Thread: The Communist Takeover..how many can you see happening?

Bush to screen population for mental illness
Sweeping initiative links diagnoses to treatment with specific drugs

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: June 21, 2004
5:00 p.m. Eastern


By Jeanne Lenzer
© 2004 Jeanne Lenzer

A sweeping mental health initiative will be unveiled by President George W Bush in July. The plan promises to integrate mentally ill patients fully into the community by providing "services in the community, rather than institutions," according to a March 2004 progress report entitled New Freedom Initiative (www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/newfreedom/toc-2004.html). While some praise the plan's goals, others say it protects the profits of drug companies at the expense of the public.

Bush established the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health in April 2002 to conduct a "comprehensive study of the United States mental health service delivery system." The commission issued its recommendations in July 2003. Bush instructed more than 25 federal agencies to develop an implementation plan based on those recommendations.

The president's commission found that "despite their prevalence, mental disorders often go undiagnosed" and recommended comprehensive mental health screening for "consumers of all ages," including preschool children. According to the commission, "Each year, young children are expelled from preschools and childcare facilities for severely disruptive behaviours and emotional disorders." Schools, wrote the commission, are in a "key position" to screen the 52 million students and 6 million adults who work at the schools.

The commission also recommended "Linkage [of screening] with treatment and supports" including "state-of-the-art treatments" using "specific medications for specific conditions." The commission commended the Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP) as a "model" medication treatment plan that "illustrates an evidence-based practice that results in better consumer outcomes."

Dr Darrel Regier, director of research at the American Psychiatric Association (APA), lauded the president's initiative and the Texas project model saying, "What's nice about TMAP is that this is a logical plan based on efficacy data from clinical trials."

He said the association has called for increased funding for implementation of the overall plan.

But the Texas project, which promotes the use of newer, more expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs, sparked off controversy when Allen Jones, an employee of the Pennsylvania Office of the Inspector General, revealed that key officials with influence over the medication plan in his state received money and perks from drug companies with a stake in the medication algorithm (15 May, p1153). He was sacked this week for speaking to the BMJ and the New York Times.

The Texas project started in 1995 as an alliance of individuals from the pharmaceutical industry, the University of Texas, and the mental health and corrections systems of Texas. The project was funded by a Robert Wood Johnson grant – and by several drug companies.

Mr Jones told the BMJ that the same "political/pharmaceutical alliance" that generated the Texas project was behind the recommendations of the New Freedom Commission, which, according to his whistleblower report, were "poised to consolidate the TMAP effort into a comprehensive national policy to treat mental illness with expensive, patented medications of questionable benefit and deadly side effects, and to force private insurers to pick up more of the tab" (http://psychrights.org/Drugs/ AllenJonesTMAPJanuary20.pdf).

Larry D Sasich, research associate with Public Citizen in Washington, DC, told the BMJ that studies in both the United States and Great Britain suggest that "using the older drugs first makes sense. There's nothing in the labeling of the newer atypical antipsychotic drugs that suggests they are superior in efficacy to haloperidol [an older "typical" antipsychotic]. There has to be an enormous amount of unnecessary expenditures for the newer drugs."

Olanzapine (trade name Zyprexa), one of the atypical antipsychotic drugs recommended as a first line drug in the Texas algorithm, grossed $4.28bn (£2.35bn) worldwide in 2003 and is Eli Lilly's top selling drug. A 2003 New York Times article by Gardiner Harris reported that 70 percent of olanzapine sales are paid for by government agencies, such as Medicare and Medicaid.

Eli Lilly, manufacturer of olanzapine, has multiple ties to the Bush administration. George Bush Sr. was a member of Lilly's board of directors and Bush Jr. appointed Lilly's chief executive officer, Sidney Taurel, to a seat on the Homeland Security Council. Lilly made $1.6m in political contributions in 2000 – 82 percent of which went to Bush and the Republican Party.

Jones points out that the companies that helped to start up the Texas project have been, and still are, big contributors to the election funds of George W Bush. In addition, some members of the New Freedom Commission have served on advisory boards for these same companies, while others have direct ties to the Texas Medication Algorithm Project.

Bush was the governor of Texas during the development of the Texas project, and, during his 2000 presidential campaign, he boasted of his support for the project and the fact that the legislation he passed expanded Medicaid coverage of psychotropic drugs.

Bush is the clear front runner when it comes to drug company contributions. According to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), manufacturers of drugs and health products have contributed $764 274 to the 2004 Bush campaign through their political action committees and employees – far outstripping the $149 400 given to his chief rival, John Kerry, by 26 April.

Drug companies have fared exceedingly well under the Bush administration, according to the centre's spokesperson, Steven Weiss.

The commission's recommendation for increased screening has also been questioned. Robert Whitaker, journalist and author of Mad in America, says that while increased screening "may seem defensible," it could also be seen as "fishing for customers," and that exorbitant spending on new drugs "robs from other forms of care such as job training and shelter programmes."

But Dr Graham Emslie, who helped develop the Texas project, defends screening: "There are good data showing that if you identify kids at an earlier age who are aggressive, you can intervene... and change their trajectory."



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=39078

Attempt to Stop Mandatory Mental Screening Fails

Congressman pushed language requiring parental consent


http://www.mindfully.org/Health/2004...ing24nov04.htm



Get ready for New Freedom


http://www.guerrillanews.com/forum/thread.php?id=409



Forcing Kids Into a Mental Health Ghetto

CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL

http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2004/tst091304.htm




President's Bogus Mental Health Screening Initiative Is a Thinly Veiled Scam to Boost Pharmaceutical Profits


http://www.newstarget.com/001688.html

Zero Tolerance For Non-Compliance

Ten Steps Toward Lifelong Behavior Modification


http://www.crossroad.to/text/articles/zerotol.html


not directly related

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=38262

-

Eli Lilly, Zyprexa And
The Bush FamilyBy Bruce Levine
5-27-4

More than one journalist has uncovered corrupt connections between the Bush Family, psychiatry, and Eli Lilly & Company, the giant pharmaceutical corporation. While previous Lillygates have been more colorful, Lilly's soaking state Medicaid programs with Zyprexa-its blockbuster, antipsychotic drug-may pack the greatest financial wallop. Worldwide in 2003, Zyprexa grossed $4.28 billion, accounting for slightly more than one-third of Lilly's total sales. In the United States in 2003, Zyprexa grossed $2.63 billion, 70 percent of that attributable to government agencies, mostly Medicaid.

Historically, the exposure of any single Lilly machination-though sometimes disrupting it-has not weakened the Bush-psychiatry-Lilly relationship. In the last decade, some of the more widely reported Eli Lilly intrigues include:

Influencing the Homeland Security Act to protect itself from lawsuits
Accessing confidential patient records for a Prozac sample mailing
Rigging the Wesbecker Prozac-violence trial
A sample of those who have been on the Eli Lilly payroll includes:

Former President George Herbert Walker Bush (one-time member of the Eli Lilly board of directors)
Former CEO of Enron, Ken Lay (one-time member of the Eli Lilly board of directors)
George W. Bush's former director of Management and Budget, Mitch Daniels (a former Eli Lilly vice president)
George W. Bush's Homeland Security Advisory Council member, Sidney Taurel (current CEO of Eli Lilly)

The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (a recipient of Eli Lilly funding) In 2002, British and Japanese regulatory agencies warned that Zyprexa may be linked to diabetes, but even after the FDA issued a similar warning in 2003, Lilly's Zyprexa train was not derailed, as Zyprexa posted a 16 percent gain over 2002. The growth of Zyprexa has become especially vital to Lilly because Prozac-Lilly's best-known product, which once annually grossed over $2 billion-having lost its patent protection, continues its rapid decline, down to $645.1 million in 2003.

At the same time regulatory agencies were warning of Zyprexa's possible linkage to diabetes, Lilly's second most lucrative product line was its diabetes treatment drugs (including Actos, Humulin, and Humalog), which collectively grossed $2.51 billion in 2003. Lilly's profits on diabetes drugs and the possible linkage between diabetes and Zyprexa is not, however, the most recent Lillygate that Gardiner Harris broke about Zyprexa in the New York Times on December 18, 2003.

Zyprexa costs approximately twice as much as similar drugs and Harris reported that state Medicaid programs-going in the red in part because of Zyprexa- are attempting to exclude it in favor of similar, less expensive drugs. Harris focused on the Kentucky Medicaid program, which had a $230 million deficit in 2002, with Zyprexa being its single largest drug expense at $36 million. When Kentucky's Medicaid program attempted to exclude it from its list of preferred medications, the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI) fought back. The nonprofit NAMI-ostensibly a consumer organization-bused protesters to hearings, placed full-page ads in newspapers, and sent faxes to state officials. What NAMI did not say at the time was that the buses, ads, and faxes were paid for by Eli Lilly.

Ken Silverstein, in Mother Jones in 1999, reported that NAMI took $11.7 million from drug companies over a three and a half year period from 1996 through 1999, with the largest donor being Eli Lilly, which provided $2.87 million. Eli Lilly's funding also included loaning NAMI a Lilly executive, who worked at NAMI headquarters, but whose salary was paid for by Lilly. Though NAMI's linkage to Lilly is a scandal to psychiatric survivors-whose journal MindFreedom published copies of Big Pharma checks to NAMI-the story didn't have the widespread shock value that would elevate it to Lillygate status.

In 2002, Eli Lilly flexed its muscles at the highest level of the U.S. government in an audacious Lillygate. The event was the signing of the Homeland Security Act, praised by President George W. Bush as a "heroic action" that demonstrated "the resolve of this great nation to defend our freedom, our security and our way of life." Soon after the Act was signed, New York Times columnist Bob Herbert discovered what had been slipped into the Act at the last minute and on November 25, 2002, he wrote, "Buried in this massive bill, snuck into it in the dark of night by persons unknownwas a provision that-incredibly-will protect Eli Lilly and a few other big pharmaceutical outfits from lawsuits by parents who believe their children were harmed by thimerosal."

Thimerosal is a preservative that contains mercury and is used by Eli Lilly and others in vaccines. In 1999 the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Public Health Service urged vaccine makers to stop using mercury-based preservatives. In 2001 the Institute of Medicine concluded that the link between autism and thimerosal was "biologically plausible." By 2002, thim- erosal lawsuits against Eli Lilly were progressing through the courts. The punchline of this Lillygate is that, in June 2002, President George W. Bush had appointed Eli Lilly's CEO, Sidney Taurel, to a seat on his Homeland Security Advisory Council. Ultimately, even some Republican senators became embarrassed by this Lillygate and, by early 2003, moderate Republicans and Democrats agreed to repeal this particular provision in the Homeland Security Act.

In early 2003, "60 Minutes II" aired a segment on Lillygate and Prozac. With Prozac's patent having run out, Eli Lilly began marketing a new drug, Prozac Weekly. Lilly sales representatives in Florida gained access to "confidential" patient information records and, unsolicited, mailed out free samples of Prozac Weekly. How did Eli Lilly get its hands on these medical records? Regulations proposed under Clinton and later implemented under Bush contained a provision that gave health-care providers the right to sell a person's confidential medical information to marketing firms and drug companies. Despite many protests against this proposal, President Bush told Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson to allow the new rules to go into effect.

Perhaps the most cinematic of all Lillygates culminated in 1997. The story began in 1989 when Joseph Wesbecker-one month after he began taking Prozac-opened fire with his AK-47 at his former place of employment, killing 8 and wounding 12 before taking his own life. British journalist John Cornwell covered the Louisville, Kentucky trial for the London Sunday Times Magazine, ultimately writing a book about it. Cornwell's The Power to Harm (1996) is not only about a disgruntled employee becoming violent after taking Prozac, but is also about Eli Lilly's power to corrupt the judicial system.

Victims of Joseph Wesbecker sued Eli Lilly, claiming that Prozac had pushed Wesbecker over the edge. The trial took place in 1994, but received scant attention as the public was transfixed by the O.J. Simpson spectacle. While Eli Lilly had been settling many Prozac violence cases behind closed doors (more than 150 Prozac lawsuits had been filed by the end of 1994), it was looking for a showcase trial that it could win. Although a 1991 FDA "blue ribbon panel" investigating the association between Prozac and violence had voted not to require Prozac to have a violence warning label, by 1994 word was getting around that five of the nine FDA panel doctors had ties to Big Pharma-two of them serving as lead investigators for Lilly-funded Prozac studies. Thus, with the FDA panel now known to be tainted, Lilly believed that Wesbecker's history was such that Prozac would not be seen as the cause of his mayhem.

A crucial component of the victims' attorneys' strategy was for the jury to hear about Eli Lilly's history of reckless disregard. Victims' attorneys especially wanted the jury to hear about Lilly's anti- inflamatory drug Oraflex, introduced in 1982 but taken off the market three months later. A U.S. Justice Department investigation linked Oraflex to the deaths of more than 100 patients and concluded that Lilly had misled the FDA. Lilly was charged with 25 counts related to mislabeling side effects and pled guilty-but in 1985, the Reagan-Bush Justice Department saw fit to fine them a mere $25,000.

In the Wesbecker trial, Lilly attorneys argued that the Oraflex information would be prejudicial and Judge John Potter initially agreed that the jury shouldn't hear it. However, when Lilly attorneys used witnesses to make a case for Eli Lilly's superb system of collecting and analyzing side effects, Judge Potter said that Lilly had opened the door to evidence to the contrary and ruled that the Oraflex information would now be permitted. To Judge Potter's amazement, victims' attorneys never presented the Oraflex evidence and Eli Lilly won the case. Later, it was discovered that-in a manipulation Cornwell described as "unprecedented in any Western court"-Eli Lilly cut a secret deal with victims' attorneys to pay them and their clients not to introduce the Oraflex evidence. However, Judge Potter smelled a rat and fought for an investigation. In 1997, Eli Lilly quietly agreed to the verdict being changed from a Lilly victory to "dismissed as settled."

Looking back further to 1992, Alexander Cockburn, in both the Nation and the New Statesman, was one of the first to connect the dots between the Bush family and Eli Lilly. After George Herbert Walker Bush left his CIA director post in 1977 and before becoming vice president under Ronald Reagan in 1980, he was on Eli Lilly's board of directors. As vice president, Bush failed to disclose his Lilly stock and lobbied hard on behalf of Big Pharma-especially Eli Lilly. For example, Bush sought special tax breaks from the IRS for Lilly and other pharmaceutical corporations that were manufacturing in Puerto Rico.

Cockburn also reported on Mitch Daniels, then a vice president at Eli Lilly, who in 1991 co-chaired a fundraiser that collected $600,000 for the Bush-Quayle campaign. This is the same Mitch Daniels who in 2001 became George W. Bush's Director of Management and Budget. In June 2003, soon after Daniels departed from that job, he ran for governor of Indiana (home to Eli Lilly headquarters). In a piece in the Washington Post called "Delusional on the Deficit," Senator Ernest Hollings wrote, "When Daniels left two weeks ago to run for governor of Indiana, he told the Post that the government is 'fiscally in fine shape.' Good grief! During his 29-month tenure, he turned a so-called $5.6 trillion, 10-year budget surplus into a $4 trillion deficit-a mere $10 trillion downswing in just two years. If this is good fiscal policy, thank heavens Daniels is gone."

There is one Eli Lilly piece of history so bizarre that if told to many psychiatrists, one just might get diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic and medicated with Zyrprexa. Former State Department officer John Marks in The Search for the "Manchurian Candidate": The CIA and Mind Control, The Secret History of the Behavioral Sciences (1979)-along with the Washington Post (1985) and the New York Times (198-reported an amazing story about the CIA and psychiatry. A lead player was psychiatrist D. Ewen Cameron, president of the American Psychiatric Association in 1953. Cameron was curious to discover more powerful ways to break down patient resistance. Using electroshock, LSD, and sensory deprivation, he was able to produce severe delirium. Patients often lost their sense of identity, forgetting their own names and even how to eat. The CIA, eager to learn more about Cameron's brainwashing techniques, funded him under a project code-named MKULTRA. According to Marks, Cameron was part of a small army of the CIA's LSD-experimenting psychiatrists. Where did the CIA get its LSD? Marks reports that the CIA had been previously supplied by the Swiss pharmaceutical corporation Sandoz, but was uncomfortable relying on a foreign company and so, in 1953, the CIA asked Eli Lilly to make them up a batch of LSD, which Lilly subsequently donated to the CIA.

The most important story about Eli Lilly is that Lilly's two current blockbuster psychiatric drugs-Zyprexa and Prozac-are, in scientific terms, of little value. It is also about how Lilly and the rest of Big Pharma have corrupted psychiatry, resulting in the increasing medicalization of unhappiness. This diseasing of our malaise has diverted us from examining the social sources for our unhappiness-and implementing societal solutions.

Much of the scientific community now acknowledges that the advantage of Prozac and Prozac-like drugs over a sugar-pill placebo is slight-or as Prevention and Treatment in 2002 defined it, "clinically negligible." When Prozac is compared to an active placebo (one with side effects), then Prozac is shown to have, in scientific terms, zero value. Moreover, many doctors and researchers now warn us about the dangers of Prozac. Psychiatrist Joseph Glenmullen's Prozac Backlash (2000) documented "neurological disorders including disfiguring facial and whole body tics indicating potential brain damage...agitation, muscle spasms, and parkinsonism," and he stated that debilitating withdrawal occurs in 50 percent of patients who abruptly come off Prozac and Prozac-like drugs.

Just as Prozac and other SSRI drugs are no longer seen by many scientists as an improvement in safety and effectiveness over the previous class of antidepressants, psychiatry's highly touted Zyprexa (and other "atypical antipsychotics") turns out to be no great advance over the older problematic anti-ps ychotics such as Haldol. Journalist Robert Whitaker, in Mad in America (2002), details how Eli Lilly's Zyprexa research was biased against the inexpensive Haldol and how claims of improved safety of Zyprexa are difficult to justify. Whitaker reports that in drug trials used by FDA reviewers, 22 percent of Zyprexa patients had "serious" adverse effects as compared to 18 percent of the Haldol patients.

The United States and other nations that have bought psychiatry's and Big Pharma's explanations and treatments turn out to have worse results with those diagnosed as psychotic than those nations who are less enthusiastic about drugs and who care more about community. In 1992, the World Health Organization (WHO), in a repeat of earlier findings, found that so-called underdeveloped nations, which emphasize community support rather than medications, have better results with those diagnosed as psychotic than nations, which stress drug treatments. In nations such as the United States, where 61 percent of those diagnosed as psychotic were maintained on antipsychotic medications, only 37 percent had full remission. While in India, Nigeria, and Colombia, where only 16 percent of patients diagnosed as psychotic were maintained on antipsychotic medications, approximately 63 percent of patients had full remission.

While scientists are not certain about the reasons for these WHO findings, two possible explanations are: (1) psychiatric drugs, even for the most disturbed among us, are not the greatest long-term solution; (2) community support, crucial to our mental health, does not lend itself to commercialization. Thus, in areas such as mental health, radically commercialized societies such as the United States are backward societies.

Though some mental health professionals insist that atypical antipsychotics such as Zyprexa are a great advance, I've met few Zyprexa users who agree. A few years ago, a well-read man with a professorial manner in his early 60s, diagnosed by several other doctors as paranoid schizophrenic, came to see me. He had, at various times, taken several types of antipsychotic drugs and told me, laughing loudly between each sentence, "I'm crazy on drugs and crazy off drugs. Haldol helped me sleep and Zyprexa helped me sleep, but I hated the Haldol and when I was on Zyprexa, I couldn't take a shit for three weeks. Now I don't take any drugs and I can't sleep and I am a big pain-in-the ass, but I can remember better what I read." A few weeks later he told me, "It's all friendly fascism. Yes, friendly fascism. Was it you who told me-or was it I who told you-that fascism is about the complete integration of industry and government under a centralized authority? Friendly fascism, right? I suppose I say 'friendly fascism' too much, but you're not Ashcroft and neither am I, right? Don't you agree that it's all friendly fascism?" Then he flashed a giant smile and said one more time, "Friendly fascism, right, Bruce?"

Bruce E. Levine, PhD, is a psychologist and author of Commonsense Rebellion: Taking Back Your Life from Drugs, Shrinks, Corporations and a World Gone Crazy (New York-London: Continuum, 2003).

http://www.zmag.org/ZMagSite/May2004/levine0504.html


Source:

http://www.rense.com/general53/clei.htm

And if you think about how things are happening in todays time, what one country stands in the background and lets other countries destroy others?
I told my husband that this morning and he laughed at me.
There are 3 super powers in this world. Europe, US and Russia.
Who was behind what happened in Cuba in the 60's? Russia...........
When we invaded Iraq, who did they catch leaving the country of Iraq? Russians.........Who told Iraq about our plans to attack them? Russia.......
Never did trust the Russians and I truly believe they will cause our downfall. Out of all the nationalities in our country, what one isn't here?
Maybe I am crazy............Someone is out to destroy us and I for one don't think Bush is smart enough to do this all by himself. There is a stronger force behind this. Whoever it is is standing in the background, watching and waiting.
Am I crazy?

Although physical violence and war are a by-product, the TRUE war raging lies in a realm which cannot be seen and heard by human eyes and ears yet it's reality is utterly overwhelming.

Communism per the first post in this thread seeks to undermine the Bible and Christ, making all good things evil and making all evil things appear "good".

If you are willing to open your mind long enough to look at this whole illegal immigration thing from an outside perspective instead of a victim mindest, you may be shocked as to what the REAL motivation force behind all of this really is - it's spiritual. And the Bible describes a time when the spiritual warfare will finally be seen with eyes and heard with ears. It is destined to culminate in a period of time called the "Time of Jacob's Trouble" - or - the Tribulation.

America and it's strong/deep Christian and Biblical roots would have stood completely against a "one world government" and would have prevented it. God's Word is the final say and the America we've always known would have to be taken out of the way for the final few prophecies to finally come to pass.

What we are seeing right now is NORMAL in the Biblical sense of the word. Because of my study in all of the prophecies in this particular book, it is my reason for saying these things cannot be stopped or defeated. Considering every single prophecy (except for just a small handful that are left of othem) in the Bible have come to pass precisely and without fail every single time - the Judeo-Christian America and it's ability to hold back the tide of global dictatorship (evil) must be taken out of the way in order for the remaining handful of prophecies to finally be fulfilled.

The next revolution won't be fought politically or physically. Those who are wise will be capable of seeing that it will be fought spiritually, yet the after effects will be physical to US.

I don't think 80% of people in this nation are able to remove the blinders from their eyes to see the tsunami of evil that is heading straight for them. Some of us can see it - I can see it - but our warnings go unheeded as we are called "crazies" and "lunatics" and "psycho-religious oddities".

Everyone has the right to believe in what they want to believe, but there can only be one truth and it is now materializing right before the eyes of every man, woman and child.

The revelation was made and now the consumation has begun.

I think it is finally time that we forfeit our computer printers, ink pens and mortal weapons and get down on our knees in continuous prayer - there is only one way out of this mess and it quite honestly isn't of this world.

Looks like a Nazi take over by the republican party and George Bush.

Only the rich will survive.

for saying these things cannot be stopped or defeated.

I think it is finally time that we ...get down on our knees in continuous prayer

I agree prayer is something that we all need more of, and something that we all need to be doing more.

And it is true that God will do whatever He wishes, and the world operates on His timetable.


However, just because those events may or will happen does not mean
that they cannot be delayed. As those who are familiar with Old Testament know, God delayed judgement against nations sometimes for generations.

I don't really know that we have that much time, but I think that the good book also tells us that we are to OCCUPY UNTIL He comes.

As we know, "occupy" is a military term meaning to "hold our ground and stand fast"

Every time we write a good note here, every time we email or phone a congressman, every time we take action to help this Nation, we are Occupying.

we are to be light to the World and Salt to the Earth, a preservative, something helps to enhance the Spiritual staying power

Romans 13 tells us that Governments are to be agents of Good and NOT to do Evil. The good book accurately teaches that Power comes from the people, from those who are governed, because they give their Just Consent.

That is the basis of local churches, that the authority resides in the people, and the same concept finds its way into the American System of Jurisprudence and Government.

Do we need to pray ? Absolutely

Is it important to ask God for Help and to seek Him sincerely ? Absolutely

Is it important to realize that much of these battles are of a Spiritual nature ? Definitely.

However, we also have to remember that each of us has the right to life, and that this means defending the things that give us the ability to sustain our own life. That includes this land, and the nation, and the rights that the Constitution and the Declaration recognize that God has given us.

May all of us continue to be SEMPER FIDELIS, always faithful to our nation, to our Constitution, to the Creator, and to the struggles that we find ourselves in the midst of.

These battles are mostly not of our chosing, yet it would be a mistake to think that we would shun the battle that these days have been thrust upon us.


(Greyerhat)

Wow Grayerhat, an other-worldly brother you are indeed!

I guess my line "forfeit our computer printers, ink pens and mortal weapons" sounded as though it meant giving up. Now that I re-read it myself, it does sound like that. Yet again, by the accidental omission of just one simple phrase I came across wrong - AGAIN. No wonder why those who do public speaking will go through the speech once after the outline is written and then go through it again a day later or so. Best way to catch that stuff. Here on forums, it's easy to get in the habit of typing it all out and punching the "Submit" button never to look back again at times.

Quite honestly, the political effort has been quite powerful. So much so, that Bush felt it necessary to address the nation. I'm fried over that speech of course, but at least the efforts have been adding an element of fear in the leaders who seem to not care when they fail to actually LEAD.

We can only send so many letters and faxes, and we can only make so man phone calls. All the government departments in Washington D.C. now know our side. If they legislate incorrectly, it's that they ignored us and lost their loyalty to the people they are supposed to serve.

There indeed comes a time when efforts and petitions to government of man become futile, and there is only One who is over every government and nation who can be petitioned with greivances (with a heart of worship however!!) And His decisions are final - no human being will ever overrule His Kingship - ever.

Concernedveteran,

You are exactly correct. Funny thing my dad has been telling myself and my 4 siblings this for 25 years. When you are young your reply is "Yeah, okay dad" and just humor him. Well now we have all had to go to our very wise father and tell him he was right all these years. You especially see it after you have children. I know having children made me open my eyes to the reality of our world as it is now. I made the decision long ago that my children will never step foot into one of these government brainwashing camps we call schools.

I believe like you that we all need to hit our knees hard and regularly because God is our only hope. However, I do not believe we should give up on the fight either. "God helps those who help themselves." Another words what Greyerhat said. I also believe the USA is the key to globalization. If they can get us they have it in the bag. If we can stop it or at least hold it of and keep up the good fight they will have to back off and regroup.

Keep fighting people. There are many who know the real agenda behind all this. I just wish more people would see the truth behind all the rhetoric and stop thinking just because it is so unbelievable it cannot be real.