I never thought I would have to write this: but—incredibly—Congress has now passed the National Defense Appropriations Act, with Amendment 1031, which allows for the military detention of American citizens. The amendment is so loosely worded that any American citizen could be held without due process. The language of this bill can be read to assure Americans that they can challenge their detention — but most people do not realize what this means: at Guantanamo and in other military prisons, one’s lawyer’s calls are monitored, witnesses for one’s defense are not allowed to testify, and one can be forced into nudity and isolation. Incredibly, ninety-three Senators voted to support this bill and now most of Congress: a roster of names that will live in infamy in the history of our nation, and never be expunged from the dark column of the history books.

They may have supported this bill because—although it’s hard to believe—they think the military will only arrest active members of Al Qaida; or maybe, less naively, they believe that ‘at most’, low-level dissenting figures, activists, or troublesome protesters might be subjected to military arrest. But they are forgetting something critical: history shows that those who signed this bill will soon be subject to arrest themselves. – continued

Related Information:

Endless Conspiracies and the True Rulers of America: The Military-Industrial Complex

Oliver North Appalled When Continuity of Government (the Federal Government/MIC) Is Exposed In Public (notice how old this video is, it’s been known since the 80s!)
Here is Part of a Video In Which President Reagan Is Cited As Having Excused Himself From Obeying the Law With a Signing Statement (to do guess what? SELL WEAPONS TO OUR ENEMIES. Sound familiar?: Operation: Fast and Furious

More Information:
The ‘Cover-Up’, how high does it really go on Fast and Furious?
Eric Holder asked if he lied about Fast and Furious, and said, “Lying has to do with your state of mind“. Really Eric? Doesn’t every action a human commits have to do with it’s state o mind? Now how about not committing the begging the question fallacy and make an actual logical point? Telling the truth also has to do with your state of mind. What kind of state of mind do you have? One that is deluded and excuses to you to tell lies while thinking they are true? Or are you saying that we should have a state of mind that is oblivious to your lies? Are you a psychopath?

Wars of the CIA

Wikipedia is a propaganda tool for anti-Christians and narcissists who want to somehow prove that they are superior to those around them and to feed their craving for attention, but without risking their public reputation by being exposed as cyberbullies and retaliation against them for it (hence why they hide their identities). The goal of Wikipedia is also to subtly fool people into thinking that Wikipedia is trustworthy and that the Bible is only partially reliable and ultimately that since there is no God to answer to or who can hurt or reward anyone, that whoever has the control (which wouldn’t be God) makes right, as a narcissist might say.

So what does Jimmy Wales and his army of gullibles want our money for, or as Jimmy puts it currently, our $5 for? They seem to fancy that ht money is meant to enlighten you about anything and everything you want to know about, but it’s not that simple. First, the obvious: Wikipedia is an excellent propaganda tool. The information on it can be found elsewhere, and it puts it together on one page. So what. Second, the money doesn’t just go to bandwidth in general, it’s used up mostly on stupid pages (see list of stupid waste of bandwidth pages below). Guess why? Because most of the world is stupid. I’m sure the idea is to get people to think, “Wow Wikipedia got this right, wow it let me know all these cool facts really fast about Michael Jackson and din’t make fun of him, my hero, at all” so that when Wikipedia says that evolution is true and creationism false, the same idiot will think, “Well they got MJ’s profile right, so they must be trustworthy with everything else,” in the hopes that such morons will influence others to be the same way till there are no Christians left, just stupid and easy-to-manipulate people who won’t make them (the Wikipedia know-it-alls) feel bad for being the immoral, self-centered, lying, hypocrite, manipulators that they are. So, what those donations are mostly covering are pages that don’t further civilization/advancement in living longer, happier, with an improved knowledge of the most helpful truths for those things, but instead, destroy it. Here’s the top 100 most popular pages on Wikipedia for 2009, with my comments written after the number of people given who viewed the page for the year).

1. Wiki (131,383 page hits per day) = 47,954,795 total views for the year. So, Jimmy Wales wants Christians, all theists, and all atheist to pay $5 to teach people that he invented Wikipedia (false)? Cuz that’s the claim where “Wiki” ends up leading visitors to.

2. The Beatles (111,896) = 40,842,040 million hits a year. Jimmy Wales wants Christians, all theists, to pay $5 so the world can learn about the Beatles? No Jimmy atheist, no.

3. Michael Jackson (79,734) = 29,102,910. Jimmy Wales wants Christians, all theists, to pay $5 so the world can learn about Homosexual Pedophile-inclined singer with multiple bad nose jobs even in the controversy section, which Jimmy whitewashes out of the MJ article? Because? Is Wikipedia for celebrity promoting and advertising Jimmy? No Jimmy Atheist Wales, you’re not getting my money.

4. Favicon.ico (78,077) = 28,498,105. No Jimmy, won’t be donating so that you can have more bandwidth to teach people about favicon.ico.

5. YouTube (72,318) = 28,498,105. No I won’t donate $5 so you can learn about Youtube, just go to Youtube and learn from Youtube itself.

6. Wikipedia (52,542) = 19,177,830. No I’m not donating $5 so you can learn about Wikipedia or learn a new random fact from it’s homepage.

7. Barack Obama (49,401). Liberal fodder. No five.

8. Deaths in 2009 (48,758). Lovely what attracts the non-Christian and false Christian world. Not “Breakthroughs of 2009″ not “Greatest achievements of 2009″ or just all time world-benefiting breakthroughs or achievements, not even for the decade, no, it’s “deaths for this year.” And the anti-Christian world says Christians are morbid and full of hate? Backwards, evil, blind, negative idiots. You’re not inspiring at all anti-Christians, you’re depressing and morbid with an unhealthy interest in pain, fighting and death.

9. United States (46,545). You can only learn about the US from Wikipedia? Nope, far from it. There’s city-data, the CIA, and many other sites.

10. Facebook (42,679). Try watching Social Networking first.

11. Current events portal [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events] (40,962). An encyclopedia of current events? Uh… what happened to CNN, Fox, ABC, NBC, Reuters, Bloomberg, Asianews, CNBC, and using the many years old RSS feed button? No five dollars.

12. World War II (29,736). But you won’t be learning that Hitler was a narcissist who endorsed atheism. No five for you.

13. Twitter (28,511). Boring. No five.

14. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (28,395). Of course anti-social nerds with no life and little kids are attracted to Wikipedia: it talks about anything and everything except actually giving all the facts against evolutionism, big bangism, and the Jimmy Wales Wikipedia cult.

15. Slumdog Millionaire (26,755). That’s an important topic to use up thousands of dollars of bandwidth for isn’t it? No. No five let alone five million.

16. Lil Wayne (26,210). But not Jesus. No five.

17. Adolf Hitler (25,481). No five unless you’re going to point out Hitler had narcissism disorder and endorsed the atheist Nietzsche’s books (and in stop lying about Christians, Christian history and the Bible).

18. India (25,380). Like the USA, you can learn about India from plenty of other sources than the untrustworthy Wikipedia. I know that Indians are one of the main drivers of the traffic to that page. It’s also one of the most popular because India has one of the world’s largest populations.

19. Transformers 2 (24,842). Fail again.

20. Scrubs (TV series) (24,758). And again.

21. Sex (24,754). Nope: can’t learn about sex elsewhere: you need Jimmy Wales to explain it to you. And like a hodgepodge fest of narcissist atheist nerds have any business teaching anyone about sex? Eeek.

22. Rhianna (24,670). Wow, no. I wonder why Jenna Jameson isn’t in the top 100. Says a lot that no matter how much you whore yourself and no matter how beautiful you still won’t make the top 100 in Wikipedia.

23. United Kingdom (24,300). Same as USA and India: look elsewhere.

24. Abraham Lincoln (23,743). Hmmm, let me guess if there would be an atheist spin on Abraham Lincoln. I wonder why American Civil War and the American Revolution aren’t in the top 100. I know those are standard public school topics. Maybe liberals have marginalized them for fear of being accused of spreading Christian teachings.

25. Heroes (TV series) (23,569). No I won’t donate to Wikipedia.

26. Watchmen (film) (23,544). No Jimmy Silly Wales, I can always go to IMDB.

27. Lady GaGa (23,376). No I won’t give $5 so you can learn extensive information about the idiot narcissist who wears meat on her head and thinks the most important thing in life is looking like a rich crazy. Anyone know what a dandy is?

28. Star Trek (film) (22,990). Atheist Trek.

29. 2009 Swine Flu outbreak (22,968). I really wanna give $5 for atheist propaganda allied with the CDC (Center for Disease Censorship and Propaganda that started off with deadly experiments on humans). Not.

30. Featured content portal (22,829). So Wikipedia home page gets 19,177,830 hits a year, + millions more to their ,”Recommended by atheist narcissist control-freak nerds for the day” page. No five.

31. Megan Fox (22,573). And no one is hotter than MF? Sad. No five for the nerds who obsess on MF on Wikinerdia.

32. Naruto (22,573). Wow, kid and nerdfest. Where’s Pokemon?

33. Australia (22,544). See popular page 38.

34. Canada (22,437). Canada? Wonder if it has anything to do with marijuana.

35. World War I (22,307). Oh I get it: in American public school they have you do a piece on WWI and WW2, so guess where all the kids and teens and college students go for quick facts to reword, and why: cuz Google and Yahoo put it on the top five results (and no doubt those $5 bills are going to pay Google to be on the top ten.)

36. Vagina (22,295). Of course Jimmy is using the world’s money to teach everyone about the female private parts. No five.

37. List of House episodes (21,950). Wow, talk about sad net pollution.

38. Japan (21,797). (Oh I see why now Germany, Japan, China, Russia, Australia, the UK and the US are in the top 100, after I read through the top 100 and had a lil drink of beer): they were the major players in WWI AND WWII and linked to those pages.

39. Martin Luther King Jr (21,786). I wonder if shampedia mentions that MLK JR was an adulterer who preached a social gospel (a false gospel). Obviously this is public school generated traffic and white washed to appease blacks.

40. Miley Cyrus (21,724). Nerds.

41. Robert Pattinson (21,515). Not Pat Robertson? No, Wikipedia doesn’t want you to learn more about a false Christian and why he’s false. Instead it wants to cater and pander to Twlight obsessed emoMoron nerds like themselves. E-morons are not getting my $5 to learn about a pretty boy.

42. Deadpool (comics) (21,264). Shallow silly nerds who think reading narcissistic babble in comic book = learning something useful. Interesting that Superman, Dare Devil, Ghost Rider, Spiderman, Spawn, Hulk and Punisher aren’t in the top 100. I’m sure they’re close by though.

43. Twilight (2008 film) (21,158). Shallow nerds. It says a lot that Wikipedia attracts people who are into shedding blood and using violence to get there way and pretending to have super powers.

44. Windows 7 (21,018). Yawn. No where else in the universe can you learn about Windows 7 except Wikipedia? Try Annoyances.org. No doubt Jimmy Wales is friends with the ultimate nerd and pays to get that page in Google’s top five so that Bill Gates, a closet atheist (who wants the world’s population reduced to only what he considers the perfect special people), is put in a good light. I’d bet the people going to this page are W7-haters and elderly people who rarely use a computer and looking for info on them.

45. House (TV series) (20,882). No five.

46. Terminator Salvation (20,743). Nerds.

47. Kristen Stewart (20,538). Nerds.

48. Internet Movie Database (20,422). What? Dumb.

49. 2012 (20,347). New Age nerds : )

50. X-Men Origins: Wolverine (20,150). Ultra nerds.

51. Penis (20,076). Sad. I’m sure this is a page popular with sociopaths and psychopaths.

52. List of Presidents of the United States (19,884). Public school fodder. A clever way to draw in kids to Wikipedia and to get them to trust Wikipedia as a reliable source of info, including the Big Bang, abiogensis, and evolution pages. Evil.

53. List of sex positions (19,876). Ultimate nerd and new age grannies fodder. This page I bet links to India too, which would cause India to have higher traffic than many other pages and countries.

54. Masturbation (19,730). N.E.R.D.S., and kids.

55. William Shakespeare (19,714). Emo and narcissist fodder. Jesus should at least be here.

56. Farrah Fawcett (19,584). Wow nerdy.

57. Germany (19,514). Not “beer”?

58. Swine flu (19,092). CDC propaganda page.

59. Israel (19,077). See above. (Yeah atheists are really gonna be experts on Israel).

60. Google (19,070). Of course.

61. George W. Bush (18,964). Liberal fodder.

62. Global warming (18,809). LOL.

63. Wikipedia About Page (18,803). WOW. Six million+ people a year go to learn the Jimmy Wales invented Wikipedia fantasy and that Wikipedia is mostly free of bias it’s atheists claim. No five, for wasting time.

64. New York City (18,251). The mecca or narcissist/dandies, liberals, atheists, and the avaricious.

65. Tupac Shakur (18,186). Losers.

66. Taylor Swift (18,101). Of course the Swift fans making sure everything is factual.

67. Henry VIII of England (17,912). Because atheists need to find dirt about the funder of the King James Bible. “Did you know HVIII was a homosexual you fundies!? Therefore the KJV is bad and God doesn’t exist and the KJV shouldn’t be read and Christianity fails.” Atheist logic = roach poop.

68. Jade Goody (17,802). Who? Don’t care. Wait, let me guess, something to do with Twilight?

69. Sexual intercourse (17,716). NERDS.

70. The Notorious B.I.G. (17,572). WOW, SAD.

71. Human penis size (17,403). ULTRA SAD NERDFEST. Of course it’s the kids too.

72. 2009 in film (17,270). Try IMDB instead.

73. Anal sex (17,052). Wow nerds, get lives.

74. Twilight (novel) (17,040). *Shakes head*. What happened to Star Wars and Harry Potter? Are they too intellectual for nerds?

75. Natasha Richardson (17,001). Who? Oh is that Charlie Sheen’s wife? No that’s Denise.

76. China (16,935). Wow never heard of China. Gotta go to Wikipedia to learn… oh: Chinese going to read about themselves. Probably public school fodder too. No doubt anti-communists and conservatives wondering what the atheist liberals have to say about their atheist “one child for Chinese citizens only or we’ll kill your extra kid and sterilize you” brethren.

77. American Idol (16,728). Booooooooring.

78. MySpace (16,240). Super boring.

79. France (16,198). Bleah.

80. Metallica (16,110). Nerds trying to be cool by swinging their heads up and down with long hair and shutting out the world with earphones and pretending to play the drums. Really sad and really anti-social.

81. Relapse (album) (16,099). Whatever. Where’s Bach, Mozart or Vivaldi? Not Chinese or Greek ancient music? Not medieval or renaissance “age of atheist enlightenment” music? … oh, cuz the music wasn’t enlightened by atheists. Fail.

82. List of Family Guy episodes (15,961). Massive conniving atheist nerd fail. Where’s South Park? I guess it would be too embarrassing for atheists to frequent a page about paper cut outs babbling childish nonsense? Pathetic.

83. Bleach (manga) (15,947). But not Hentai? I’m sure in a few years Hentai will pop up in the top 100.

84. Russia (15,674). Same as China: learn elsewhere. Wait, the Russians must be googling, “What does helve Westerners think ehbout Russia, what say them on wooorld’s most poopular ensickcloopedia?”

85. Mickey Rourke (15,616). Sounds familiar.

86. Jonas Brothers (15,561). Gay nerds?

87. Vietnam War (15,306). Public school fodder, college fodder, Vietnamese and American veterans and their family doing fact-checking. no doubt to me.

88. Kim Kardashian (15,213). What? Not Kim Jong Il?

89. Lost (season 5) (15,107). Atheist and liberals are truly lost.

90. Selena Gomez (15,086). Get a life. She’s dead. I wonder how many Mexicans make up the traffic to that page.

91. Wolverine (comics) (15,062). Lol nerds.

92. Family Guy (15,013). This again? Talk about obsessed.

93. Valentine’s Day (14,924). Huh… I wonder why nerds are so interested in this day… oh, never mind. I can just imagine, “We’ll you see my nerd blow up doll girlfriend, this isn’t really a day that needs to be celebrated because it’s really a Catholic thing, and look how much people spend on this day to give silly gifts. See, it’s all about making money, so we can safely ignore this day.”

94. Hotmail (14,880). Holy nerd fest.

95. The Dark Knight (film) (14,782). Ultra nerd fest.

96. America’s Next Top Model (14,752). So sad, nerds have no life.

97. Mexico (14,709). Nerds wishing to escape to the greener grass on the other side, dreaming of seducing an ignorant poor chica. I wonder if there’s such thing as Mexican brides.

98. Batman (14,654). Classic nerd icon.

99. List of Heroes episodes (14,652). *Shakes head.* No five.

100. Pornography (14,650). Of course: the ultimate atheist liberal kids-looking-for-easy-porn nerd food. I wonder if Hentai is somewhere in there.

How are atheists and liberals supposed to be more informed about Christianity and religion then Christians when no where in these top 100 is anything about religion, not even about the worlds biggest religions, not even Catholicism, not even the Bible or most popular Bible verse, “Do to others as you’d have them do to you,” or “mistakes in the Bible” even, and not even EVOLUTION! Not DARWIN, NOT CARL SAGAN, NOT MICHIO KAKU, not the word “atheist” or “Big Bang” or “arguments against religion.” And only two wars (no doubt atheists looking for something to blame theists on too) but not the Crusades which atheists love to use as a sole top example of why not to be religious (talk about simple-minded and not reasoning)? WIKIPEDIA IS AWESOME: because it is useful for showing what is on the mind of non-Christians and anti-Christians, even the rest of the world (which no doubt to me parallels the English world’s fixations and idols). It shows atheists, liberals, anti-Christians and the world in general is NOT scholarly, is not more interested in what matters most in life, but rather, temporary pleasure fixes, what kids and silly females and boys are interested in for the moment. Tis is what the atheists loons, nerds with no life, and liberals attract with Widgetpedia: Shallow morons, narcissists, kids, teens, recluses, fanboys and fangirls, in other words, stupid people, shallow people, ignorant people, those curious about what liberals have to say about pop culture figures and idolaters/man-worshipers. What a whopping massive monster of a fail. But of course, it’s not a fail in that atheists have managed to put a somewhat fun and professional face on the chaotic, warped, morbid mass-murder-filled face of atheism, and the atheists who pretend that atheism = “this life now matters most (meaning their life, not yours)” rather than simply meaning “no belief in God or gods.” But again, a fail: because Wikipedia’s information content would have had to have come mostly from theists, since atheists only make up 4% of the world by some estimates, and there is no way it’s more than 10%, and there’s no evidence that atheists contribute more information than theists. It’s the crazy shattered-mirror reflection of the combined faces of the atheists and liberals in control of Wikipedia.

It’s a satisfying feeling to know Wikipedia’s bandwidth is being drained away on stupidity. Hopefully one day an EMP will disable that monster propaganda machine, or God will take it over.

Related Info:

Top 10 Reasons Not to Donate to Wikipedia (haven’t read it yet)
Jan/13/2011: “Jimmy Wales says Wikipedia too complicated for many.” Thanks Captain Obvious. Now guess why Wikipedia is mostly staffed by obsessive compulsive, social misfits and hatemongers with no lives, aka: “geeks”?

References:

http://www.techxav.com/2009/08/31

A neo pagan named Aaron(?) is parroting the myth that Bush voters had a low IQ and Kerry voters a higher IQ (see American Voters Are Really Dumb). It’s is typical of goatbaggers to NOT CHECK FOR FACTS and to believe whatever they first hear as long as it fits their feelings. Truly it’s stupid to “trust first, but verify” and wise to “first verify, then trust.” But what should you expect from people who believe in “magick”? Who believe, “It just happens cos it does dude”?

And how can a neo-pagan not know that Bush and Kerry are pagan Skull and Bones friends? Talk about ignorant.

And here is another pagan spreading pagan myths about Christians as all being a single unified church. On that page the prideful pagan says:

“It is appropriate, at this point, to note the great hypocrisy of the early Christian Church at the time of this “demonization” of the pagan religion.  Though the Church was willing to expunge the concepts of nature and the Goddess from the minds of Man, it was not going to throw out the baby with the bathwater and it incorporated vast elements of the pagan religion within its own ritual structure.”

And whatever you say is true because you repeated it and feel it. How about learn what logical fallacies are so that you stop committing them? Stop being a hypocrite yourself and biased bigot and lumping in all Christians together as one, as if you never heard of the reformation or the Bible to be able to read it yourself. You’re a typical blind emotion basher who keeps calling Christians Catholics and in your hypocrisy also acknowledges Gnostics. Is that the limit of your ability to learn? You can’t take the time to seriously study the Reformation? And no: that doesn’t mean reading one or three pages on Wikipedia and then smugly thinking, “Now I know it all.” How stupid: please do tell me what Reformed Baptists and Presbyterians have to do with paganism. Nothing. Just your delusions, your parroting of myths and your “we came first and first is bestest and rightiest.” And going back further into the past: to God’s word: show us the pagan symbols every in the Bible that God used for the religion he put forth. You can’t, because besides there being none, you miss and forget the utter obvious that you pagans love to complain about: That God wants all other religions to be destroyed and forgotten, for even the “poles” to be taken down and all the idols to be destroyed. And wow, what extreme blasphemy and arrogance: what was the “baby”? So, “Do unto others as you would have them do to you” and “Love your neighbor as yourself” and “Forgive your enemies and bless those who persecute you” and “Do not oppress a stranger” and “Don’t lie” and “Don’t steal” and “Don’t commit adultery” and “Honor your mother and father” and “Don’t covet (what belongs to your neighbor)” and “Love the Lord your God with all your heart” who put forth those laws are throwing out the baby and the bathwater? HUH!!!!?!????!?!?!!!!!!!!!!!! Which was the baby and which was the bathwater and what were either?! See world: pagans love to make flowery speeches, poetic, eloquent, but the meaning behind them is vague, empty, vain, nonsense. Look at that page, look how it says, “pagan pride” in fancy lettering. Pagan pride of what?! And how is that mature and how does that show a serious attitude towards the truth? It doesn’t Instead it’s a bold sign that says, “Nanny nanny boo boo I take pride in what I say and you can’t hurt me, I’m happy and you can’t make me sad. Hah.” Of course it’s not that obvious, but that is what is behind that shield statement. How many Christian pages can you find that say, “Christian pride”? But how many White Power, and Neo Nazi and racist pages can you find, “White Pride” on? And as everyone knows who knows about racism understands, that statement is one which is meant to rebuff what they see as attempts to make whites feel inferior. And what things do they see as attempts to make whites feel inferior?: Other whites mixing with blacks by being near to them, eating in the same places, having sex with them, marrying them, having babies with them, using the bathrooms as them, sharing the same tools and going inside the same buildings, and finally: affirmative action. Except perhaps for the last one, there is no arguing that none of those things are in and of themselves an attack on whites and meant to make them feel inferior, anymore than pagans are being teased by Christians when Christians, build churches, worship God, refuse to acknowledge a “goddess”, when Christians excel in science or other fields, when they make and increase friends and live in peace with their non-Christian neighbors, when they refute pagan myths like “The Burning Times” that pagans and their Wiccan brothers claim lead to the death of millions of witches by burning (talk about simple-minded and gullible), and when they refuse to have sexual relations with pagans, marry them or raise children with them. It’s also interesting and shouldn’t be surprising that many racists are pagans, who believe the myth that paganism came before Christianity and that that some how makes it legitimate and Christianity not. This is about jealousy and a childish belief that Christians are out to get pagans and bully and murder pagans, much like how the Germans during Hitler’s time were lead to believe that Jews were out to get them and wipe them out or other stupid things, and similar to how “extremist” Muslims view Christians (most of whom seem to have the wrong idea that all Christians are Catholics, or that Catholics and other Christians are the same, just go to different teachers with different leaders I guess). Something also that shouldn’t be surprising is that Islam is also a pagan religion: many Muslims will journey hundreds of miles to kiss a rock, as if it were a person, and view this rock as holy. On top of that, their religion started out as a moon-god worshiping cult and Mohammed’s exposure to Catholic teachings (which lead him to claim falsely in the Quran that Mary was part of the Trinity).

http://eternian.wordpress.com/life – The true gospel, not the gospel of the Catholic, Mormon, JW, 7th Day Adventist, Pentecostal and Universalist cults.

Related Info:

New Age and Neopaganism: Are They Two Separate Traditions? (that’s my custom title for the link)
Do Muslims Worship a Moon God?

I was listening to the Mark Levin show, and a substitute host (Tom Marr) said that Ron Paul doesn’t complain when donations are given to Egypt (but does over Israel getting money from the U.S.) and the host implied that the Israelis get most of it via giving money to American Jewish citizens in department of defense jobs. He repeatedly asked the caller for the source of his claim that Ron Paul gets more donations from the military than any other presidential candidate, yet the host gave no source for his donation claim either. The caller however did cite the website opensecrets.com, to which the host immediately responded with a “ahah” type tone saying “aaaaawh” and then said, “the web.” Yeah, and? Is there some better source Mr. “The (TV) Media Lies”? What’s it matter if it’s on the web or not, doesn’t Mark Levin have a website? Yes he does. Doesn’t he teach through it? Yes he does. Further, yesterday, Mark Simone, a hateful liar, cited that Ron Paul “for ten years” made racist statements. No liar, there were a handful of arguments spread throughout the years mixed in to many more statements that weren’t racist. Mark seemed to be twisting that Ron Paul or others argued that these statements were made “ten years ago.” The host right now is using a logical fallacy to claim that because “tons of them out there” (racists) support Ron Paul, that therefore Ron Paul must be bad. So if racists voted for McCain or whites over Obama does that mean that McCain and all the other white presidential candidates were racist too? This is conservatism: arbitrary arguments and using conniving cheap shots when threatened, just like liberals do. Hypocrites. Further, that stupid people support Ron Paul, or illogical people support him, is evidence of? What? In other words: is it a surprise that stupid people don’t check the facts and support the wrong people? Isn’t that what conservatives accuse liberals of doing? But again, arbitrariness: if it’s racists, and if your opponent is winning or threatening your power, forget that liberals or stupid people do stupid things, just change your tune to a sour note and say they are always clear-minded enough to recognize any like-minded person (which is not true as history repeatedly has shown through the repeated failure of pagan governments befriending and supporting people that turned out to be their enemies).

Concerning Ron not speaking against donating to Egypt, false: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjnfHuCrCLc In fact, the host said near time of his “Ron Paul didn’t complain about donations to Egypt” statement, that Hosni Mubarak “was a bad guy, but he was our bad guy.” He said this because of Ron Paul’s policy to NOT intervene in the affairs of MUSLIM nations and to get our bases out of foreign countries like Germany due to not being able to AFFORD IT, AND, perhaps deceptively, because he knew Ron Paul was against arming Muslim dictators which would ENDANGER Israel, as Ron points out on that Youtube link. It’s Ron’s desire to withdraw troops and money from foreign lands that Mark Levin (a Jew, keep that in mind because it can be considered evidence of bias, and keep in mind that I am also Jew, biologically at least half), Mark Simone, and Catholic conservative propagandist and radio show host Shawn Hannity (and maybe Rush Limbaugh), are always complaining about concerning Ron Paul. Michael Savage also recently claimed that RP hates Jews and supports terrorists (good job ruining the last dregs of your reputation Michael Bean). Michele Bachmann also has attacked Ron Paul’s position on the military (and federal donations to foreigners?) as suicidal in her presidential campaign. Something to note is that very recently a top spokesperson for Michele Bachmann withdrew his support for her campaign and is now giving it to Ron Paul. As far back as January 31st! 2011 Ron Paul spoke out against meddling in the affairs of countries like Egypt: Ron Paul on Egypt: U.S. Meddling Leads to Unintended Consequences So, these conservative hosts contradict themselves and are lying.

Concerning Iran: at least, or only one Ron Paul supporter attacked me on my position on attacking Iran. There was a stupid person on a pro Ron Paul Youtube video who made the stupid remark, “Why can’t Iran have nukes? They’re surrounded by them” or something like that, which I said was stupid because Iran has a violent government that oppresses it’s people, which I likened to beating or killing your wife, or family, I said something like that. So, I believe Iran’s government and military should be attacked if they don’t change their stance on attacking Israel or not. But, I also believe Iran should be prayed for, and for an attack on them to not be necessary, for them to be at peace.

Tom? also claimed that Ron Paul said that Martin Luther King seduced black children. Tom then said, “oh yeah, he’s really going to get the black vote.” Even if Ron had said that, so what? It makes no point. And are blacks too stupid to investigate a comment like that? Martin Luther King is known for having been an adulterer, so he was unfaithful and allowed himself to be seduced. That’s a little evidence that he wasn’t someone to simply trust outright. The FBI even tried to blackmail him with the evidence that had on his adultery, but failed. Further, he was a worldly type Christian, NOT saved, and preached a worldly version of Christianity, one that appealed to blacks most I’d imagine. So to say that he (spiritually seduced) black children wouldn’t be wrong. If there was evil sexual implication behind that statement, I don’t know, but not knowing him to be a homosexual or not, have no opinion on that and it’s not a big concern to me, because that was long ago in the past, and there’s plenty of evidence he preached a false “social gospel” which is enough to disregard him as a worthy teacher of the Bible, someone who can be trusted with God’s word.

Related Information:
Ron Paul Ron Paul gives a ‘green light’ to an Israeli attack on Iran in self-defense
12/29/2011: Ron Paul says to Hareetz, Israel has a right to defend herself and QUESTIONS how giving 12 billion to her enemies HELPS her (Tom Marr: you lied about Ron Paul).
‘Racist newsletter’ timeline: What Ron Paul has said

Related Information:
Ron Paul’s Political Positions

Post link: http://shrooms.tk

On Coast to Coast Am is an annoyingly nasal and fake historical expert on Christianity named Jan Irvin (pronounced “Yan”). This person claims that behind Judaism and Christianity is nothing more than mushrooms, forget history, forget the accomplishments of Christians and Jews, thousands of years of work, whether or not they accomplished anything of value, forget about anything specific the Bible says, forget about if any of it makes sense or is useful for anything, like telling people not to lie, murder or be angry at each other in hypocrisy or judge one another in hypocrisy, just say, “It was the mushrooms, because it mentions the color red sometimes.” He claims that there’s very little evidence that Jesus was a historical person, as in a real person, and more evidence that he was a myth. Using that logic, his claim that mushrooms are behind Judaism and Christianity is also a myth, a lie, made up, because there is only very little tenuous highly subjective evidence that mushrooms are behind these religions. An example of one of his evidences is that Santa Claus is red, and that red presents are left under a Christmas tree, and no doubt I’d guess that Rudolph’s nose is red. Jan Irvin, you are an idiot. First, since when do Mushrooms grow in the winter!!!!!!? So much your for your expertise on mushrooms! Second, RED?! How about THE BLOOD OF CHRIST?! HELLO: “CHRIST-MAS”!? Or how about HOLLY BERRIES? ROUND HOLLY BERRIES! Guess where Holly berries come from genius? THE HOLLY TREE. I imagine if he saw white spots on a red-wrapped BOX under a Christmas tree he’d think “SHROOMS!”. No: squares aren’t shrooms, and white dots can be explained away as SNOW, and red as HOLLY BERRIES. He is truly stupid and arbitrary. That would mean that he’s also stereotyping and lumping, meaning calling all Catholics Christians and all Christians Catholics, showing that he is ignorant of the distinction between the different types of Christians. It’s a hypocritical oversight too since atheists arbitrarily trump up the differences while at the same time saying that all (fundamentalist) Christians are the same. He also brought up a supposedly hidden ancient comment that Jesus was born on the same day as other deities and therefore Christ was just a myth. Besides that making no more sense then saying, “People ate apples that day therefore apples are mythical,” this Jan obviously is nothing more than a shallow researcher, because if he looked up that argument he would have found this: http://www.kingdavid8.com/Letters/LetterThousand.html

This Jan was also questioned on Coast by a guest caller asking him what he thought about the Shroud of Turin, and he said that the arguments made for it are “arbitrary” and “salacious”. LOL. A guy who argues that the color red, and shapes and a spurious single comment disproves Christianity talks about arbitrary and salacious? He also claimed that many shrouds appeared in Europe and that it’s been well debunked. HUH? Since when? He also claimed with a very annoyed tone that it’s merely “arguing the arbitrary” when people bring up “all these little questions” (DAMN THOSE PESKY LITTLE QUESTION ASKERS!) and that the “owness is on them” to prove these things, and that he can’t prove a negative (wrong) and yet said they need to “study logic”. Wow, what a hypocritical evidence-hater. A caller merely asked his opinion on it and he gets angry a few minutes later. And studying logic? He didn’t even know that it’s a fallacy that you can’t disprove a negative, and yet he himself ARBITRARILY thew up false arguments against the Shroud. What a hypocrite. When another caller brought up Josephus, he claimed that some flow of Josephus’ writing was, uh, unflowed? where Jesus is mentioned, and that if you remove it (oh wouldn’t he love to remove ANCIENT text? just like that supposedly hidden comment about Jesus being born on a day of other deities? Talk about arbitrary and hypocrisy!) that it would flow again. Oh but that’s not all of the arbitrary logic of Jan: During the above statements at some point he also made this nonsensical argument against the Shroud (and it shows how arbitrary he was being), “…unless you want to study the History Channel, and it’s credentials have been damaged by all the questionable stuff they’ve been putting out over the years” OH BUT NOT COAST TO COAST AM THE VERY SHOW YOU ARE SPEAKING ON? JAN: GIORGIO TSOUKALOUS HAS BEEN A REPEAT GUEST ON COAST TO COAST AM AND ENDORSED BY GEORGE NOORY, ART BELL AND GEORGE KNAPP, all of whom are hosts of the show. They’ve also had the other “UFO experts” on Coast BEFORE they were on the History Channel. And how is it a valid argument to merely say, “Oh they had some questionable stuff on there over the years.” BUT YOU’RE SILLY CLAIMS THAT CHRISTIANITY IS BASED ON SHROOMS ISN’T? SO THE HISTORY CHANNEL DOESN’T PUT OUT ANYTHING HISTORICALLY RELIABLE IN COMPARISON TO YOU!? SHUT UP!!!!!! THERE WAS AN GLOBAL WARMING SCAREMONGER ASTROLOGER FALSE PROPHET ON COAST JUST BEFORE YOU GOT ON! Can anyone give me a “WOW”!? Who in the world doesn’t know that Coast to Coast AM is a mouth for New Age babbling idiots and every arbitrary ranting parrot and ignorant out there? The History Channel is miles away from Coast to Coast AM! Though sadly the gap is closed a little by putting on Giorgio Tsoukalos, who claims that UFOs are what is behind the Bible. Now if Jan were more intelligent, he would have said, “Well UFOs look like mushroom because they are round and dome-shaped, so clearly the writers of the Bible were seeing mushrooms while high on mushrooms.” But instead he decided to get angry right away and shoot himself in the foot with an arbitrary argument. And as if YOU were more credible than Tsoukalos? TSOUKALOS IS LIGHT YEARS MORE CREDIBLE THAN YOU! At least he does come up with evidence for some of his theories, but you, asking, “Why are presents put under a Christmas tree,” think you are spurious with a stupid “proof” like that, that you should be taken seriously?! You’re either an arrogant liar or blind.

Oh but that’s not all: after giving a speech about the JFK assassination, he criticizes those who don’t think it’s a conspiracy for “not having critical judgment and not being able to see when someone is trying to deceive them.” Jan, “You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.”

I have a question for you Jan: If Christianity was based on Shamanism and mushrooms, why does Christianity, all the way back to when it was supposedly “Judaism” (which is a myth that you perpetuate), why then does it forbid magic? Second: why did you laugh when a moron caller called in saying that he WAS going to make a religion (as if he knew the future) based on shrooms and listening to Jimmy Hendrix, Pink Floyd and the Beatles, and that he wasn’t going to include doctrine because it was creepy. You laughed and said “really” in agreement, but then after the host, Rob Simone mentioned recreational drug use, contradicted your arbitrary hatred by then saying that recreational drug usage, which you implied was bad, was bad because it was devoid of religion which it had been stripped of? As for “the owness” is on us, Jan, another question: the owness is also on you to prove your claim that Christianity is based on the visions of people who hate psychedelic mushrooms, and you haven’t come up with any except for a little of your opinions which you speak of as facts.

A few minutes later, still going on about the JFK assassination still 40 minutes away from the end of the show (wow: nothing more to say about the theory of Christianity and shrooms? Big surprise!” he said concerning someone’s conspiracy theory on JFK’s murder: “I would need more proof before I would settle on anything positive about that.” But with the most subjective evidence and nonsensical evidence you’ve decided that Christianity is just babble from people high on mushrooms, and that the Shroud of Turin is just a cloth that was made by lying it on someone’s body (lol, hence why it’s been controversial and repeatedly attempted to be shown to be not miraculous for decades?! HUH?)

Another question for you Jan: how are you credible when you advise people to have false visions (hallucinations) based on drugs? Can the truth be based on lies and imaginary things? How about using “critical thinking” and “studying logic” which you advise with your mouth but refuse to do yourself when it comes to the Bible and the usefulness of having hallucinations? Write after I asked that question I’ve now heard him say to a caller, “unless you have evidence coming in through your five senses you’re arguing the arbitrary”. And you have evidence coming in through all five of your senses that the Bible is false? You can smell that the Bible is false?! Are you high on shrooms? And no, arguing something without having evidence “coming in” through all five of your senses isn’t defined as “arbitrary”. Wow: as I was typing that previous sentence Jan mentioned “logical fallacies”. What in the world does Jan know about logical fallacies? You can’t make sense when arguing against the greatest most time-tested book in the world yet speak like you have knowledge of logical fallacies? What astounding arrogance. What a blasphemer. … Wow, now he said that if you read the work of some guy, who went line by line over the evidence for the historical Jesus, and, “If we remove the logical fallacies” that we’ll know the truth, which is that Jesus wasn’t real. Wow, stupid. So it’s logical to selective take the work of one obscure man, and say, “Therefore that’s evidence Jesus wasn’t real.” You can’t present any strong evidence of your own? No you can’t, hence why you have to weasel your way out of arguing against Jesus being real. It is you who are being ARBITRARY with your logic and your “proof”.

THE OWNESS IS ON YOU, not the other way around, because hundreds of millions of people who’ve died promoting real evidence for Christ and hundreds of millions more who are living who promote the same and more outnumber your “many” fake scholars. And this man you say who went through the proof for Christ by going through it “line by line” (and Christians don’t go through the Bible line by line, or arbitrary arguments from morons like you – I’ve been through 500 of them Jan, I wrote them down, no matter how stupid and grammatically nonsensical), Jan: the entire Bible is evidence for Christ, he endorsed it all, it’s not just “the gospels” as you seem to believe. You seem to believe it’s just the gospels and a few historical references to him: NO IT’S NOT. And you really think that one many can disprove thousands of years of scholars and the hundred thousand archeologists and theologians living today? The evidence is the entire Bible and all the historical references to him outside the Bible, and the archeological evidence, and the prophecies that have come true, and the experiences of all those who have been saved by him, and the miracles that still occur today. Haven’t you ever heard of “Evidence That Demands a Verdict”? For someone to say that one many going “line by line” through the evidence and having found evidence against it all, is utterly stupid and a plain lie. You have to know you are lying, and if not, you’re extremely ignorant and argue out of ignorance, which is what you say is, “arbitrary arguing.”

And Jan: the prophecies are clear, that the Old Testament spoke of him. Only someone stupid and deluded who after CAREFULLY examining the evidence for these prophecies would deny that they are true. And why wouldn’t you believe being that you believe in magic and religion? And you refer to “many” scholars who side with you: WHO? AND WHAT IS THEIR MAIN AND/OR SECONDARY FIELD OF STUDY? Who Jan? Carl Sagan? Julia Childs? Martha Stewart? Paris Hilton? Ted Turner? Bill Gates? Donald Trump? There are more scholars in opposition to yours, real scholars of Biblical archeology, real scholars of the Shroud of Turin, real theologians, who don’t get high on drugs as a main method of learning the truth, who stay in their right mind and don’t rely on false visions and hallucinations, yet you act like because you merely say “many” that that is proof enough. The Bible says not to be filled with wine, but with the Spirit, not “mushrooms”. The “owness” is on you, you “owe” us the proof that mere mushrooms are at the core of Christianity.

May God unblind him, remove his hypocrisy from him, and save him.

More Information:

The Shroud of Turin (This site is very extensive).
Evidence That Demands a Verdict, Volume 1: Historical Evidences for the Christian Faith

Evolutionary Biology is very much like the pseudoscience Phrenology

Professor or former Professor Kenneth R. Miller, of Brown University, said, “Though some insist that life as we know it sprang from a Grand Designer’s Original blueprints, Biology offers new evidence that organisms were cobbled together layer upon layer by a timeless tinkerer called evolution.”

An Evolutionary Tree Made by the Fraud Scientist and Evolutionist Ernst Haeckel

A weird coincidence, after posting this article on the 27th,
and then this morning looking for evolution trees, found
this circular version, but then looking to the right noticed
a smaller version, placed against this phrenology looking ad!

Here’s yet another evolution tree I found before the one on New Scientist,
and is in conflict with the others. Interesting to note that this comes from
the nih.gov website (a US government website), and that on the page it is
described as a “Phylogeny showing evolutionary relationships”.
Very strange how much that sounds like phrenology!

Question: why do evolutionists keep resorting to flowery speech and poetry? Can they talk plainly and straight for once instead of like narcissist goof balls? That evolutionists keep talking like that is a clue that many narcissists take to this stupid theory, the reason being that it frees man from having to be responsible to God and makes out man to be the Intelligent One for revealing and understanding evolution (which is a weak way of trying to come close to being the Designer) and opens up the possibility for man to be a Creator himself by genetic engineering and finding out how to create life (which evolutionists imagine they will one day learn, because they tie in evolution to how life was created yet hypocritically accuse creationists as being the only ones who do that).

Second question: Why is Kenneth likening evolution to being a designer? Evolution isn’t a designer of anything, it’s a natural process according to the definition, just like the wind and space dust eroding a rock away. The wind and space dust aren’t designing anything by eroding away a rock.

Third question: what evidence? Kenneth like all other evolutionists are all talk and no substance. On the page from which I got those quotes is NO EVIDENCE. Rather, it’s THEIR DELUSIONS, their day dreaming:

“But evolution can be used as an explanation for complex structures, if we can imagine a series of small, intermediate steps leading from the simplex to the complex.”

Yes, just imagine it people, and look at a few pictures of made up steps or watch a cartoon of dinosaurs running around on the Discovery or History Channel, or pictures of an angry T-Rex eating meat in Discover Magazine or Scientific American, which never stop preaching Darwinism or Evolution. Talk about “all you say God all the time:” Shut up yourself with your 100% faith-based materialistic preaching. The evidence for evolution is chanting, dreams, poetry, cartoons, coloring books and liberal dandy’s playing dress-up in movies. I have no problem with hypothesizing, with imagining how something might be possible, but if there is no evidence to support it, and there is none to support evolution theory hypothesis, then it’s not something you can truthfully teach as being factual or proven or evident, especially if there’s evidence against it, and there is plenty, easily found, on my journal, throughout the Internet, books in libraries all over the world, and from what can be observed of nature.

Keep your cult out of God’s universe and shut up with that stupid vain “keep your religion out of my science” line. It’s “my twisted reality disguised as science so that I don’t have to admit responsibility for my actions and how completely not good I am” that should be used in place of “science.” May I ignore you evolutionists now, or are you going to break “your” logical fallacy lists again and leave me a comment appealing to emotion, ad hominem, mere rhetoric, or concluding before examining the evidence, like this one which commits all four fallacies at once: “You idiot. You know evolution is right and creation wrong, right?” Or how about begging the question: “Just look at this website right here about how bacteria learned to eat citrus fruits which it could never do before.” And your point is? It would have to be: therefore God wasn’t needed to make the universe, life, lightning and mud can come to life, and mud can turn into men. If we can just imagine it, just have faith, it will be true, and the Christians will finally disappear. Just name it, and claim it.

Update 12/30/2011: A blog I found while looking for evolutionary tree pictures. Notice the description of the blogger here, “Callan draws cartoons.” Third story on the blog of this geology teacher: “19 December 2011Video book review: cartoon books”. Can you smell the science? I checked out Alexa (an unreliable site for statistics on websites when if they have a small amount of traffic) and saw that it says mostly 65 year olds and older with no kids go to this website mostly from some location at school. Can anyone say, “Old evolutionists stuck in their ways”?

Related Information:

Unique Fungal RNA Splicing Mechanism Strikes a Blow Against Darwinian Evolution

“You possess an intuitive intelligence so powerful it can
help you heal, relieve stress, and find emotional freedom”

Yet we still need Judith to tell us that and help us to use it, even though it’s powerful and we can already know things just by trying and without having to reason. Can someone give me a, “Making money off the gullible.”? And what is “intuitive intelligence”? Like all New Agers, Judith is using catchy New Age cliches. The usual are: evolve (that word copied off materialist and humanist evolutionists who also sometimes or often use the word in a vague way), healing, aura, vibration, vibrational, energy, lower energy, higher energy, higher self, lower self, negative, positive, light, love, abstract, emotional, intuition, inner self, spirit, spirituality, negative forces and positive forces. Such words and phrases are used in vague ways by New Agers, never described precisely, and that is because they are vague and abstract themselves, not thinking carefully and with precision, but carelessly and sloppily, and going with their vague feelings rather than precise and logical reasoning. They assumed that it’s a good thing to think in “abstract” ways rather than to be specific, and by doing so, are easily manipulated by Satan, who pushes and pulls at the hearts of those who are ignorant of and against God. Intuition in the way she most likely used it, means,

“direct perception of truth, fact, etc., SEPARATE from ANY reasoning process”. But when she said “intelligence” she committed a logical fallacy because the word can mean two different things in the way she used it. She wasn’t specific. It can mean, “capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and teaching” or ” a high mental ability” to do those things.

But, either way she’s saying a person has the ability to directly know the truth without reasoning using your mind (Satan would have everyone “think” this way, because by following your heart, you’re bound to fail and sin, because the heart as God says, is desperately wicked. And history shows how unreliable the human heart is for doing what is right and best.)

If however she specifically meant, “ability to know the truth apart from reasoning by a high mental ability to reason” she’d be contradicting herself, and that wouldn’t be surprising to me being that she’s a New Ager who thinks in abstract and vague ways rather than using careful reasoning.

On Facebook she contradicts herself again in a blurb under a picture of a person sitting on the edge of a pointed cliff. It says,

“My job as a psychiatrist is to help others find light in darkness. Don’t let the dark seduce you! The light is always there”

The contradiction is saying that the (bad) darkness has light in it that is good. How can darkness of light in it? That’s nonsensical. Further, if it’s bad how can it have good within it? If she meant, “goodness in a bad situation,” then why not just be specific and clear and say that then? If she meant, “good thoughts among your bad thoughts,” it would be pointless. So what if you have good thoughts among bad thoughts, thoughts of helping the poor among thoughts of murdering them, what about it? Is someone helped by simply saying, “You have thoughts of helping the poor, don’t think about the fact that you also feel like murdering them.” Is that how you help someone, by getting them to think about their “positive” thoughts and pretend they don’t have evil thoughts? Imagine trying to help a murderer or liar by saying, “Don’t think about the fact that you’re always lying/murdered 40 people, focus only on the good you’ve done.” Can a person become good by that, by not confessing their sins to God for forgiveness and repenting of them? To say to someone, “Deal with your evil impulses by thinking only about the good you’ve done,” is the same as saying, “Ignore your never-ending evil desires by thinking about doing honorable things or thinking about honorable things you’ve done, and by doing that, you’ll no longer have evil desires.” But what is the evidence of that? What’s the evidence that ignoring your guilt by thinking of doing good deeds or on your good deeds is healthy, will set you, “emotionally free” whatever that means, and will get rid of “the darkness” whatever that is? Vague, vague, vague, baseless, baseless, baseless! Her “therapy” and “counseling” is useful for turning someone into a psychopath, sociopath or narcissist if it were started early enough on someone, and faciliates the ones who are adults. To say, “It’s good to be emotionally free” is horrible. It’s like saying, “It’s good to do whatever you feel like doing, to be like a wild animal, and to have no self control.”

She described her “help” accurately by claiming that she was someone who could find light in the darkness; she thinks evil (negativity) can produce good, or has goodness (positivity) in it.

Update 10:48 PM: Judith just said “linear knowledge” to solve brain problems isn’t the only way. What does that mean? And then said that “just because something sounds right doesn’t mean it’s true.” But then a few words later contradicted by saying that if it doesn’t feel right it can’t be true. It’s a contradiction because a thing can sound right either based on how you feel, think or all three. It’s a perfect example of how New Agers don’t make sense because they use a word in a way that can have multiple meanings and in this case one of them contradicts her point.

For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine.
Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great
number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
2 Timothy 4:3

The girl who was hit and ignored is named Yue Yue (as of 12-23-2011 it seemed over 3,500,000 have seen the video)

“the love of many will grow cold.” -Matthew 24:12

Incredible to see such evil behavior (and from guess who: atheists no doubt), but, I was even more shocked by the one who first picked up the child because she did it in a crude way, but later I found out she was elderly and probably didn’t have the best education being that she was a “trash scavenger.”

“October 13th, afternoon around 5:30, a car accident occurred at the Guangfo Hardware Market in Huangqi of Foshan. A van hit a 2-year-old little girl and then fled. No passersby reached out to help and then another car ran over her. Over the span of 7 minutes, a total of 17 people passing by failed to extend a hand or call the police, up until the 19th person, a garbage scavenger ayi [older woman], who lifted her up after discovering her but the little girl in her arms was like a noodle, immediately collapsing back onto the ground. The trash scavenger ayi called for help, and the little girl’s mother, who was in the vicinity, immediately rushed over and rushed her to the hospital.”

One Chinese commenter on this video said:

It isn’t ignoring, it’s not daring. If one were to encounter a Nanjing judge, one would be screwed.

[Note: "Nanjing judge" refers to the infamous 2006 case of a man named Peng Yu who helped a woman to the hospital after she had fallen only to have the old woman accuse him of knocking her down. The Nanjing judge in that case ultimately ruled that common sense dictated that only the person who hit her would take her to the hospital, setting a precedent that continues only further discourages and reinforces many Chinese people's wariness to help others in similar situations.]

Another person commented,

I wouldn’t necessarily send her into the hospital, but I would definitely make a call, and call for help. For those people who saw and then made a detour around her, have your consciences all been “eaten by a dog” [lost]? May your own children be the next Yue Yue [name of the 2-year-old girl who was run over in the video].

And another said,

Those people who walked by are animals. No, even some animals have compassion and would at the very least stop to take a look. Those 18 pigs who walked by should also be arrested and taught a lesson with 15 days [in jail]. Instead it was the waste scavenger ayi from other parts [of the country] who had a conscience.

Video and more info here.

Good news!: The woman who helped the little girl (Chen Xianmei) was awarded 25,000 Yuan! ($3,945.40 USD)

” When receiving the money she said Chen Xianmei accepting the Nanhai District Civilization Office’s appreciation, thoroughly reluctantly accepting the reward money. As a simple person, she kept repeating, “I didn’t help her for money.” ” This reminds me of this saying from the Messiah “For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.” (Matthew 23:12)

Here’s a different story from China with opposite news: Chinese Crowd Lifts SUV to Rescue Run Over Child in Wenzhou. I wonder if these were atheists too.

Definition of ‘Liquidity’

1. The degree to which an asset or security can be bought or sold in the market without affecting the asset’s price. Liquidity is characterized by a high level of trading activity. Assets that can be easily bought or sold, are known as liquid assets.

2. The ability to convert an asset to cash quickly. Also known as “marketability”. – From Investopedia

BlueCrest’s Platt Says European Banks Insolvent Amid Crisis – Transcript | Video

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard: euro is ‘unsaveable’
Telegraph columnist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard tells Robert Miller why the single currency cannot work in its current form, and what he believes will happen to the eurozone next. – Audio

Disbanding The Euro – A Worst-Case Scenario

Only time will tell if we are past the worst of the debt crisis in Europe, or simply enjoying a calm amidst the storm. In either case, the crisis in Greece and the fears of its spread into Spain, Italy and Portugal have led many financial analysts and commentators to seriously consider what had once been mostly the domain of crackpots – the notion that the euro could collapse and vanish altogether.This is no small matter. Of the 10 largest economies in the world, four use the euro as their currency. Roughly 330 million Europeans use the euro every day, while nearly 200 million people use currencies that are pegged to the euro (many of them in Africa). It is also the second most-used currency as a reserve currency, with roughly one-quarter of the world’s reserves held in euros. – More here

Economy watch: Is Britain heading back into recession?
By Andrew Oxlade
Last updated at 7:26 PM on 21st December 2011

With 2011 drawing to a close – and a year of feeble recovery for the economy – experts are queuing up to warn that the UK may see a return to recession in early 2012.

Two well regarded bodies have issued worrying recent forecasts: The Organisation of Economic Cooperation & Development (OECD) and the National Institute of Economic & Social Research (NIESR).

The NIESR estimates a 70% risk of a double-dip recession (3 November) while the OECD predicts recession for the first-half of the year (28 November). – More here

“Often, a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself, whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy ” Charles Darwin…Life and Letters 1887 – sandra, Liverpool England, More False Witness Bearing by creationists. Another one breaks the 9th commandment. Dear Sandra, I would ask you and other creationists to stop misrepresenting Darwin and other scientists by mining their quotes. This above comes from a letter to Darwin’s friend, Charles Lyell. The next line is: “Now I look at it as morally impossible that investigators of truth, like you (Lyell) and Hooker, can be wholly wrong, and therefore I rest in peace.” Darwin, unlike creationists, was intellectually honest and always presented a problem before offering the solution. Creationists usually cut and paste only the problem and try to sully Darwin and science with it. It’s a murky, ugly, untruthful business is quote mining, but desperate creationists are happy to do it in the name of their myth.

- Duster, Canterbury, Kent, 07/6/2010 20:31

And it’s a myth because Duster, part of the group that killed 150,000,000 people in the past 100 years in the name of “I’m God, there is no God” not including millions of aborted babies, which in China atheists forcefully abort and try to stop from being born by sterilizing women after having just one (wow talk about “extremists” and “fanatics” and “kooks”) — because Duster who cares about Darwin being taken out of context, but not the deeds of Christians, creationists, theists or God, said so. Get saved Duster, before it’s too late for you.

“A fool gets no pleasure from understanding anything, but only in airing his opinions.” – from Proverbs of King Solomon