral
principles ought to inform our laws, but rather which controversial moral
principles -- liberal, conservative, libertarian, or whatever -- ought to
inform them. As the Schiavo case illustrates, it is inevitably going to be
extremely difficult, if not impossible, to settle these matters in a way that
is going to satisfy all members of a pluralistic society. But it is no use
pretending that the difficulty doesn't exist -- or that it is only
conservative moral scruples that give rise to it."
The recent Terri Schiavo controversy has raised once again the question
of whether government ought ...
"Here is video of the arrest. You see that I was standing completely still and
speaking very calmly to the officer, on a sidewalk that the permit specified
protesters could march if they did not obstruct foot traffic which they were
not; they were in single file and there was about twelve feet on either side
of them/us. My arrest was for 'disorderly conduct.' PLease decide for yourself
if my completely still position, calm voice and compliance with what I knew to
be the terms of the permit can be construed in that way:
The right-wing media have engaged in a relentless smear campaign against
the Occupy Wall Street move...
On Friday, Rush Limbaugh delivered a defense of the Lord's Resistance
Army, a murderous cult. Seekin...
A remarkable Arab op-ed oozes shame: "When will we see an Arab official
assuring a family that the government is doing its utmost to secure the
release of an Arab captive abroad as did Israeli prime ministers with Shalit's
family? As long as we, Arabs, do not respect ourselves nobody will ever
respect us, and we will always exchange thousands of Arabs for one single
Israeli Israeli soldier."
"[Farmer]Lana Boatwright ... said many of the people she has tried to hire
since the law went into effect were concerned about losing their government
disability payments if they worked in the fields."
""There is [sic] precisely zero
mentions by any of the Founders that the Fifth Amendment is supposed to
prevent the president from killing enemy combatants, even if they are U.S.
citizens." Of course, there's also no case of U.S. citizens being targeted for
death by Presidents during the time of the Founders.
But we do have the exact opposite example from George Washington during the
Whiskey Rebellion. President Washington did order rebellious citizens to
"disperse and retire peaceably to their respective abodes," and he did call
out the militia to stop what he labeled "overt acts of levying war against the
United States" during the Whiskey Rebellion. But that was only after
Washington received permission to use force from Congress and had sent a
delegation to meet with the violent insurgents in western Pennsylvania. And
even after that, Washington used minimal force. He did not automatically try
to "take out" any insurgents as Obama has done in the war on terror. After the
Whiskey Rebellion ended, the U.S. Senate applauded Washington's "lenient and
persuasive measures" that avoided unnecessary bloodshed.
In fact, when a man and a boy were killed by federal militia under
Washington's command, Washington ordered both shooters arrested and handed
them over to Pennsylvania state prosecutors. Washington did this even though
the man had been killed while clearly resisting arrest. Judges later ruled
that both shootings were accidental and set the militia members free, but
Washington's example in the only two deaths under his command is a sharp
contrast with Obama's assassination list today. As Thomas Slaughter noted in
his book The Whiskey Rebellion, "Federal officials had hoped to instill fear
among dissidents, but not necessarily to kill them; friends of order had no
wish to open themselves to charges of oppression or to create martyrs useful
to the political opposition."
Instead of taking "war" as a license to kill, George Washington arrested rebel
insurgents during the Whiskey Rebellion. He then ensured that every one of the
rebels who had been warring against the U.S. government received a civilian
trial. When two of the defendants in the Whiskey Rebellion were found guilty
of treason and sentenced to death, Washington pardoned both offenders.
By way of contrast, Obama made no attempt to get the permission of Congress
(which had given permission to go after only the actual perpetrators of the
September 11 attacks in the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force
law) and made no known attempt to arrest Awlaki before killing him. Moreover,
Obama (supposedly the openness President) has refused to release any
information about Awlaki's guilt in actually planning a terrorist incident or
any information about the secret death panel that supposedly condemned Awlaki."
"It was a belligerent (and selectively
misquoted) speech directed at the rebels that gave the French President a
fleeting opportunity to intervene in the uprising in Libya that he did not
miss. His claim to be concerned about the people of Libya and ‘to protect the
civil population’ sits uneasily with the report in the usually well-informed
newspaper Canard Enchainé that French intelligence agents have been active in
stirring up rebellion in Libya since well before the outbreak of hostilities.
Khadafy has raised the standard of living of his people to one of the highest
in Africa so the tenacious rebellion has come as something of a surprise. The
“Brother leader” was not beloved of all his people but it sounds awfully like
another case of a western use of the intelligence services lighting the blue
touch-paper and then shrieking for the military fire brigade in the inevitable
ensuing mayhem. At a very deep level was Sarkozy acting as a stalking horse
for Obama or some other element in US governmental circles?
However that may be, Sarkozy seized a fleeting opening and, through the
unorthodox medium of the intellectual Bernard Henri-Lévi, met and then granted
the rebels in Benghazi diplomatic recognition. Resolution 1973 was then
scrambled through the UN Security Council authorising a no-fly zone to protect
the civilian population and calling for a ceasefire. Notably Brazil, India,
China, Russia, and Germany abstained – a big chunk of international opinion.
Only nine days later the Sarkozy French initiative had morphed into a
full-blown NATO aerial attack on Libya with the stated objective of the
defence of the civil population, free movement of humanitarian aid and the
forced return of the Libyan army to barracks."
Sarkozy’s Libyan War
June 23, 2011 Sarkozy’s Libyan War By
Robert Harneis French President Nicolas Sarkozy sta...
"The European-instigated NATO
involvement in the Libyan civil war was no doubt seen as just such a
prestige-building exercise. The EU nations were in need of some action that
could show they were, as Jacques Chirac said in 1995, an “essential pole” in
the “multipolar world” created by the end of the Cold War. In the 1990s that
boast had been exposed as hollow after the horrors in the Balkans––ethnic
cleansing, massacres of civilians, torture and mutilation of prisoners in
concentration camps––were stopped not by the Europeans and the UN, but by an
American bombing campaign conducted under the patina of NATO authority. The
subsequent wars against jihadist terror likewise have been American affairs,
undertaken against the advice, wishes, and obstructions of major powers like
France and Germany. The whole edifice of EU “postmodern” foreign policy,
predicated on the “soft power” of diplomacy and international law, is nothing
but an exercise in bad faith if American soldiers and cruise-missiles have to
be called on to punish aggressors.
The civil war in nearby Libya, with its mostly flat terrain and Mediterranean
coastline, seemed like a lovely little prestige-building intervention for the
Europeans. The patent sadistic lunacy of Gaddafi, evident in his bluster about
exterminating the “rats” in the rebel stronghold of Benghazi, added a moral
imperative to the logistical conveniences. And an American president eager to
“lead from behind” and allow the Europeans to do most of the bombing on
America’s nickel, all in the name of “multilateralism,” thrust into the
shadows the perennial unpleasant fact that NATO is institutional camouflage
for American military power, an organization necessary for those
military-scrimping nations that NATO Secretary-General Lord Robertson once
called “military pygmies.”
Yet despite the downfall of Gaddafi’s regime, the Libyan adventure is unlikely
to fool anybody into respecting Europe’s geopolitical clout. Too many
unpleasant contradictions and unanswered questions still hang around the
campaign. Everyone knows that American cruise missiles and intelligence were
critical to the campaign. Rules of engagement designed for political rather
than military efficacy, an unwillingness to risk ground troops, Obama’s
disappearance, and squabbling between NATO states unnecessarily prolonged the
conflict to the detriment of those nations’ prestige. It is unlikely that any
aggressor is going to be deterred by a coalition which, enjoying superiority
in the air and armed with high-tech weaponry, took several months and 20,000
sorties to defeat a glorified gangster like Gaddafi. As Stanley Kurtz points
out, “If this is what it takes for America and its allies to dislodge an
unpopular dictator in open terrain, our more dangerous potential adversaries
cannot be feeling much fear right now.”"
You have reached the End of the
Article... But, read on...
Apostle 1.com's Disclaimer Notice
and other things
Contents & Links:
Some of the items you may come across requires Adobe ".pdf" reader.
don't have Adobe
Reader installed on your pc, click
download it for free. You will need Adobe Reader to open pdf files. (Most
pc's already have an Adobe Reader installed.) However,
you may also wish to use Open Office which is another Free download that
can be reached at:
Which provides (for some people) a better way to create and manage
documents as well as " .pdf " files and other items.
In due time we shall be using "zipped" files.
Most computers already have installed a ZIP FILE EXTRACTOR, however
If you need a Zip
utility program to unzip or extract zipped files, click
download a free trial of WinZip.
Disclaimer Notice & Other
Note, Commentary, opinion & Disclaimer Notice:
We Have many Contributors to our DAILY NEWS SERVICE, as well as many other
Updates & Information provided - We are thankful for our Desert Angels, Our
Flying Foxes, Our Flying Squirrels and our many other contributors... Even
though we don't always give the credit they deserve... We want you, the viewer
to know that they are a part of our life and living... They are, according to
their nature & degree of ability, truly Christian in Spirit and in Truth for
they have YOU, the viewer in mind as a part of their own concerns too, as we do
However... there is
something else we wish to warn you about.
DISCLAIMER NOTICE: The views expressed
at this website regarding any article not directly connected to religious
content is the opinion or commentary of the author
which we may
not necessarily believe in, accept or support, and some religious articles we
may not accept or support either.
We take no responsibility or liability for the content of any news item or
article presented as any information provided which you rely upon requires that
you, the reader/viewer, take action to verify its worthiness on your own.
We have deduced to a minor degree, that the information provided by the author
is such that warrants posting for you the viewer/reader only... and that any
statements or purported facts, including any news item, is for you to verify as
to its authenticity. We take no liability and no responsibility for its
accuracy whatsoever! You who are new visitors, may wish to read a very short
article below entitled "The
purpose for presenting our Daily News section"
Sadly to say, we
take no pleasure in stating that some of the items we post are not from what we
would call true "Christian" organizations. But we post it because it provides
another side of the proverbial story.
after all, is
supposed to be a temple
for sick souls (sinners) without distinction
between their worse sins or otherwise, but it seems to some organizations that
they say much about others, but fail and refuse to upbraid themselves and their
members for their own sins...)
never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be
eastern. The West was Orthodox for a thousand years, and her venerable liturgy
is far older than any of her heresies."
- Blessed St. John
Maximovitch of Shanghai and San Francisco
The purpose for presenting this Daily News section:
Daily News is very important to those who are true Orthodox Catholic Christians.
For without knowing or gaining information for understanding about what is
happening in one's local area and around the world, you could find
yourself faced with denied services in the secular area, lack of income, even
(although it sounds far-fetched) ability to worship openly for the time is not
far off when all will have to decide if they wish to follow the Anti-Christ
through the One World Church and One World Government as prophesied by the
Apocalypse, the Book of Revelation of St. John or follow the faith delivered
once and for all which will cause for many to be denied the abilities to survive
under those kind of conditions, causing for one to consider other options.
Many of those who subscribe to, and some who have caused or are the cause for,
these things to happen are involved in or with the Roman Jurisdiction of the
Catholic Church (which is not the seat of all things "Catholic") as well as its
protestant daughters such as the cultic Jehovah's Witnesses, the Pentecostal
Churches, the Church of Latter Day Saints also known as the Mormon Church and
far too many more to list.
Yet, at this web site we do provide some of the reasons about why they are
opined to be the harbingers of that which is prophesied in Holy Scripture for
the bringing about of the End Times which we have already entered. It is
not necessarily their individual members or parishioners that should be blamed
since they are only the "Sheep" and not the Shepherds... So do not think we
castigate individual people of themselves as we castigate those "money changers"
who Jesus Christ chased out of His Father's House as the Bible Describes; for
they exist in these present times too.
Events are already rushing toward
that time in which this is beginning to happen and will become more fully
wide-spread. In these present times all you need to really do is look around
both your local and larger areas as to what is really on-going through.
Things so very little or miniscule that they are barely noticeable except to the
more informed observer may become apparent.
little things are the laws of the land, economics, politics, the degrading and
erosion of those rights and liberties afforded by the Constitution of these
United States of America and many other things such as the manner with which
entertainments have taken over much of the populace, entering into and becoming
a major focus in worship, and more.
We ask you,
if you don't want to believe us... Have you heard, seen or found what is termed
(of the many terms being used) that there are "holding areas" or "camps" or
"Closed/Fenced communities" being built by GOVERNMENT?
North America, especially in the United States of America, we must admit that
what Russia has come out of (a communistic, atheist country) we are entering
into. And one last thing that needs also to be understood... Something
very important to those of you who are "Catholic" in the Roman sense of its
jurisdiction.... And, we believe this also holds true for many who
are "Orthodox" whether "Eastern" or "Western"....
altering the Life and Teachings of
to accommodate the disease of Political
Jurisdiction (Latin Church = Vatican) of the Catholic Church)
breaking of - or failure and refusal to respect and abide by - the ancient
which leaves everything else open to God's gift of creativity... failure &
refusal to abide by and have respect for those who diligently protect one of the
other Pillars of the Church, the
but "Non-Denominational" also includes worshiping Satan's religion of
Islam by praying with them and other
such as 'Pentecostalism,'
any so-called church with "Community
in their nomenclature
and others who by their
false and misleading dogmas and doctrines
are actually against the Life and Teachings of Jesus Christ upon whom and for
exacting reason we are called "Christian" in both spirit and truth from which
non-denominational protestant sectarian claimants have departed from as being
skilled spiritual father can help you!
cannot ride two horses or serve two masters for one of them will be harmed by
your thoughts, your very words and your actions which is to blaspheme the Holy
Ghost (Spirit) who will depart from you. And when the Holy Spirit departs,
the great deceiver (unbeknownst to you) will rush in to fill the void under
disguise of being the Holy Spirit! Testing of the Holy Spirit to insure it
is the Holy Spirit does not, for many a Sectarian Protestant and Roman, work
because the Great Deceiver (Satan) is most skilled in worming and snaking his
charms around your mind and heart to feign being the Holy Spirit.
Remember, Satan has the same gifts similar to the Holy Spirit but Satan's gifts
are UN-HOLY and lead all who accept him (unbeknownst to you) to perdition.
About This Web Site -
About Who We Are -
Some of our Synod
members & clergy -
About Holy Orders & Institutions
CODE OF CANON LAW -
Canons & Councils =
Cancer In America - A tribute
Apostolic Lines of Succession
A Message from our Spiritual Father
Abouna +Gregori's Own - Let The
Truth Be Known
Clergy Database Information
Messages from Father Lazarus
Many things relevant to the
Life & Teachings of Jesus Christ
Clergy Application & Agreement
Commemorations for the living and the
Daily News - DCHN
Education & More
different way of Praying the Our Father
FAITH WE NEVER KNEW IS
A STUDY IN CANONICITY
Liturgies for All Occasions
Monastery of St. John Maximovitch and the Holy Theotokos (includes the
Brotherhood & Community)
On-Line Discussion Groups
Our Core Beliefs -
of Orthodoxy in the Americas
Quotes From Father +Thaddeus
Religious Products ???
Join the: Apostle1
group at MSN.GROUPS.com
never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be
eastern. The West was Orthodox for a thousand years, and her venerable liturgy
is far older than any of her heresies."
- Blessed St.
Maximovitch of Shanghai and San Francisco
"Prejudice makes Prisoners of the
Hated and the Hater"
Archbishop +Joseph Thaddeus (1990)
Our Vladyka on Facebook where you may wish
him questions that are non-confrontational
Create Your Badge
American Orthodox Church - North American Orthodox Church
International Communications Headquarters
All Rights Reserved
212 So. 16th Av., Caldwell, Idaho 83605
Telephone: (208) 459-2901
How Many Times?
TOTAL VISITORS since 1999:
Free Hit Counter