Friday, February 6, 2009

CFR ?? Trilateral Comminsion?

Tom's Journal.

The VIDEO: Eric Clapton "cocaine" Video

So...... even Rick Warren is a member of the CFR ?? Woo Woo! PTL [Praise the Lord] that the |Holy Spirit gives [real, biblical] Christians the 'power' and faculties to discern a lamb in sheep's clothing.... and special little RED FLAGS go up inside our heads when 'something doesn't sound right.' That what is meant in the book of Hebrews 4: 12, "For the Word of God ]the Bible] is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart." This means that the Bible is the ultimate, last word on deciding weather something is true or false, right or wrong! Period. Otherwise we may well be tossed to and fro by ever goofy, lying wolf who comes along to fatten his wallet on people who are looking for the truth, but are duped by all kinds of tricksters, scam artists, false prophets, etc. This is very important to me because I was really hurting emotionally when I got back from Vietnam in 1970 with PTSD, looking for some truth to get my mind back together-- when I got involved with Jehovah's Witnesses for the next 22 years!!! And they messed me and my family up ROYAL!! Beware, please! And it's not about being dumb, smart,educated of going to a Bible college. Prayer and intense study will give you all the 'tools' you need to discern what is fact and what is fiction or lies when you hear someone talk.
Now, go look up what "CFR" means, and "Trilateral Comminsion." Obama is into this stuff, big time!

Still not convinced? Just a few days ago, when asked by a reporter what he thought the most important thing was that Barack Obama could accomplish, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said, "I think his task will be develop an overall strategy for America in this period when, really, a New World Order can be created. It's a great opportunity; it isn't just a crisis."

This is the same Henry Kissinger, you will recall, who said back in 1991, "Today, America would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow, they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were [sic] an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government."

Even Gideon Rachman, the chief foreign affairs commentator for the Financial Times, wrote an editorial expressing his support for world government. In his column he said, "I have never believed that there is a secret United Nations plot to take over the US. . . . But, for the first time in my life, I think the formation of some sort of world government is plausible.

"A 'world government' would involve much more than co-operation between nations. It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a body of laws. The European Union has already set up a continental government for 27 countries, which could be a model. The EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability to deploy military force.

"So could the European model go global? There are three reasons for thinking that it might."

Rachman then goes on to explain the reasons why he believes world government is plausible.

The Dems' 'Messiah.' I hope you are happy now...LOL.

Tom's Journal.

Why not sing the Cocaine song ??? hey hey.... Eric Clapton - Cocaine (10/3/06

February 05, 2009

$20.3 Million for the Resettlement of Radical Muslims

$20.3 Million for the Resettlement of Radical Muslims



Paul L. Williams

Bos Smith


Michael Travis

By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure of $20.3 million in migration assistance to the Palestinian refugees and conflict victims in Gaza.

The "presidential determination" which allows hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States was signed on January 27 and appeared in the Federal Register on February 4.

President Obama's decision, according to the Register, was necessitated by "the urgent refugee and migration needs" of the "victims."

Few on Capital Hill took note that the order provides a free ticket replete with housing and food allowances to individuals who have displayed their overwhelming support of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in the parliamentary election of January 2006.

The charter for Hamas calls for the replacement of the nation of Israel with a Palestinian Islamic state.

Since its formation in 1994, Hamas has been responsible for hundreds of terrorist attacks, including the 2002 Passover suicide bombing. The leaders of the movement signed the World Islamic Statement of 1998 - - a document, penned by Osama bin Laden, which declared war on America and Israel.

President Obama's executive order is expected to bring hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, many with ties to radical Islam, to our shores, furthering a process that was inaugurated in 1995 by Senator Ted Kennedy and the Cedar-Hart bill.


In 1965, Allah in His mercy raised up Senators Ted Kennedy and Edward Celler to initiate changes in the immigration law that made it possible for millions of Muslims to make their way to the New World - - as the Christian Europeans had done in the early years of the 20th Century. The Cedar-Hart bill, which was signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson on October 3, 1965, abolished the national-origin quotas that had been in effect since 1924. In the spirit of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it barred discrimination on the basis of race, creed, religion, or national origin. America, by fiat of liberal secular humanists, was to be become a multicultural country - - a country severed from its Judeo-Christian roots.

Remaining cognizant of the common roots as the American people, our legislative had enacted stringent laws pertaining to immigration and naturalization. The Naturalization Act of 1790 stipulated that "any alien, being a free white person, may be admitted to become a citizen of the United States" The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 prohibited Chinese families from immigrating to the United States. The Immigration Act of 1907 reorganized the states bordering Mexico (Arizona, New Mexico and a large part of Texas) into Mexican Border District to stem the flow of immigrants into the U.S.

The Immigration Act of 1924 further limited the number of new immigrants by the establishment of a stringent quota system. The number of newcomers was now limited to 2 percent of each nationality who lived in the country not in 1924 but in 1890. The reliance of this legislation on the ethnic composition of the country before the turn of the century guaranteed that the majority of new arrivals would be from Northern Europe. Since few Italians and Eastern Europeans lived in the U. S. in 1890, the quotas for these nationalities became fixed at marginal rates and the number of new immigrants from "undesirable" regions greatly reduced. The following chart shows the effects of this legislation:

Immigration Statistics, 1920-1926
Year Total
Entering U.S.
Country of Origin
1920 430,001 38,471 3,913 95,145
1921 805,228 51,142 32,793 222,260
1922 309,556 25,153 12,244 40,319
1923 522,919 45,759 16,082 46,674
1924 706,896 59,490 13,173 56,246
1925 294,314 27,172 1,566 6,203
1926 304,488 25,528 1,596 8,253

It is hard to conceive of an act of Congress that could be more culturally biased than the Immigration Act of 1954 and yet it received nearly unchallenged bipartisan support. Yet The New York Times editorialized: "The country has a right to say who shall and who shall not come in. . . . The basis of restriction must be chosen with a view not to the interest of any group or groups in this country . . . but rather with a view to the country's best interests as a whole."1

In 1952, The McCarran Walter Immigration Act affirmed the national-origins quota system of 1924 and limited total annual immigration to one-sixth of one percent of the population of the continental United States in 1920, or 175,455. The act exempted spouses and children of U.S. citizens and people born in the Western Hemisphere from the quota.


But, in 1965, Kennedy and company viewed such legislation as pig-headed and prejudicial. Few elected officials, Senator Sam Ervin of North Carolina - - being one of the exceptions, dared to disagree with them. Championing the Celler-Hart bill, which called for the abolished all quotas, Kennedy, being far from prescient, said: "Contrary to the charges in some quarters, S500 will not inundate America with immigrants from any other country or area, or the most populated and economically deprived nations of Africa and Asia. . . The charges I have mentioned are highly emotional, irrational, and with little foundation in fact. They are out of line with the obligation of responsible citizenship. They breed hate of our heritage."2

Forty years after Senator Kennedy made this pledge, Dean Steven Gillon of the Honors College at Oklahoma University assessed the results of the 1965 Immigration Act by noting: "The U. S. added at least 40 million immigrants after 1965. Before 1965, 95 percent of the new immigrants had come from Europe. After 1965, 95 percent came from the Third World. The 1965 act has transformed American society and had consequences exactly the opposite of what we were promised."3

In his speech before Congress, Senator Kennedy had said; "Our cities will not be flooded with a million im