MySpace

Photobucket Photobucket Photobucket
[erin] -- WAKE UP -- (Schiff 2010)( Ron Paul 2012)



Last Updated: 12/30/2009

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe

Gender: Female
Status: Married
Age: 28
City: Greenville
Country: US
Signup Date: 8/22/2007

Blog Archive
[Older      Newer]
 /  / 
Friday, April 03, 2009 

Category: News and Politics


What do you do when you literally have no where to go? An especially difficult question if you currently live in a tent city in Ontario, California. 


Source: LA Times, http://www.latimes.com/news/local/orange/la-me-tents18mar18,0,1589130.story?page=1


'Ontario residents only' at Tent City


Tent CityIrfan Khan / Los Angeles Times

Tent City residents gather as the city of Ontario starts the process of
sorting out who may stay and who must leave. The city issued wristbands
– blue for Ontario residents, who may stay, orange for people who need
to provide more documentation, and white for those who must leave. The
aim is to reduce the number of people living there from over 400 to 170.

Officials begin thinning out the encampment, saying the city can provide space
only for those who once lived there and can prove it.

By David Kelly, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
March 18, 2008

Dozens of Ontario police and code enforcement officers descended upon the
homeless encampment known as Tent City early Monday, separating those
who could stay from those to be evicted.

Large, often confused, crowds formed ragged lines behind police
barricades where officers handed out color-coded wristbands. Blue meant
they were from Ontario and could remain. Orange indicated they had to
provide more proof to avoid ejection, and white meant they had a week
to leave.

  • City to reduce homeless numbers in Tent City


Many who had taken shelter at the camp -- which had grown from 20 to more than 400 residents in nine months -- lacked paperwork, bills or
birth certificates proving they were once Ontario residents.

"When my husband gets out of jail he can bring my marriage certificate; will that count?" asked one tearful woman.

Another resident, clearly confused, seemed relieved to get a white band -- not understanding it meant she had to leave.

Pattie Barnes, 47, who had her motor home towed away last week, shook with anger.

"They are tagging us because we are homeless," she said, staring at her orange wristband. "It feels like a concentration camp."

Entire story: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/orange/la-me-tents18mar18,0,1589130.story?page=1


..





Apparently, Onatario isn't the first California city to "evict" the
homeless. In November '07, the Sacramento Police Dept, at the request
of residence and business owners, threatened to arrest the homeless
living in a "tent city" if they didn't leave.



Monday, March 30, 2009 

Category: News and Politics
We are still well on our way to a worse depression than the last. WAKE UP



Photobucket


Thursday, March 05, 2009 

Category: Religion and Philosophy



Among other things, you should be asking yourself what any of this has to do with FEMA. Aren't they just a government "Red cross". The truth is they've been given very peculiar and inexplicable powers which you have a responsibility to be aware of. More about that in another post.


Church Document Encourages Congregation To Obey Government Posted by In Depth Stories on March 4, 2009 at 1:35pm
View In Depth Stories's blog



A
shocking document has come to light from a church in Ohio which
educates its congregation that Barack Obama’s presidency is appointed
by God and that Obama himself is “God’s minister,” in another
perversion of Romans 13, the bible verse cited as an excuse for
Christians not to oppose tyranny.

Ohio
District Superintendent Rev. John Wooton was responsible for
distributing the pamphlet, which was handed out at the Assembly of God
church in Ohio, according to a reader who forwarded the document to us.
Look below for the PDF file.

“This
was handed out at the Assembly of God church that my fiance and I used
to attend. We immediately stopped attending after getting this flier
about ’submitting to Obama and the government,’ states the reader.

“The
pastor even brought children to the front of the church, encouraging
them to submit to teachers, firemen, and the police. It was insane.”

“I
confronted the pastor about his stance on Romans 13, a year prior, and
he assured me that he would never sell out his church. This sermon was
given on the immediate Sunday after Obama’s election win. Please post
this and inform others about it. I never, ever thought this would
happen in the church I was attending, but thankfully, we were informed
enough to leave this church,” he concludes.

The document cites Romans 13 verses 1-4 and claims that the following “paraphrases” can be interpreted from the bible.

- Barack Obama’s presidency is appointed by God. (v 1)

- Christians should lead the way in supporting Barack Obama’s presidency. (v 2)

- Barack Obama’s presidency can be a force for good and a deterrent against evil. (v 3)

- As president, Barack Obama is God’s minister to you for good. (v 4)

The
document concedes that a majority of practicing Christians probably
didn’t even vote for Obama because of his pro-abortion policies, indeed
one of Obama’s first acts as President was to issue an executive order
which ensured that millions more black babies are aborted in third
world countries, with American taxpayers picking up the tab.
Obama
himself has also scoffed at Christians in the past, arrogantly stating
that people “cling to guns or religion” in tough times.

Despite this, the document urges Christians to “support loudly” Obama’s policies and “remember who is in control”.

Romans
13 has routinely been cited by tyrants throughout history in an attempt
to prevent Christians from opposing their rule, indeed, it was Hitler’s
favorite bible verse. Religious groups such as the Catholics in 1930’s
Germany also used the verse as an excuse not to rise up against the
Nazis when they were still a minority political party.

A large number of mainstream church representatives..
claim that Romans 13 means Christians should obey the ruling
authorities no matter how tyrannical they are, and yet the bible itself
is full of examples of men standing up to corrupt authorities and
attempting to change the system - Jesus, John the Baptist and Moses
being the prime examples.
Should
Jesus have refrained from throwing the money changers out of the
temple? Should Moses have cowered from standing up to the Egyptian
slave masters? Should John the Baptist have kept quiet about the sinful
practices of Herod Antipas, his condemnation of which led to his
beheading?

The fact that large churches in America are
encouraging their congregation to all but obey the government and
support their agenda even if it opposes basic Christian principles is a
shocking indictment of how much control the state now exercises over
the church through the carrot of the 501(c)(3) Status dangled in front
of corruptible pastors and preachers.

Ominously. as we first exposed in 2006, FEMA is training pastors and other religious representatives..
to become secret police enforcers who teach their congregations to
“obey the government” in preparation for a declaration of martial law,
property and firearm seizures, and forced relocation. The bible verse
that FEMA encourages religious representatives.. to cite while undertaking this role? Romans 13.

The
individual who forwarded the document noted that around the time the
sermon was given, the church seemed to have an influx of funds.

“This
church has a new stage with flat screen monitors, updated church vans,
and is talking about expanding the church by building a new church,
which all occurred around the giving of this sermon. Mind you, we were
having a hard time buying new chairs for our church, no more than a
year ago. Coincidence?” he writes.

Click on the link to see the actual pamphlet:

http://thewaythetruththelightministries.ning.com/profiles/blogs.church-document-encourages




Romans 13 Revisited







by Chuck Baldwin


February 27, 2009





It seems that every time someone such as myself attempts to encourage our
Christian brothers and sisters to resist an unconstitutional or otherwise
reprehensible government policy, we hear the retort, "What about Romans
Chapter 13? We Christians must submit to government. Any government. Read
your Bible, and leave me alone," or words to that effect.

No doubt, some who use this argument are sincere. They are only repeating
what they have heard their pastor and other religious leaders say. On the
other hand, let's be honest enough to admit that some who use this argument
are just plain lazy, apathetic, and indifferent. And Romans 13 is their
escape from responsibility. I suspect this is the much larger group, by the
way.

Nevertheless, for the benefit of those who are sincere (but obviously
misinformed), let's briefly examine Romans Chapter 13. I quote Romans
Chapter 13, verses 1 through 7, from the Authorized King James text:

"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but
of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore
resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist
shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good
works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that
which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the
minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be
afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God,
a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must
needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For this
cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending
continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues:
tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear;
honour to whom honour."

Do our Christian friends who use these verses to teach that we should not
oppose any political leader really believe that civil magistrates have
unlimited authority to do anything they want without opposition? I doubt
that they truly believe that.

For example, what if our President decided to resurrect the old monarchal
custom of Jus Primae Noctis (Law of First Night)? That was the old medieval
custom when the king claimed the right to sleep with a subject's bride on
the first night of their marriage. Would our sincere Christian brethren
sheepishly say, "Romans Chapter 13 says we must submit to the government"? I
think not. And would any of us respect any man who would submit to such a
law? I wouldn't.

So, there are limits to authority. A father has authority in his home, but
does this give him power to abuse his wife and children? Of course not. An
employer has authority on the job, but does this give him power to control
the private lives of his employees? No. A pastor has overseer authority in
the church, but does this give him power to tell employers in his church how
to run their businesses? Of course not. All human authority is limited in
nature. No man has unlimited authority over the lives of other men. Lordship
and Sovereignty is the exclusive domain of Jesus Christ.

By the same token, a civil magistrate has authority in civil matters, but
his authority is limited and defined. Observe that Romans Chapter 13 clearly
limits the authority of civil government by strictly defining its purpose:
"For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil . . . For he is
the minister of God to thee for good . . . for he is the minister of God, a
revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil."

Notice that civil government must not be a "terror to good works." It has no
power or authority to terrorize good works or good people. God never gave it
that authority. And any government that oversteps that divine boundary has
no divine authority or protection.

Civil government is a "minister of God to thee for good." It is a not a
minister of God for evil. Civil magistrates have a divine duty to "execute
wrath upon him that doeth evil." They have no authority to execute wrath
upon him that doeth good. None. Zilch. Zero. And anyone who says they do is
lying. So, even in the midst of telling Christians to submit to civil
authority, Romans Chapter 13 limits the power and reach of civil authority.

Did Moses violate God's principle of submission to authority when he killed
the Egyptian taskmaster in defense of his fellow Hebrew? Did Elijah violate
God's principle of submission to authority when he openly challenged Ahab
and Jezebel? Did David violate God's principle of submission to authority
when he refused to surrender to Saul's troops? Did Daniel violate God's
principle of submission to authority when he disobeyed the king's law to not
pray audibly to God? Did the three Hebrew children violate God's principle
of submission to authority when they refused to bow to the image of the
state? Did John the Baptist violate God's principle of submission to
authority when he publicly scolded King Herod for his infidelity? Did Simon
Peter and the other Apostles violate God's principle of submission to
authority when they refused to stop preaching on the streets of Jerusalem?
Did Paul violate God's principle of submission to authority when he refused
to obey those authorities that demanded he abandon his missionary work? In
fact, Paul spent almost as much time in jail as he did out of jail.

Virtually every apostle of Christ (except John, who survived being boiled in
oil, according to historians) experienced martyrdom from hostile civil
authorities. In addition, Christians throughout church history were
imprisoned, tortured, or killed by civil authorities of all stripes for
refusing to submit to their various laws and prohibitions. Did all of these
Christian martyrs violate God's principle of submission to authority?

So, even the great prophets, apostles, and writers of the Bible (including
the writer of Romans Chapter 13) understood that human authority--including
civil authority--is limited.

Plus, Paul makes it clear that our submission to civil authority must be
predicated on more than fear of governmental retaliation. Notice, he said,
"Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for
conscience sake." Meaning, our obedience to civil authority is more than
just "because they said so." It is also a matter of conscience. This means
we must think and reason for ourselves regarding the justness and rightness
of our government's laws. Obedience is not automatic or robotic. It is a
result of both rational deliberation and moral approbation.

Remember, too, that we are all subject to Natural Law. No human authority
has the right to demand that men surrender their submission to God's law
"written in their hearts." When any human authority attempts to do this, it
becomes tyrannical, because, again, it challenges the Lordship and
Sovereignty of man's Creator.

As William Blackstone (as studied and devoted a Christian scholar as there
ever was) wrote, "This law of nature, being co-eval with mankind and
dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other.
It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no
human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are
valid derive all their force, and all their authority, mediately or
immediately, from this original." (Source: William Blackstone, "Of The
Nature of Laws in General")

Therefore, there are times when civil authority must be resisted. Either
governmental abuse of power or the violation of conscience (or both) could
precipitate civil disobedience. Of course, how and when we decide to resist
civil authority is an entirely separate issue. And I will reserve that
discussion for another time.

Beyond that, we in the United States of America do not live under a
monarchy. We have no king. There is no single governing official in this
country. America's "supreme Law" does not rest with any man or any group of
men. America's "supreme Law" does not rest with the President, the Congress,
or even the Supreme Court. In America, the U.S. Constitution is the "supreme
Law of the Land." Under our laws, every governing official publicly promises
to submit to the Constitution of the United States. Do readers understand
the significance of this distinction? I hope so.

This means that in America the "higher powers" are not the men who occupy
elected office, they are the tenets and principles set forth in the U.S.
Constitution. Under our laws and form of government, it is the duty of every
citizen, including our elected officials, to obey the U.S. Constitution.
Therefore, this is how Romans Chapter 13 reads to Christians in America:

"Let every soul be subject unto the [U.S. Constitution.] For there is no
[Constitution] but of God: the [Constitution] that be [is] ordained of God.
Whosoever therefore resisteth the [Constitution], resisteth the ordinance of
God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For [the
Constitution is] not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then
not be afraid of the [Constitution]? do that which is good, and thou shalt
have praise of the same: For [the Constitution] is the minister of God to
thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for [the
Constitution] beareth not the sword in vain: for [the Constitution] is the
minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for
conscience sake. For this cause pay ye tribute also: for [the Constitution
is] God's minister, attending continually upon this very thing. Render
therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom
custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour."

Dear Christian friend, the above is exactly the proper understanding of our
responsibility to civil authority in these United States, per the teaching
of Romans Chapter 13.

Furthermore, Christians, above all people, should desire that their elected
representatives submit to the Constitution, because it is constitutional
government that has done more to protect Christian liberty than any
governing document ever devised by man. As I have noted before in this
column, Biblical principles form the foundation of all three of America's
founding documents: the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution,
and the Bill of Rights.

(See: http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2005/cbarchive_20050630.html )

In addition, if Christians (and others) had been properly obedient to the
Constitution (and Romans 13), they would also have submitted to the Tenth
Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which recognizes the authority of the
States in matters not specifically ceded to the federal government. In other
words, the Constitution intended that the authority of the federal
government be small and limited, with most authority residing within the
States and among the people themselves.

As submission to the Constitution and Natural Law have provided a haven of
peace and prosperity in these United States, Christians (for the most part)
have not had to face the painful decision to "obey God rather than men" and
defy their civil authorities. However, as it is obvious that a majority of
our government leaders currently have almost no fidelity to their oaths to
defend the U.S. Constitution, it is becoming more and more likely that
we--like our forefathers--will need to rediscover Benjamin Franklin's
declaration that "Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God." (Of course,
this effort, too, must be accomplished within the scope of law, both divine
and civil.)

The problem in America today is that we have allowed our political leaders
to violate their oaths of office and to ignore, and blatantly disobey, the
"supreme Law of the Land," the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, if we truly
believe Romans Chapter 13, we will insist and demand that our civil
magistrates submit to the U.S. Constitution.

Now, how many of us Christians are going to truly obey Romans Chapter 13?

P.S. I invite readers to listen to my interview with Dr. Greg Dixon
regarding Romans Chapter 13 at:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/Interview_Dixon.html

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by
credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php




..


© Chuck Baldwin

This column is archived as
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090227.html




Friday, December 05, 2008 

Category: News and Politics

The Socialism of Public Schooling

by Jacob G. Hornberger
November 5, 2008

While the nation is on the subject of socialism, we really ought to talk about public schooling. With the possible exception of the military, it's the best example of a socialist institution one could ever find. It's not a coincidence that public schooling is one of Fidel Castro's favorite government programs.

Actually, "public schooling" is a misnomer. It would be more accurate to call it "government schooling" because it's a government operation from start to finish. That's different from, say, public movie theaters or public restaurants. Those are private businesses that are open to the public.

Like the military, public schooling operates in a top-down, command-and-control manner. It's a perfect model of socialistic central planning, a system in which government officials plan and direct the activities of the citizenry rather than simply leaving the citizenry free to plan and direct their own affairs.

Whether the control comes from the state government, through the state department of education, or the local government, through a school board, the principle is the same — a group of appointed or elected government officials is directing the educational decisions of multitudes of students. That's different from the private sector, where consumers, through their spending decisions, determine the direction of entrepreneurial and business activity.

Government officials decide the textbooks and the curricula in government schools. Thus, they decide the substance of what is to be taught to the students. In socialist countries like Cuba, we usually call that process indoctrination.

An American teacher might deviate from time to time from official doctrine, but if the deviation is major and persistent, the teacher will ultimately be forced into conformity. For example, suppose a schoolteacher begins teaching students that the drug war is immoral and destructive and, therefore, that drugs should be legalized. Outraged parents would bring their wrath down upon the school board, which would pressure the principal, who would send an appropriate message to the teacher.

How are public schools financed? Through coercion. Everyone, even people who do not have children, is taxed to fund this government enterprise. It's called taking money from everyone to subsidize those who have children. Or as Karl Marx would have described this process of spreading the wealth, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

The private sector gets its money differently. Private businesses must produce goods and services that people find sufficiently valuable to pay for voluntarily.

How do government schools get their customers? Through force. That's where compulsory-attendance laws come into play. If a parent fails to send his children into the public school system or fails to subject them to some alternative form of government-approved education (e.g., charter schools, government-licensed private schools, or homeschooling), the parent is subjected to extreme sanctions, including imprisonment. Of course, that's not the way that businesses in the private sector get their customers.

What's the alternative to government schooling? No, not charter schools or a voucher system or even a system of government-licensed private schools or government-supervised homeschooling. Those reforms leave government in charge of education and continue to rely on coercion.

Instead, the genuine alternative to government schooling is a free market in education — that is, an educational system that is entirely free of governmental involvement — a total separation of school and state. A free-market educational system would operate the same way that restaurants and movie theaters operate. Consumers, not the government, would decide the appropriate educational vehicles for their children, and businesses and entrepreneurs would supply those demands by providing people with educational products and services.

Advocates of government schooling claim that parents are not competent to make educational decisions for their children.
That raises an obvious question: Why not? Aren't most parents products of public schooling? If public schooling has produced a nation of adults who lack the competence to guide their children's education, why do we want to continue a system that is likely to produce the same result?

http://www.fff.org/comment/com0811c.asp
Tuesday, September 30, 2008 

Category: News and Politics

Sunday, September 28, 2008

Editorial: Cops wrong to taser teen

September 28, 2008
The Province

On Monday, a 16-year-old mother was clutching her baby, who was born one month ago with a series of life-threatening medical conditions. As the baby was released from hospital, the threat of those medical conditions had obviously diminished.

Social workers wanted the baby taken away from the mother, and when they were unable to do so, the police were called in.

With a number of police officers and social workers in the room, the distraught teenage mother allegedly gripped her sickly infant more tightly.

For three hours they negotiated.

Efforts to have the teenager willingly turn the baby over to the Vancouver police and social services went nowhere.

At that point, someone decided, for the well-being of this baby, that the standoff demanded immediate action: It was Taser time.

Not one Taser, but two Tasers.

As a result of the blasts, the mom involuntarily released the baby, the police rushed the child into an ambulance and all was resolved.

Well, sorry, but we still have a bunch of questions, starting with: What the hell just happened? Three, maybe four police officers couldn't wrestle an infant from the clutches of a 110-pound, 16-year-old mother? You negotiated for three hours with the teenager, then, 180 minutes later, concluded the infant was in trouble and only a Taser could resolve the situation? VPD Const. Jana McGuinness said officers had no choice but to Taser "the extremely distraught mother to rescue her critically ill infant." Rather than call that a lie, let's just say it's not true. Officers did have a choice. They could have left the room, for example. They could have continued to negotiate. Hell, they could have shot her.

Choices were everywhere. So, apparently, were Tasers.

Const. McGuinness went on to say: "It might appear to be harsh, but we have to remember that if the child died because we hadn't used the Taser, what criticism would we face then?" First off, police officers shouldn't make life and death decisions based on the optics and the potential for criticism. You do the right thing, and if some criticism comes along with doing the right thing, you live with it. Tasering this teenager was not the right thing.

As the citizens of Vancouver are well aware, the use of a Taser comes with the possibility of death. If the mother had a gun to the baby's head, fine, Taser her to Pluto. But the mother reportedly had no plans to hurt her child. The mother was holding the child during three hours of negotiations. Was it really worth risking the life of the 16-year-old by blasting her with thousands of volts of electric shock? Meanwhile, in New York, police Tasered a naked guy with a fluorescent light. He fell from the side of a building, landed on his head and died. A bystander recorded the incident and that recording was shared with the world on YouTube. Prosecutors are now investigating the police on the scene at the time of the death.

Perhaps if someone taped the Tasering of the Vancouver teenager, a similar investigation would ensue.

Perhaps the police themselves should have taped it. After all, they had three hours to set up the cameras.


Source: http://truthnottasers.blogspot.com/

Monday, September 15, 2008 

Category: Religion and Philosophy
Like me, you may have wondered how it was Earthly possibly for Hitler to have carried out his evil schemes. He tortured and killed men, women and children while German citizens, presumably people just like you and me, didn't notice?.. turned a blind eye?.. or even cheered? They must have been some sort of extraordinarily evil people. They must have been selfish, hateful, and definitely needed Jesus. I never spent much time though since I knew that nothing like that could or would ever happen here in America. No one like Hitler could ever come to power here. Right?

Remarkably, there were some 14,000 Protestant churches in Germany in the 30's; maybe more. I guess they were some of the first to be rounded up and exterminated so they couldn't interfere......or so you'd think.

"....Accordingly, did not the German church have an obligation to resist Adolph Hitler? Of course they did. However, at the end of the day, out of over 14,000 pastors and church congregations in Germany at the time, only 800 properly discerned the evil Hitler for who he was and openly opposed him. The rest not only tolerated him, but openly praised him, promoted him, and punished anyone who failed to do the same."

Source: http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2007/cbarchive_20070814.html

WHAT? Did you know that? Okay, so most have them must have just been too scared, didn't trust God enough, and shrunk from responsibility.

In fact, 3000 "Christian" pastors were fervent enough in their support of Hitler, they joined his German Christian movement. [German Christians or Deutsche Christens - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Christians ]

An estimated 800 pastors are known to have joined the "Confessing Church". Because they formed in opposition to Nazism, and the "German Christian" church which supported Hitler, they were forced underground. Many members were imprisoned, tortured and killed.

You can look into this more on your own. As time is of the essence -- I say with all certainty that the end is much closer than you think -- please consider this:

"....However, before we become too judgmental toward the Christians of 1930's Germany, we should look in the mirror. Are not many Christians in these United States behaving in the exact same manner? Have not many of us already embraced the spirit of antichrist? And if so, have we not, in our own way, already accepted the mark of the beast? Sure we have.

Many pastors and Christians embrace the authoritarian policies of one George W. Bush with the same enthusiasm and blind loyalty as Germans did Hitler. For example, according to White House insiders, while publicly embracing conservative Christians, the White House is privately said to have nothing but disdain for Christians. Mr. Bush acknowledged being a member of Skull & Bones, a secret society with a dark history. Others have reported that he is a member of Bohemian Grove, which, according to some, is an occultist society of the most sinister variety. Yet, all of this is rejected out of hand by most Christians today.

Plus, George W. Bush (as did Adolph Hitler) has led America into a preemptive and aggressive war against a foreign nation without provocation. Now, there is even talk at the White House of expanding the war in Iraq with attacks against Iran and Syria, and maybe even Pakistan. In addition, he is in the process of turning America into a Hitlerian surveillance society where our every move, phone call, and email are being monitored by federal police agencies.

***Yet, conservative Christians are still so infatuated with President Bush that they actually believe that anyone who resists the President is resisting God. They further believe that if anyone votes for any candidate who is not a Republican (Bush's party), they are fighting against God.*** They gladly surrender their constitutional liberties and safeguards. They enthusiastically support an unconstitutional war in Iraq and would no doubt support expanding the war to wherever Bush decided. They happily cede Bush the power to tap their phones, read their emails, or open their mail (without warrant or court order, no less).

Regardless of one's politics or religion, the spirit of Big Brother, the spirit of military aggression, the spirit of occultism, the spirit of a police state mentality, the spirit of deception are all part of the spirit of antichrist.

Therefore, whether one identifies himself as a premillennialist or a postmillennialist or anything in between; whether we believe in a Rapture or not; no matter what our understanding of Eschatology might be, every Christian has a duty to "resist the devil" in any form in which he reveals himself. And that certainly means that any political leader, regardless of party, who embodies or exemplifies the spirit of antichrist, must be resisted. Anything less means to accept, in a way, the mark of the beast."

Source (same as first source): http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2007/cbarchive_20070814.html

TO MY CHRISTIAN FRIENDS AND FAMILY:

Get on your knees and ask God to open your eyes to the truth. Get out your Bible and measure EACH AND EVERY THING YOU READ OR HEAR IN THE NEWS, everything anyone says to you BY THE WORD OF GOD. It's time for Christians to get humbled before the Lord. There is a real and dangerous enemy in this world. Our existence as followers of Christ is not meant to be limited to going to church, listening to Christian music, not-sinning, or even telling others the way to be saved. Let us not forget that we are not humans with spirits, but spirits borrowing these Earthly bodies and this Earthly life. We have a job to do! - Our spirits do!

Ephesians 6:12
"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms."

I'm sure you've read this. This is reality! Are you one of those Christians who acts like those "spiritual forces of evil" spend most of the year on vacation, and thankfully only pop up when we're ready? No! They're working OVERTIME, to not only funnel as many of us into hell as possible by DECEPTION, but to fulfill each and every prophecy of evil in the Bible as quickly as possible. And yes, the Bible says Christians will be pulled away from the truth - the "falling away". The "Christian church" won't be teaching the TRUTH! We've got the blueprint right in front of us. We have a responsibility. Has it begun already? Would we know it if it had? Remember the Germans. Their "Christian" leaders wanted to institute "Positive Christianity", where no mention of sin was made and would ONLY talk about the happy, nice parts of the Bible.

If you accept your God-given responsibility, dig into the word. Pray, no PLEAD with God to open your eyes to the truth. Do not be deceived by the evil one.

Read:

2 Thessalonians 2 - pay special attention to verses 3, 8, 10-12

"1 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you,
2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ  had come.
3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition,
4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things?
6 And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time.
7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way.
8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming.
9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders,
10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie,
12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

The spirit of the antichrist is, and has been, at work in the world. His number one job? To DECEIVE, even CHRISTIANS.

The above verses provide a serious warning. Anyone who believes not the truth and is deceived by the antichrist will be condemned. As we saw with the German Christians, it is NOT impossible for Christians to be lead astray and to "pleasure in unrighteousness" (delight in the doings of the antichrist).

How can we be sure that we're not the ones who will be deceived by THE antichrist? How can we be sure that it hasn't happened already? We have pastors proclaiming that Christians have nothing to worry about in the end because we won't be here when the bad stuff happens. 2 Thessalonians 2:3 comforts Christians, assuring them that they need not worry because they have not missed the "gathering" of believers unto Christ, for his return will not happen until:

-THE antichrist, by Satan's power performs signs and lying wonders
-The falling away
-THE antichrist is revealed

If we don't wake up, we're going to miss our opportunity, no our RESPONSIBILITY, and face condemnation.

Revelation - Ask God to reveal to you his truth. Ask Him to guard you from deception.

Proverbs 2:6
"For the LORD gives wisdom,  and from his mouth come knowledge and understanding."

We each have a choice to make. Will we be part of the "American Christians" or the "Confessing Church"?

LINKS:
Have Christians Already Accepted the Mark of the Beast? (Chuck Baldwin)

What's With All These Clueless Christians? (Chuck Baldwin)

1930's German Protestant Church

The Protestant church in Hitler's Germany and the Barmen Declaration


Sunday, September 07, 2008 

Category: News and Politics
First off, the CDC has NEVER reported a death due to smoking marijuana. Not to say it has never been a contributing factor to, say and auto accident. But unlike alcohol or prescription drugs, which can actually kill you just by consuming too much, it is impossible to OVERDOSE on "marijuana". That is because it would not be physically possible to either smoke or consume enough of the plant quickly enough. I believe you'd have to eat something like 40 lbs of it.

Secondly, I hate the word "marijuana". The real name of the plant is Cannabis (genus) and it has 3 species. Sativa, Indica, and Ruderalis. Indica is the one usually smoked and Sativa is used for industrial purposes. The third species, Ruderalis, isn't commonly used for anything that I know of.

Up until the middle of the last century, hemp was the most widely grown field crop on the planet. George Washington grew hemp. In North America, in the early 19th century, hemp was legal tender (money). During times of drought, in the US, farmers were threatened with imprisonment if they refused to grow hemp.

Henry Ford made a BIODEGRADABLE plastic from hemp that was more resistant to heavy blows than STEEL! He used it in his Model-T, and also made the fuel for the car from hemp.

Here in the US, cannabis was called hemp up until right before it made illegal. Hemp was and is used in many countries for hundreds if not thousands of purposes. It is the strongest natural fiber on Earth.

Things made from hemp: food, fuel, textiles, paint, plastic, rope, canvas..... the list goes on.

One theory on how/why hemp, I mean marijuana was outlawed can be found here: http://www.sdearthtimes.com/et0199/et0199s11.html Basically, the gov (and lobbyist companies including the DuPont chemical company) can make WAAAYYY more money off of ILLEGAL hemp..... locking up harmless people (like the alcohol prohibition), cashing in on the profits of the oil, pharmaceutical, and many other industries.

Here's a funny video detailing the publicly known facts as to how "marijuana" was criminalized; how Anslinger, a bureaucrat associated with the DuPont company, tried to convince white America that "marijuana" was a menace and threat from minorities.



***In 1942, 4 years after hemp was prohibited, the government conveniently changed its mind (temporarily) in order to produce items needed for battle in WWII. The gov produced a video called "Hemp for Victory" and distributed it to farmers. That just cracks me up...



Here's a video of a car that runs on "gas" from hemp oil.... so safe you can actually drink it!



The medicinal benefits of hemp are mind-boggling. This video was made in Canada, where hemp is also illegal.



****Although we're to believe that hemp is dangerous and does not have significant, if any, medicinal benefits, the pharmaceutical industry produces a SYNTHENTIC (man-made) version of THC, the psychoactive substance from cannabis which they sell at the blood-boiling price of $700 / 30 pills!! See for yourself: source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thc

I recently learned that we're all treating our dry skin the wrong way; from the outside, in. If given enough "essential fatty acids" would not require all the chemical-laced lotions and moisturizers. Guess which thing in nature contains the most essential fatty acids?? Hemp seeds!! I read an article in Ft. Lauderdale Sun Sentinnel describing hemp seeds as a "super food".

Links:

http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vcG9ydGFsbWFya2V0LmNvbS9oZW1waGlzdG9yeS5odG1s">

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp
Sunday, August 03, 2008 

Category: News and Politics

IT'S NOT, BUT UR CURRENCY IS LOSING IT'S PURCHASING POWER!
More Currency = A Less Valuable Currency = Higher Prices
Governments and Central banks are the reason currencies are being inflated and causing them to lose their purchasing power.


currencies have been increasing in quantity which causes them to lose value.  If there are more dollars, each individual dollar will become less valuable.  As a result the price of "things" that currencies purchase, such as oil and gasoline, will go up.  This explanation of a complex topic is short and simple.  The main point to remember is that the cost of gas at the pump is a reflection of both the value of oil as well as the value of the currency measuring it.
  

The value of paper money continually loses value because the constant printing of paper money constantly dilutes the value of previously printed money. The more paper money printed, the less paper money is worth; and today, money is being printed at a faster rate than at any time in history.


In fiat paper money systems, today's paper money will be worth less than tomorrow's and will be worth less the day after ad infinitum . This constant degradation of paper money is known as inflation. When the process rapidly speeds up, it is known as hyperinflation. Remember that word.

For the first time in history, all money, all currencies are now fiat which means money no longer has intrinsic value . This is not because intrinsic value was deemed unnecessary for a functioning currency. The real reason is far less reasonable.

All money is now fiat because between 1949 and 1970 the US overspent its entire 21,775 ton hoard of gold and could no longer convert its currency to gold as agreed under the Bretton Woods Agreements in 1944.

Note: What gold remains in US custody today remains only because in 1971 the US refused to transfer the remaining gold owed to others; as its obligations were far greater than its capacity to settle.

Because at the time the gold-backed US currency anchored all world currencies, when the US dollar became fiat, all currencies also became fiat. For the first time in history, no currency was backed by either gold or silver including the international reserve currency, the US dollar. The destructive consequences of that act have remained contained for 35 years. They are no longer.

The sudden global switch from gold backed money to fiat paper money was not by design; it was the by-product of excessive US post-WWII military spending and corporate overseas expansion. Throughout history, the downfall of most paper money economies can be directly tied to wars and the military. The US is no exception.

The late central banker John Exter called today's money IOU-nothing money , the best description yet of today's constantly degrading paper currencies. Trillions of dollars are bet daily on FOREX markets as speculators bet on the value of government issued coupons masquerading as money. Someday, perhaps sooner than later, speculators will bet the coupons have no value at all.

 

THE DAY GOLD CORNERS PAPER MONEY

On that day, according to Professor Antal E. Fekete, a spontaneous gold corner could develop; but the corner would not be driven by speculators cornering a commodity to drive up its price. The corner will be caused by the refusal of those who own gold to exchange their increasingly precious metal for increasingly worthless paper currencies.

Since 1913 when the Federal Reserve first issued its debt based paper money in the US, the paper US dollar has lost 95 % of its value, a loss of 95 % over 95 years. Perhaps in five more years, 100 years after the creation of the Federal Reserve, the US dollar will have lost 100 % of its value—which means in five years the US paper dollar will be worth nothing.

Throughout history, no fiat money system has stood the test of time. All attempts to substitute paper money for gold and silver have ended in the total destruction and debasement of the currency.

This time will be no different. It is hubris to think otherwise but unfortunately the vast majority do—which is a clear sign they're not thinking at all.

Barrels of oil per dollar in blue, Euro in red and ounce of gold in purple.

Chart showing the price of oil in U.S. dollars, Euros and in gold.

The Price of Oil Hasn't Budged Since 2001 (If You Pay for Black Gold with Gold)

http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vd3d3LnRoZWRhaWx5Z3JlZW4uY29tL2Vudmlyb25tZW50YWwtbmV3cy9sYXRlc3Qvb2lsLWdvbGQtY29tbW9kaXRpZXMtNDcwNDE1MDc=">http://www. thedailygreen. com/environmental-news/latest/oil-gold-commodities-47041507





Zimbabwe brings in new currency to tackle inflation crisis
Larry Elliott, economics editor The Guardian,
Friday August 1 2008 Article history

People in Zimbabwe will tomorrow start to use a new currency introduced by the central bank to halt the African country's runaway increase in the cost of living.

Gideon Gono, the central bank governor, said he was no longer prepared to print notes of ever higher denominations. "Ten billion dollars today, will as from August 1 be revalued to one zimdollar dollar," he said earlier this week. The move follows an increase in Zimbabwean inflation to 2.2m%, and represents an attempt to get to grips with the economic crisis in what was once one of sub-Saharan Africa's richest countries. The $100bn note came into circulation only 10 days ago.

Gono's move follow the example of the president of the Reichsbank in the 1920s, Hjalmar Schacht, who helped end Weimar Germany's financial crisis by striking nine zeros from the currency and turning 10bn old marks into one new rentenmark.

Zimbabwe's inflation rate has hit a new high as the country comes to terms with spending billions of dollars.

The BBC's Andrew Harding visited a supermarket in Harare and found buying a box of eggs costs 600 billion Zimbabwe dollars.

VIDEO OF ZIMBABWE FOLLOWING LINK;
http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vbmV3cy5iYmMuY28udWsvMi9oaS9hZnJpY2EvNzUyOTc0MS5zdG0=">http://news. bbc. co. uk/2/hi/africa/7529741. stm

Wednesday, July 30, 2008 

Category: News and Politics

Did you even know that apricot seeds are illegal... well of course, they are inside apricots if you buy the fruit, but did you know that it's illegal to buy/sell the seeds (from inside the pit) in the US? I bet you still think I'm joking don't you? Stay tuned.

As you read, keep in mind this fact: plants cannot be patented, therefore no one can cash in on the discovery of a healing property of any given plant.

Cyanide in Apricot Seeds Target Cancer

By BBC News Online's Jonathan Amos, 7 September 2000

Scientists are using cyanide to attack tumors. They have tested a two-stage drug that harnesses the power of the dangerous chemical to kill bowel cancer cells in the lab.

The researchers, at Imperial College, London, now hope to refine the technology and test it on patients.

Laetrile (amygdaline) is a simple compound found most abundantly in the seeds of non-citrus fruits. Most commercially prepared laetrile is extracted from apricot seeds. Laetrile is composed of two molecules of glucose (sugar), one molecule of benzaldehyde (an analgesic) and one molecule of hydrocyanic acid (a cell-killing compound). It is the hydrocyanic acid which kills cancer cells.

Laetrile's action relies on a chemical difference between normal cells and cancer cells:

  • Cancer cells contain in abundance an enzyme called beta-glucosidase; normal cells have very little of it.
  • Normal cells have large quantities of another enzyme called rhodanese; cancer cells are deficient in that.

Laetrile is broken down into its component parts as a result of the action of beta-glucosidase. As normal cells are deficient in this, most of the cyanide is released only in cancer cells. With nothing to control it, the cyanide released destroys the cancer cells.

In normal body tissue, deficient in beta-glucosidase, very little cyanide is released and rhodanese, in the presence of sulphur-bearing compounds, converts the little free cyanide which may be released to thiocyanate which is not toxic. This thiocyanate is then excreted in the urine. In this way normal cells survive unharmed.

The cancer industry has been searching for decades for a 'magic bullet', a treatment which targets only cancer cells without damaging normal cells, and there it was all the time and they refused to acknowledge it.

Full Story: http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/laetrile.html


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Proof that laetrile (component of APRICOT SEEDS) is illegal in USA:


UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

vs.

JOHN ANTON RICHARDSON
RALPH S. BOWMAN
FRANK SALAMAN
ROBERT WILLIAM BRADFORD

Defendants-Appellants.

Filed October 26, 1978

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California

Before: HERRILL and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges,
 and BARTELS,* District Judge

*Honorable John R. Bartels, Senior United States District Judge of the Eastern District of New York, sitting by designation.

MERRILL, Circuit Judge:

Laetrile is a substance (drug or vitamin) around which controversy for some time has raged as to whether it provides effective cure of or relief from cancer. The Food and Drug Administration has classified it as a "new drug" under 21 U.S.C. §32l(p): a drug not generally recognized by experts to be safe and effective. Under 21 U.S.C. §355(b) as a result of this classification an application for approval of the new drug must be filed and the new drug cannot be transported in interstate commerce without such approval.1 Approval so far has been withheld, which precludes importation of the drug and limits distribution of it in this country.

This case involves a conspiracy to smuggle the drug into the United States from Mexico and thereafter to distribute the smuggled merchandise. A twelve-count indictment was returned by a grand Jury in the Southern District of California charging these four appellants and fifteen other codefendants with two conspiracies—one to smuggle merchandise and one to receive; buy, sell, transport and conceal the smuggled merchandise, both in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§37l and 545—and also charging various substantive offenses, The trial of these appellants was severed from that of their codefendants. All four were found guilty of the two conspiracy counts. Appellant Bradford also was found guilty of three substantive counts: two of smuggling and one of receiving, concealing and facilitating the transportation of smuggled merchandise.

The record establishes that in 1971 one McNaughton (a codefendant) was engaged in a chemical manufacturing business in Sausalito, California. He decided to move his plant to Tijuana, Mexico, and there to manufacture Laetrile. The plant was established under the name of Cyto Pharma. One Contreras (a codefendant) who maintained a cancer clinic in Mexico became co-owner of the enterprise. One Greczy (a coconspirator) who had acted as chemist for NcNaughton in Sausalito, and two Del Rio brothers from Mexico (codefendants) were placed in charge of the plant. At the outset the plant produced only for Contreras' clinic. A surplus developed, however, and in the fall of 1971 it was decided by McNaughton, Contreras, Greczy and the Del Rios that the surplus should be brought into the United States for distribution. Since Customs officials regularly seized all declared Laetrile, this meant that the Laetrile would have to be smuggled in. One Thurston (coconspirator) was designated to act as distributor for NcNaughton in the United States. Evidence as to the manner in which the conspiracy operated came from correspondence of Thurston seized under a state search warrant and from testimony of Grcczy and numerous other co-defendants, many of whom had actually brought Laetrile across the border and some of whom had engaged in knowing distribution.

Appellant Richardson is a medical doctor engaged in practice in Albany, California. Appellant Bowman is his office manager. Appellants Bradford and Salaman are active members of the Committee for Freedom of Choice in Cancer Therapy, which is engaged in seeking to remove the FDA classification of Laetrile or to secure its approval.

Source: http://www.casewatch.org/doj/bradford/appeal.shtml

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


From CNN: http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/cancer/09/07/laetrile.crackdown.ap/index.html


FDA cracks down on laetrile resurgence

September 7, 2000

Web posted at: 1517 GMT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Federal health officials warned Internet users Wednesday to beware of a concoction made of apricot seeds that's touted as a cancer cure, as a Florida court case became the government's latest attempt to quell a resurgence of laetrile.

In the 1970s, thousands of patients went to Mexico seeking laetrile, and some doctors sold it in the United States, before a National Cancer Institute study concluded the substance did not fight cancer. Experts also warned that laetrile pills could cause cyanide poisoning.

So the Food and Drug Administration declared laetrile illegal. Several states fought the FDA action but courts backed the government, ending laetrile's heyday by 1980.

Now laetrile is rebounding on the Internet, sometimes sold under the aliases amygdalin or "vitamin B17."

Wednesday, the FDA announced that a U.S. District judge in Miami had issued a preliminary injunction halting sales by three Internet sites, and warned consumers to beware.

"We do not want people to take products that have not been proven to be safe and effective," said FDA enforcement chief John Taylor, saying the biggest worry is that patients will forego proven cancer therapy.

The judge's ruling temporarily stops laetrile sales by World Without Cancer Inc. and Health World International Inc., of Bay Harbor Fla., and Arizona-based Health Genesis Corp., which also does business in Bay Harbor Island, while the court considers an FDA lawsuit seeking to permanently halt the sales. The FDA said since 1998 its inspectors have warned David E. Arjona, a official of all three companies, that laetrile is illegal, yet those inspectors bought laetrile from his Web site in June.

Arjona did not return a phone call. His attorney, Kirkpatrick Dilling of Chicago, was not aware of the preliminary injunction but said his client "hasn't sold one thing that's harmful to anybody."

The Florida case is the FDA's third laetrile crackdown this year, part of the agency's new attempt to block Internet sales of unapproved drugs. In April, a federal judge ordered a New York company to stop selling laetrile -- in July, a federal grand jury indicted an Ohio laetrile seller.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

History of Hemp

Some other interesting pieces of information about the historical use of hemp include the following.

  • Hemp is thought to originate in the Himalayas, from where it was spread by animals and people. The Aryans who invaded India are known to have taken hemp seed with them to sow for fibre throughout the Middle East and Europe.
From at least the 5th Century BC until the late 19th Century ship sails and riggings were made from hemp. Hemp is still used on some ships because of its resistance to mildew and weathering and because it remains pliable in extreme conditions where plastic based ropes become brittle and crack.
  • Hemp is among the oldest industries, going back more than 10,000 years to the beginning of pottery.
  • The oldest relic of human industry is a bit of hemp fabric dating back to approximately 8,000 BC. It was found in Mesopotamia and was mentioned in Assyrian scripts.
  • By 3,000 years BC, hemp was considered the most important textile, and even in China, where silk production was flourishing, hemp was relied on because it was cheaper than silk and was a strong fibre for clothing.
  • Christopher Columbus carried hemp seed on his fleet for use in case of shipwreck to grow crops for raw materials and for use as a food source.
  • US past presidents Thomas Jefferson and George Washington were both active hemp farmers.
  • The war between North America and Great Britain in 1812 was mainly about access to Russian hemp.
  • Napoleon's principle reason for invading Russia in the same year 1812 was due to Russian hemp supplies.
  • Until the early 1800's the word 'linen' was used to refer to any fine fabric made from hemp or flax.
  • After the invasion of Philippines stopped the supply of Manila hemp to US, the US government distributed 400,00 pounds of Cannabis hemp seeds to US farmers who subsequently produced 42,000 tons of fibre for the US WWII effort.
  • Benjamin Franklin started one of the first paper mills with cannabis hemp thus freeing US from dependence on paper or books from England.
  • Hemp seed oil is said to burn the brightest of all lamp oils and has been used for millennia.
  • Scythians used hemp seed oil to cleanse and purify themselves.
  • Legal restrictions put an end to Henry Ford's automobile made in part from hemp fibre and run on hemp oil. He was forced to abandon his work due to hemp prohibition, and alcohol prohibition.
  • In 1935 in the US 58,000 tons of hemp seed was used to make non-toxic paint and varnish, but hemp prohibition meant these safe products were replaced with toxic petro-chemical paints and varnishes.
  • French bank notes are still produced from hemp paper, grown and processed in a small area of France.

Read much more here: http://www.harbay.net/index.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Interesting excerpt from the Sun-Sentinel (Ft. Lauderdale paper): http://www.sun-sentinel.com/features/food/sfl-flrawfoodsbjul17,0,5461717.story

Hemp is a SUPERFOOD?? What?!?

"Today, she runs Loving Foods (loving-foods.com), a raw superfoods business, with her husband, Brian. Raw superfoods are blends of unprocessed ingredients that concentrate nutrients.

Examples include Chocolate Silk, the main ingredients of which are cacao powder, hemp seeds and whole coconut flour, and Fiesta Mole, the primary ingredients of which are tomato powder, cacao powder and hemp seeds."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 
Sunday, July 27, 2008 

Category: Life

Mother's anger turns to delight after her baby survives an abortion

By Liz Hull

Finley Crampton really shouldn't be here. Although his parents would have loved another child, they knew their baby could inherit a life-threatening kidney condition – and they couldn't take the risk.

After all, their first son had died of the condition and the second was born with serious kidney damage.

So when Finley's mother, Jodie Percival, became pregnant while on the Pill, she and her fiance Billy Crampton, 35, made the agonising decision to abort this child.

Jodie Percival and baby Finlay

Survivor: Jodie Percival and baby Finley who survived an abortion

'Deciding to terminate at eight weeks was just utterly horrible but I couldn't cope with the anguish of losing another baby,' said Miss Percival, 25.

However, Finley had other ideas. And some time after the operation, Miss Percival felt a fluttering in her stomach.

Eventually her doctor sent her for a scan – and she discovered she was 19 weeks pregnant.

The child had survived the abortion and thrived in the womb. 'I couldn't believe it,' said Miss Percival. 'This was the baby I thought I'd terminated.

'At first I was angry that this was happening to us, that the procedure had failed.

'I wrote to the hospital, I couldn't believe that they had let me down like this. They wrote back and apologised and said it was very rare.'

But a week later, another scan confirmed that this baby had kidney problems too, like the couple's previous children.

Miss Percival carries a gene which triggers multicystic dysplastic kidney – which causes cysts to grow on the kidneys of an unborn baby.

Her first baby, Thane, had lived for only 20 minutes after she was forced to deliver him prematurely.

Her second son, Lewis, now 20 months, was born with a similar condition. He survives on one kidney.

However, doctors told the couple from Sutton-in-Ashfield, Nottinghamshire, that this child was likely to survive, so they decided he deserved a chance.

And in November, Finley was born three weeks premature, at 6lb 3oz.

He had minor kidney damage but is expected to lead a normal life.

'I knew if that operation hadn't failed he wouldn't have been there,' said Miss Percival, a hairdresser.

'I just couldn't believe that this child had got through it all and looked so perfect.

'He may need an operation but as only one of his kidneys is affected he can survive.

'I still struggle to believe just what he has fought through. Now he's here I wouldn't change it for the world.'


Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1024297/Mothers-anger-turns-delight-baby-survives-abortion.html