En opnieuw laat de SGP zich van zijn slechtste kant (is er überhaupt een goede kant) zien. De Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij is van mening dat minister Plasterk van onderwijs cultuur en wetenschap niet zou moeten meevaren in de jaarlijkse Gay Pride, een jaarlijks in augustus gehouden homo-evenement waarbij homoseksuelen op boten door de Amsterdamse grachten varen.
SGP voorman Bas van der Vlies vindt het 'van de ratten besnuffeld' dat met een eigen boot meevaart in augustus.
Bas van der Vlies gaat ver en zei tegen het ANP het volgende: "Natuuurlijk is het goed dat het kabinet maatregelen neemt tegen geweld, discriminatie en intimidatie van homo's of wie dan ook, maar daarvoor hoeft het ministerie toch warempel geen officiële boot te laten meevaren tijdens de Gay Pride.''
Volgens Van der Vlies is de manifestatie niet voor elke homo zo leuk. "Het geheel staat wijd en zijd bekend vanwege een buitenissigheid en extravagantie waar veel homoseksuelen zich absoluut niet bij thuis voelen en zich zelfs voor schamen.''
Lees ook:SGP: geen kinderen in Gay Pride
Lees ook:SGP’ers zijn homohaters
Lees ook:Jongeren belagen opnieuw homo’s
Lees ook:Welke partij maakt zich druk om holebi’s?
Lees ook:SGP loopt niet warm voor softporno
De Minister moet beseffen dat hij niet als privaat-persoon meevaart, maar als vertegenwoordiger van het gehele volk!
Deze MINISTER IS PROVOCEREND BEZIG VOOR DEGENEN DIE FEL TEGENSTANDER ZIJN VAN HOMO’S EN HELEMAAL VAN DE DWANG WAARMEE DE POLITIEK EN OVERHEID – HAAR MACHT MISBRUIKEND – DE VALSE LEER DAT HOMOSEXUALITEIT OKAY IS, EN GELIJKWAARDIG AAN HETEROSEXUALITEIT, ALS GEWOON NATUURLIJK VERSCHIJNSEL, AAN DE BEVOLKING OPLEGT!
Daarmee VERLIEST deze regering haar LEGITIMITEIT, en mij vertegenwoordigt deze minister NIET in dit gebeuren.
Ik zal NIMMER- maakt niet uit hoe de overheid dwingt en vervolgt- van mijn overtuiging vanuit God afstappen dat homosexualiteit een gruwel is voor God, een zonde, een ongerechtigheid die elke beschaving die haar in haar midden accepteerde onder heeft laten gaan – God’s wrake en oordelen worden erdoor over het land gebracht!
Ik walg van dit losbandige, immorele, homo-gebeuren in de hoofdstad van dit land!
Een Minister die er aan meedoet, geeft aan dat dit land God’s oordelen en wrake over dit land werkelijk bijzonder wil versnellen!
De Minister van Emancipatie – vrijmaking – zoekt de Christenen ( en andere religies) ONvrij te maken, zodat homo’s meer geëmancipeerd, meer vrij, zijn?
INTEGENDEEL! Vrijer en losbandiger kunnen homo’s niet worden in dit land!
Niet om homo’s vrijer, geëmancipeerder, te maken, wil de Minister van Emancipatie, Christenen ONvrij maken! Maar om een Marxistische Doelstelling van Politiek-Correctisme, uit te voeren!
Namelijk vervanging van – zie http://weeswaakzaam.punt.nl/index.php?id=423288&r=1&tbl_archief – “het christendom door de ‘Positieve Religie.’”
Al in de 19e eeuw stelde de Franse filosoof/wiskundige Auguste Comte de blauwdruk op voor deze één-Wereldreligie, die hij de ‘Religie van de Mensheid’ of ‘Positieve Religie’ noemde.
Deze nieuwe Wereldreligie zou de mensheid zélf als object van aanbidding hebben, welke voorgesteld zou worden als een vrouw van 30 met een kind in haar armen. De religieuze leiders zouden ‘priesters van de mensheid’ genoemd moeten worden.
Om dit te kunnen realiseren maakte Comte uitgebreide plannen voor een zogenaamd Wereld Management Systeem (WORMS), waarin alle menselijke activiteiten gecontroleerd zouden gaan worden door een kleine groep intellectuelen die hij ‘sociale wetenschappers’ noemde. Deze zouden een niet omver te werpen één-wereldregering gaan vormen. Het begrip ‘individuele vrijheid’ zou voorgoed verdwijnen en vervangen worden door totale ‘sociale controle’.
Comte stelde 14 essentiële stappen voor om te komen tot dit vrijheidsloze Wereld Management Systeem:
1. Vervang het christendom door de ‘Positieve Religie
2. Hef de monarchie op
3. Voer het communistische principe in
4. Beperk het onderwijs en zorg voor sociologische controle
5. Controleer het milieu / de omgeving om zo de mensheid te controleren
6. Vernietig morele authoriteiten en onderdruk de eigen persoonlijkheid
7. Controleer de publieke opinie
8. Geef seksuele voorkeuren en gedragingen alle vrijheid
9. Verwoest het gezin en maak de rol van de man zo klein mogelijk
10. Leg de evolutietheorie verplicht op, alsmede de controle-wetenschappen
11. Promoot wereldwijde integratie
12. Geef de industiële leiders en allerrijksten politieke macht
13. Maak sommige steden tot Operationele Centra van de mensheid
14. Vervang de grondwetten door het Wereld Management Systeem
De eerste stap naar de één-Wereldreligie was het creëeren van de toen nieuwe wetenschap der Sociologie. De sociologische wetenschappen zouden uiteindelijk de bestaande religies moeten gaan vervangen als authoriteit op het gebied van moraal en spiritualiteit.
Door god en de ‘goden’ niet meer als mannelijk maar als vrouwelijk voor te stellen, wordt de weg vrijgemaakt voor het priesterschap van vrouwen. Dit moet leiden tot de aanbidding van de vrouw in het algemeen, aangezien het menselijk gevoel belangrijker moet worden geacht als de menselijke rede en het handelen.
Het positivisme wordt de grondslag van de nieuwe Wereldreligie en tevens van heel het menselijk denken en handelen, dat gericht zal zijn op de volkomen aanbidding van de mens en de mensheid in zijn geheel. Het intellect zal overwonnen zijn door het hart en deze nieuwe positieve spiritualiteit zal alle huidige religies overbodig maken.
De Verenigde Naties zijn hét instrument geworden om dit Wereld Management Systeem, deze positivistische één-Wereldreligie aan ieder mens gedwongen op te leggen.
Nederland is steeds meer een totalitaire dictatuur!
De Declaration of Independence zegt het zo goed:
Declaration of Independence
IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
Daarin wordt duidelijk dat ieder mens ingeboren rechten heeft, en dat ter garantie van deze rechten, waaronder het Recht op Leven, Vrijheid en het najagen van Geluk, regeringen/ overheden ingesteld zijn, die hun macht ontlenen aan de instemming van de mensen die geregeerd worden- dat wanneer welke vorm van regering dan ook deze doeleinden ondermijnt, en onmogelijk maakt, het het RECHT van het volk is om de regering te veranderen of omver te werpen, en een fundament te leggen op zulke principes en haar machten zo te organiseren, dat het de grootste garantie op Veiligheid en Geluk geeft.
God’s Woord zegt dat, denk ik, toch anders. Hun macht ontlenen regeringen aan God Die de overheid heeft ingesteld. Maar zonder instemming van de mensen die geregeerd worden, kan zij niet lang bestaan. God wilde geen koning voor Zijn volk Israel, althans geen menselijke Koning. Hij was de – onzichtbare – Koning van het volk Israel, en wilde dat blijven. Maar Israel voelde zich door de volkeren rondom hen uitgelachen en wilde een zichtbare koning. Die kregen zij…tot hun spijt… God werkt dus wél met de keuzes van mensen!
Wat ik hier wil benadrukken is het door God gegeven, ingeboren Recht op Leven, Vrijheid en najagen van Geluk.
De mens heeft Godgegeven Rechten. En de overheid/ regering is ingesteld om deze rechten te waarborgen!
De Nederlandse overheid overtreedt deze Rechten steeds meer! Daarmee verliest zij haar legitimiteit!
En het is het recht (en ik denk zelfs de Plicht) van de mensen wier rechten door de overheid met voeten getreden worden, om deze te veranderen of omver te werpen!
God wil dat! God houdt ons verantwoordelijk daarvoor!
Het is de overheid NIET geoorloofd om te doen, wat deze Minister onder de noemer emancipatie doet, namelijk een bepaalde groep mensen die homo’s vanuit God’s Woord als zondig en verwerpelijk zien, te veroordelen, en hen het Recht op Leven, en Vrijheid te beperken, ondermijnen, ja, te ontzeggen!
Erger! Om hun kinderen, die zij verplicht naar school moeten laten gaan, te onderwijzen in de tegen het Woord van God ingaande leer dat homosexualiteit gelijkwaardig is aan heterosexualiteit. Die gelijk rechten heeft. Dat is Totalitaire Dictatuur. Dat is Tyrannie door de Staat!
Nederland is zo geen vrij land meer.
Deze Minister van ‘Emancipatie’ – Vrijmaking – maakt mensen die vrij zijn onder God, en die Zijn wil willen doen, tot gebondenen om voor de door de zonde van homosexualiteit gebonden slaven, elke aanklaging door de aanwezigheid van het Licht van God in de Christenen, dat hun geweten aanklaagt, uit de weg te ruimen.
Waarom is dit alles anders? De homo’s leven zich toch al losbandig uit, naardat het hen uitkomt?! De zogenaamde ‘emancipatie’ voegt daar niets aan toe. Zij zoekt enkel Christenen te binden, ja, eenieder te binden, en slechts één opvatting in het land toe te laten, namelijk de opvatting die de homo’s bevalt. Maar dan is er geen sprake meer van een vrij land, waar eeneider zijn leven zo mag inrichten als hem goedunkt binnen de normale, door God vastgestelde, natuurlijke grenzen!
Daartoe wordt de macht der Staat, die dient om de Rechten van de Mens te waarborgen, misbruikt, om de Christenen te Terroriseren, hun Rechten te ontzeggen! Ja, hun kinderen te roven! De door de Grondwet gewaarborgde Vrijheid van Godsdienst wordt verworpen, door de beperking van de wet. De Grondwet is zo minderwaardig gemaakt aan de Wet! Nederland is daarmee géén rechtsstaat meer! De Grondwet is een machteloos, nutteloos document gemaakt!
En niemand van de kerk vecht. Want de meesten van de ‘kerk’ zijn dood en door de wereld gehersenspoeld om dat wat God een gruwel en zonde, die niet betaamt, noemt, in hun midden als gelijkwaardig aan de natuurlijke uitdrukking van menselijk verkeer, toe te laten. Terwijl God in Zijn Woord beveelt om wie niet deugt uit ons midden weg te doen.
IS HET TIJ NOG TE KEREN?
Dan moeten éérst de kerken door God geoordeeld en schoongeveegd worden! Zodanig dat de mensen zich tot God gaan bekeren!
En daarin ligt onze enige hoop! Zijn oordelen zijn als een doorbrekend licht, zegt de Profeet in God’s Woord.
Hos 6,5 Daarom heb Ik er door de profeten op ingehouwen, heb Ik hen gedood door de woorden mijns monds. De oordelen over u waren een doorbrekend licht.
Daar hoop ik op. Want dan heeft God ons nog niet helemaal opgegeven!
Maar als ingezetene van dit land, houdt God mij verantwoordelijk om ÁLLES te doen om dit goddeloze, heilloze tij dat God’s oordelen over dit land brengt, te keren!
Daartoe moet éérst deze regering omver worden geworpen, en de post van minister van emancipatie worden opgeheven en het door hem en zijn voorgangers gedane kwaad terug te draaien en terug te dringen!
Maar hebben wij mensen met een dergelijke visie, bekwaamheid en bereidwilligheid in dit land?
Eerder schreef ik ook al:
Homo-acceptatie, waar deze Minister ons land wil toe verplichten, is een regelrechte AANVAL op de Vrijheid van Godsdienst!
Dat men rustig verder slaapt in Christelijk Nederland, zegt voldoende over hoe het met het de ‘kerk’ in Nederland is gesteld: LAF, SLAP!
God’s Woord zegt dat de lafhartigen belanden in de Poel die Brandt van Vuur en Zwavel! (Openbaring 21:8)
Ik word liever door een criminele overheid vervolgd, en desnoods gedood, want dat gaat er van komen… deze toleranten…tolereren iedereen, behalve mensen als ik die Christus volgen en niet van plan zijn, de leer van Christus en het Koninkrijk van God te verruilen voor de duivelse leer van het Nederlandse Kabinet! Dan hun leer te omhelzen omdat ik mijn hachie wil bewaren!
Beter dood door een machtsmisbruikende overheid omdat ik Christus blijf gehoorzamen, dan voor eeuwig ‘dood’ in de Poel dien Brandt van Vuur en Zwavel!
Dit is een heel belangrijk document in dit onderwerp:
http://www.splcenter.org/images/dynamic/intel/SchoenwolfEssay.pdf
Als deze link werkt, kun je er met je rechtermuisklik en dan klikken op Bewaar Link Als, het document downloaden! Het is de moeite waard!
Hier staat:
Gay Rights and Political Correctness:
A Brief History
By
Gerald Schoenewolf, Ph.D.
Als je dit leest begrijp je hoe het zover gekomen is!
En dat dit al vóór de oorlog gepland is, als onderdeel van het Politiek-Correctisme, dat een Marxistische doctrine is, die in Duitsland verder ontwikkeld is, ook al voor de oorlog!
En als onderdeel van deze Politiek-Correcte Staatsreligie staat op het programma de vervanging van de Christen-religie door het Politiek-Correct-vervangsel!
Daar staat de bijdrage over te lezen, op deze site, bij het onderdeel De Nieuwe Wereldorde.
Onze domme ‘christen-’politici hebben het niet door en werken er met plezier aan mee. Hoe dwaas kun je zijn? Erger, omdat zij niet willen horen, lees wat God zegt in Spreuken 1:20-33!
Karl Marx’s Class Warfare Linked To Gay Rights Movement
The latest instance of the use of these same Marxian tactics (that is, the latest version
of political correctness) is the Gay Rights Movement. In this latest schema, straight
people, particularly those who harbor the notion that homosexuality is a sexual disorder
(which includes some gays), are characterized as oppressors and gay people are the
oppressed; straight people are prejudiced and gay people are the victims of prejudice;
straight people are evil and gay people are innocent.
Gay rights organizations point to the Stonewall Riots that began on June 27, 1969, when
police raided a Greenwich Village gay bar called the Stonewall Inn and gays began
rioting for three nights as a milestone in the formation of gay rights. Accounts of this
incident by gay rights groups typically glorify it as a brave revolt against homophobia.
For example, the journal, Socialism Today (July/August 1999) notes, “The word
‘Stonewall’ has entered the vocabulary of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and
transgendered people everywhere as a potent emblem of the gay community making a
stand against oppression and demanding full equality in every area of life.” But an article
by David Bianco on the website, PlanetOut.com, asserts that the Stonewall Inn was a
Mafia-owned private club and the police raided it and several others bars for selling
liquor illegally. Bianco described how gay men held hands, kicked their legs like
Broadway dancers and sang to police: “We wear our hair in curls./We have no
underwear./We show our pubic hair.”
In the Gay Rights Movement, the oppressed (homosexuals) are urged to unite and rebel
against the forces of oppression (homophobes) wherever they are, to take control and
obtain power over the latter (who due to their misguided natures cannot be trusted with
power). They feel entitled, due to their suffering at the hands of the homophobe
oppressors, to special privileges as compensation.
The “Gay Revolution Party Manifesto,” found on the website, wordiq.com (2005), is a
striking transference of Marxism to Gay Rights. It notes that,
The original social expression of straightness was gender: the division of
humanity into the castes of woman and man on the basis of the
biological sexes, female and male. In this process, females were
deprived of their subjectivity and their erotic energy was suppressed,
while males developed roles involving aggression and search for power
and dominance. Since gays, roleless relations acted in opposition to this
process, they were suppressed.
The “Manifesto” goes on to conclude that, “Gradually these straight societies came to
dominate the entire planet since their nature led them continually to seek conquest and
colonialization of other peoples.”
Such writings characterize straight males as oppressive by “nature” and the philosophy
of political correctness adapted to the Gay Rights Movement further asserts that only
the thoughts and feelings of the oppressed should be listened to and respected–only
gays know what it’s like to be gay, so only they can truly speak about gay issues; the
thoughts and feelings of homophobe oppressors (or anyone associated with them) are
seen as suspect–the defensive utterances of abusers who want to hold on to their
power.
Finally, the philosophy of political correctness, (the gay radical variation) asserts that
only the negative feelings of oppressors–those designated homophobes because of their
errant belief that homosexuality is a sexual disorder–may be viewed as prejudiced,
while any negative feelings of the oppressed (radical gays) toward the oppressors are
reasonable reactions to the abuse of the oppressors and therefore not considered
prejudice. Moreover, only the words and actions of the oppressor are regarded as
discrimination, while the words and actions of the oppressed toward those termed as
oppressors, no matter how hostile, are considered to be justified by their long suffering
at the hands of homophobes.
This final premise ensures that only straights can be blamed and held responsible for
their feelings and actions, while the gay radicals are free to feel and act however they
desire to the oppressor.
Like Marx and Engels, the Gay Rights Movement did not care about doing things in a
way that would be most beneficial for all involved–what we previously referred to as a
win-win situation. Instead, this movement, like Marxists, advocated a win-lose
scenario.
The gay rights brand of political correctness does not consider the gray area: It does
not recognize the good and bad in each human being, does not attempt to see both
sides of a conflict. It does not ponder the diverse sources of a conflict. Instead, it
simplifies the world, dividing it into evil homophobes and innocent gays. It is almost as
if they live in their own Hollywood Western where there are only stereotypical good
guys and bad guys.
There are numerous examples of this contentious and absolutist way of thinking. Many
years ago radical gays began protesting that they weren’t allowed to march in the St.
Patrick’s Day Parade in New York. They began protesting before they had even tried to
meet with parade officials and to work something out. When officials invited them to a
meeting, they came not to negotiate but to contend.
According to a report in the New York Post, radical gays refused to discuss any
compromise under which they could march in the parade without carrying placards
which lobbied for gay rights. “We don’t want to turn the parade into a political rally,”
officials said. The radical gays booed the officials and treated them with disdain (i.e.,
evil homophobes), and so the meeting broke down. It seems obvious that the radical
gays did not want to find a solution. They wanted to set up a situation where they could
make a public outcry against the evil homophobes and attempt to rally the public behind
them (“Look what those mean St. Patrick’s homophobes are doing to us!”).
Winning Through Mob Rule
Another example of the way the Gay Rights Movement utilized Marxist tactics was how
it forced the American Psychiatric Association to normalize homosexuality. Dr. Charles
Socarides reports in Homosexuality: A Freedom Too Far (1995) how the Gay Rights
Movement, through a series of political maneuvers, intimidated the APA in to taking
homosexuality off the DSM category of sexual disorders. Here again were the usual
elements of political correctness: The American Psychiatric Association was now the
evil oppressor and gays were the innocent victims who needed to take arms against
this modern evil and conquer it.
As usual, the issue was seen only in the most simplistic and absolute terms, the terms
of Gay Rights Movement. Only their view was the right view and no other view could be
tolerated. The “normalization” of homosexuality was gained not through reasoned
debate, but through mob rule.
At present, the Gay Rights Movement has taken over nearly all professional
organizations not only in America but also in the United Nations and throughout the
world. The entire planet has now been forced to agree that it is normal for one man to
insert his penis into another man’s anus–that this is exactly what nature intended.
Either they must agree to this, or they will be attacked, ostracized and stigmatized by
the Gay Rights Movement and the so-called liberal community.
A striking example of this is what happened to Dr. Laura Schlessinger. Dr Laura, as she
is known, a well-known radio personality whose talk show was at one time the most
popular talk show on radio, made the mistake of speaking out about homosexuality in
2001, calling it a “biological error.” What she was commenting on is an article that
appeared in an American Psychological Association journal that suggested that
pedophilia–specifically sex between a man and a boy, could be beneficial to the boy and
that men who have sex with boys should not be stigmatized.
Indeed, the American Psychiatric Association even went so far as to modify its stance
on pedophilia, changing the designation in the DSM to “ego-dystonic
pedophilia”–meaning that pedophilia would only be considered a disorder if the
pedophiliac considered it a problem for himself. When Dr. Laura was critical of this
article and of the Gay Rights Movement, she became the target of one of the most
vicious character assassinations in American history.
She had just launched a new television show and within months the show closed down,
largely due to a nationwide letter-writing and telephone calling campaign by radical
gays, who quickly set up websites such as “stopdrlaura.com” to wage war against her.
Soon, one sponsor after another was pulling out and Dr. Laura was being described in
various liberal columns as a “religious bigot,” a “homophobe,” and much worse. Today,
the popularity of Dr. Laura’s radio program has dwindled considerably.
The Gay Rights Movement achieved a major victory and sent a shivering message to all
others who would say anything critical of the movement, even when it clearly becomes
irrational as it did when it advocated a positive attitude toward pedophilia and when,
more recently, it demanded that the APA pass rules outlawing so-called “reparative
therapy” that would require a therapist to refuse to help those gays who want to be
straight.
Political Correctness: Revolution By Emotional Intimidation
Political Correctness is a revolutionary movement. Revolutions gain power by force.
Sometimes the force is violent and bloody force; sometimes it is emotional force. The
Gay Rights Movement has achieved an emotional revolution through a huge propaganda
effort accompanied by a hysterical us-against-them wave of sometimes vicious
intimidation. The propaganda repeated day after day, week after week, year after year,
is that homosexuality is normal, people are born homosexual, homosexual is simply
another variant of normal sexuality, and anybody who says differently is evil.
The hysterical wave of intimidation is a relentless tidal wave that seeks to punish and
even annihilate anybody who stands in the way–that is anybody who utters even a word
that can be construed as suggesting that homosexuality is a disorder, that homosexual
values may be to some degree detrimental to society, or that AIDS is sometimes a
result of homosexual dysfunction. Anybody who even starts to utter these things must
immediately be shot down and made an example of. The big irony of political
correctness is that it often accuses the right of being bigoted and cites McCarthyism as
an example of right-wing totalitarianism, yet McCarthyism lasted only a few years
while political correctness has been around over a century and its bigotry far outweighs
anything that happened under McCarthy.
We have many social problems in America. We have the largest illiteracy percentage of
all industrialized nations, and it is growing in leaps and bounds. We also have the
highest divorce, crime, and drug addiction rate of all industrialized countries. Human
rights are important, but what may be more important are human responsibilities–the
responsibility to be good parents, for example. You don’t hear the human rights groups
talk of such things very often. Yes, there are inequalities in our system, and they should
be addressed, but in proportion to their relative social importance and in a manner that
does not continually fan the flames of conflict and replace one kind of inequality with
another.
Eigenlijk moet je ook het eerste deel van de link lezen. Zodat je het hele beeld ziet.
De waarheid over het HIV-virus en AIDS vind je hier: http://www.drday.com/aidsinfo.htm
De waarheid over het HIV-virus en AIDS vind je hier: http://www.drday.com/aidsinfo.htm
AIDS: What the Government Isn’t Telling You
What you really need to know about AIDS.
In this book you’ll learn:
That the AIDS virus is not fragile.
That the AIDS virus survives outside the body for days.
Why blood on intact skin is dangerous.
Why the blood supply still is not safe.
What the government really thinks about the safety of condoms.
The risks from HIV-positive children in schools, in daycare centers and in contact sports.
Why kissing in not safe.
Plus FREE, with purchase of this book, while supplies last:
House Bill 15090 showing that the U.S. government asked for the AIDS virus to be made.
1963 U.S. Congressional Record revealing the promotion of homosexuality by the New World Order.
A booklet on Population Control by disease and death.
Would you believe…
Mosquitoes can transmit AIDS?
Condoms can transmit AIDS more than 50% of the time?
AIDS can be transmitted through intact skin?
En in haar video’s leer je:
In Volume I you will learn:
That the AIDS virus survives outside the body for days.
That kissing transmits AIDS.
Why household disinfectants will not kill the AIDS virus.
That blood on intact skin can transmit AIDS.
That AIDS has been transmitted through contact sports.
In Volume II you will learn:
That the government admits that mosquitoes can transmit AIDS.
That the water supply is in danger.
Why it is dangerous to go to a surgeon or a dentist who has AIDS.
The potential dangers in the food supply.
Why a cure or a vaccine for AIDS is probably impossible.
How the government could control the AIDS epidemic immediately and why they refuse to do so.
Can Mosquitoes Transmit AIDS?
The government says “YES”
Information in this booklet reveals that:
The HIV virus survives for 48 hours in a mosquito and for 72 hours in a bedbug.
Experiments have shown that AIDS can be transmitted by mosquitoes.
This 43 page booklet entitled “Do Insects Transmit AIDS”, initially published by the U.S. Congress, is now available only through Rockford Press.
http://www.drday.com/aidsinfo.htm
Frequently Asked Questions About AIDS
Ask Lorraine Day, M.D.
Q. How long does the AIDS virus survive outside the body?
A. The AIDS virus can survive outside the body alive and infective in body fluids for 7 days if dry and for 14 days if wet. Lancet, Sept. 28, 1985, pg. 721.
Q. Can AIDS be transmitted by contact sports?
A. It already has been. A 25 year old Italian soccer player contracted AIDS after a bleeding injury caused by a collision with another player (who was already infected) during a soccer game. Lancet, May 5, 1990, pg. 1105. The government admits that ANY blood to blood contact CAN transmit AIDS, and blood to blood contact frequently occurs in contact sports.
Q. Why hasn’t the government been able to control the AIDS epidemic?
A. Successful control of any epidemic requires the use of established Public Health principles, namely widespread testing of those at risk for the particular disease and protection of the uninfected. In the case of AIDS, the government and organized medicine have decided to disregard all established public health principles for controlling an epidemic. Instead AIDS is being handled as a political issue rather than a public health issue. In this disease, the government has chosen to protect the infected and abandon the uninfected.
House Bill 15090 showing that the U.S. government asked for the AIDS virus to be made. – http://community-2.webtv.net/LikingLArry/IsTheAIDSVirusMan/
1963 U.S. Congressional Record revealing the promotion of homosexuality by the New World Order.
A booklet on Population Control by disease and death.
I insert this piece from a long article here, as this is appropriate. Get this Housebill she says! Please do so!
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/gulf.htm
1970 Appropriation of Money to Create Human Immune Deficiency Virus
(Slide Shown) Another document that I want you to remember as long as you live is this. This document appeared on my fax machine. I believe it to be the origin of the appropriation of the money to make the AIDS virus [Editor note: See Matrix III Volume One]. This is the appropriations hearing for 1970 for the Department of Defense. It is House Bill 15090. I want you to see that the Department of Defense appropriated $10 million in 1970 to make a synthetic biological agent. Ask yourself why the Department of Defense needs this kind of agent. There are two things about the field of biological agents I would like to mention. One is the possibility of technological surprise. It says that “we believe that within a period of five to ten years, it would be possible to produce a synthetic biological agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired.” What does that sound like to you? It goes on down here to say, “within the next five to ten years, it would probably be possible to make a new ineffective microorganism which could be different in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organism. Most importantly, it might be damaging to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease.” Basically this says it will destroy the immune system. This was appropriated in 1970. In 1975 the first recorded “AIDS” related death occurred. Perfect timing. It goes on to say, “a research program to explore feasibility could be completed in approximately five years at a cost of $10 million.” Now, look at this part down here, which says, “it is a highly controversial issue and there are many who believe such research should not be undertaken, lest it lead to yet another method of mass killing of large populations.” That is in your government documentation. Now, getting involved with killing of large numbers of people is not what a government is for. I want you to get this document. Get this House Bill.
Het HIV-virus is in opdracht van de regering van de Verenigde Staten ontwikkeld, gemaakt en verspreid!
En niemand die de USA ervoor voor het Internationale Gerechtshof aanklaagt en schade-vergoeding eist!
Wat voor laffe regeringen hebben wij en de EU etc?!
Lees zelf de feiten na, in onder andere deze sites!
The Polio Vaccine, AIDS, and Their US-Made Viruses
http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=34&contentid=4890
Biowar Conspiracy: CIA-Pentagon Labs Made HIV
http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=34&contentid=4688
Do TB-Type Bacteria Cause AIDS?
http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=34&contentid=4465
Ex-CIA Doctor:AIDS Is Man-Made Pentagon Conspiracy
http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=34&contentid=4429
WHO Murdered Africa (The Man Made Origin of AIDS)
http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=34&contentid=2095
AIDS/HIV Conspiracy:Debunking Out of Africa Theory
http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=34&contentid=1744
Is The AIDS Virus Man-made?
http://community-2.webtv.net/LikingLArry/IsTheAIDSVirusMan/ With part of the House Bill 15090 showing that the U.S. government asked for the AIDS virus to be made.
Hello everyone. I worked tirelessly for six months in 1992 to piece together the AIDS puzzle using transcripted information from the “Strecker Memorandum” written by Dr. Robert Strecker and his brother Ted who went to the UCLA Medical Library to research the long term effects of insuring and treating AIDS patients as a proposal for the Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) of the Security Pacific Bank of California. They discovered “thousands of documents supporting the man-made origins of AIDS.” I also ordered a huge number of research articles on this subject from Prevailing Winds Research of Santa Barbara, CA., and collated that information into my article. I first tried to get it published in a local paper, “The New Times” but the publisher rejected it because the lead “was not exciting enough.” So I rewrote the article with a really scary lead based on the facts…a fictional scenerio and he still would not publish it. A friend of mine finially got it published along with his article on “The Last Flight of KAL 007″, when the Russians shot down that airliner with a SU-15. I had a problem with that incident also and made a t-shirt that says “A Russian SU-15 can ruin your day.” We were both published in the November 1992 issue of “Red Tail Review” which became the last issue of that magazine because, according to my friend, the publisher was visited by “men in suits”…aka government goons who step in when someone steps over the line. I am proud to present this article to you in its original text along with supporting illustrations and a gif scan of the major “smoking gun”, the Dept. of Defense Appropriations for 1970, HB 15090, page 129 which was not in our local public library when I last checked…part of the cover-up. People called me after this was published and one declared it “an indictment” of the government. Read this web page while you can. Print it out. Thankyou, Larry Jamison, Sept.
2002.
Funding for development of the AIDS Virus
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Aurora/4519/funding.html & http://www.fas.org/man/crs/98-756.pdf
The Development of the AIDS virus was funded in 1969 (three years before the request for development by the World Health Organization) through funds obtained by the United States Defense Department. The Defense Department requested and received $10 million via House Bill 15090, which was reviewed in Hearings before the Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives during the ninety-first Congress in review of the Defense Appropriations for 1970.
Part Five of H.B. 15090 was entitled RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION, sponsored by the Department of the Army, the Advanced Research Project Agency (now DARPA), and Defense Research and Engineering.
The Feasibility program and laboratories were to have been completed by 1974 – 1975 and the virus between 1974 – 1979. The WHO started to inject AIDS – laced smallpox vaccine (Vaccina) into over 100 million Africans in 1977. Over 2000 young white male homosexuals (Operation Trojan Horse) were injected with laced Hepatitis B vaccine in 1978 through the Centers for Disease Control and the New York Blood Center. The development of the virus apparently had a dual purpose: (1) As a political / ethnic weapon to be used against black individuals and (2) one of the programmed efforts at de-population.
The session of the Subcommittee that took place on July 1, 1969 involved discussions about Synthetic Biological Agents. Part of the congressional narrative (from HB 15090) is detailed below:
“There are two things about the biological agent field I would like to mention. One is the possibility of technological surprise. Molecular biology is a field that is advancing very rapidly and many eminent biologist believe that within a period of 5 – 10 years it would be possible to produce a synthetic biological agent, an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired.”
Mr. Sikes: Are we doing any work in that field?
Dr. MacArthur: We are not.
Mr. Sikes: Why not? Lack of money or lack of interest?
Dr. MacArthur: Certainly not lack of interest.
Mr. Sikes: Would you provide for our record information on what would be required, what the advantages of such a program would be, the time and the cost involved?
Dr. MacArthur: We will be very happy to. The dramatic progress being made in the field of molecular biology led us to investigate the relevance of this field of science to biological warfare. A small group of experts considered this matter and provided the following observations:
1. All biological agents up to the present time are representatives of naturally occurring disease, and are thus known by scientists throughout the world. They are easily available to qualified scientists for research, either for offensive or defensive purposes.
2. Within the next 5 – 10 years, it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organisms. Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease.
3. A research program to explore the feasibility to this could be completed in approximately 5 years at a cost of $10 million.
4. It would be very difficult to establish such a program. The science of molecular biology is a relatively new science. There are not many highly competent scientists in the field. Almost all are in university laboratories and they are general adequately supported from sources other than DOD. However, it was considered possible to initiate an adequate program through the National Academy of Sciences National Research Council (NAS-NRC). The matter was discussed with NAS-NRC and tentative plans were made to initiate the program. However, decreasing funds in CB, growing criticism of the CB program, and our reluctance to involve the NAS-NRC in such a controversial endeavor have led us to postpone it for the past 2 years. It is a highly controversial issue and there are many who believe such research should not be undertaken lest it lead to yet another method of massive killing of large populations. On the other hand, without the sure scientific knowledge that such a weapon is possible, and an understanding of the ways it could be done, there is little that can be done to devise defensive measures. Should an enemy develop it there is little doubt that this is an important area of potential military technological inferiority in which there is no adequate research program.
Actual creation of the virus was done through the Department of the Army at Fort George Meade and through the Department of Navy. The name of the individual who was head of the Naval development program is known but will not be released at this time.
http://www.greatdreams.com/cnsprcy.htm
http://www.gulfwarvets.com/cristie.htm
http://aidsbiowar.com/printpage.htm
AIDSBIOWAR.COM
Er is meer, maar aan de hand hiervan kun je je eigen onderzoek verder uitvoeren!
Je zou de politicus / Tweede Kamerlid op wie je gestemd hebt, deze informatie moeten sturen, en hem/haar vragen wat hij/zij hiermee doet.
En als hij/zij niets doet, moet je vragen waarom hij/zij niets doet.
Dat dit gilt om onmiddelijke actie en aan de tand voelen – door onze regering- van de USA, en onmiddelijk aanklagen voor het Internationale Hof van Justitie van de USA voor haar misdaden tegen de mensheid! Voor haar GENOCIDE van met name Afrikanen, door de ontwikkeling, productie en verspreiding van het HIV-virus – via intentingen van Afrikanen!
Bush is pas rondgegaan en heeft millioenen beloofd aan medicijnen voor AIDS-patienten in Afrika!
DAT IS BIJZONDER HYPOCRIET!
Dat dekt lang de schade en gevolgen niet!
Hoe lang nog zal het criminele Amerikaanse regiem ongestrasft door mogen gaan zo?
Omdat Balkie laf is en in bed ligt met de Amerikanen!
ONMIDDELIJK moeten wij ons terugtrekken uit de ontwikkeling van het nieuwe gevechtsvliegtuig!
ONMIDDELIJK! EN ons GELD TERUG!
En ONMIDDELIJK Moeten wij afsdtand nemen van zo’n crimineel regiem/ en land dat geen enkel probleem heeft om GENOCIDE te plegen door een vreselijk virus als het HIV te ontwikkelen, produceren en verspreiden!
Dat moet openbaar worden gemaakt!
Waarom doen onze media dit niet?
frans leest het wordt homo,en gaat gelijk uit zijn ster.je kan het mischien ook rukkend proberen. hebben wij er niet zo’n last van,idioot.
Frans ik heb gisteren een nieuwe muis moeten kopen de scrollknop was kapot. Weet jij misschien hoe dat komt?
@Frans.
Frans, get a life.
Hoezo subjectiefe beeldvorming!!!
Dan beweren dat de links media niet de dienst uitmaakt..
Nog geen 50 jaar geleden, was het niet in te denken, dat de overheid homo-filie actief steund.
Ik vraag me af wie hier bekrompen is…?
De SGP is niet van standpunt veranderd, maar dat is de maatschappij.
Inderdaad Henk de SGP is niet van mening veranderd. Hoe komt het toch dat de groep mensen rond de SGP een achtergebleven subcultuur vormt?