U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"

Author Topic: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"  (Read 7543 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,970
  • The banksters are steaming piles of dog shit!
    • GlobalGulag.com
Copenhagen dead as India, China, Brazil walk out
http://www.domain-b.com/environment/20091218_manmohan_singh_oneView.html    
18 December 2009    
   
In a development that took almost all observers by surprise, India, China, and Brazil walked out the plenary session of the climate summit at Copenhagen, making it certain that the summit will end in abject failure.

Heads of state were in a meeting today to hammer out some sort of final consensus on targets for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. But even the weak and wishy-washy agreement that was widely expected is now unlikely, with three key players abandoning the game on the final day.
 
After delivering their speeches to the other 190 heads of state present, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Chinese PM Wen Jiabao walked out along with their delegations, and Brazil followed suit.

It now seems even more significant that Singh and Wen met for breakfast before the plenary session of the UN-sponsored climate talks. India, China and Brazil will now hold a separate BASIC group meeting to discuss their future strategy.
 
In a hard-hitting speech, Singh urged the developed countries to deliver on the Kyoto Protocol. Any new global accord announced at Copenhagen would go against international opinion if it dilutes the Kyoto Protocol, he said.
 
Arguing the case of developing nations, Singh told his fellow heads of state, "Those countries worst affected by climate change are the least responsible for it. Any accord (arrived at in Copenhagen) must address this injustice."

The prime minister also outlined the voluntary steps that India will take to cut down greenhouse emissions. Among them are generating 20,000 MW of solar power by 2022 and improving energy efficiency by 20 per cent by 2020 as compared to 2005 levels.

"We will deliver on this goal regardless of the outcome of the Copenhagen conference ... we (developing countries) will all play a positive and constructive role … India will not be found wanting," Singh said.

"India has vital stake in the success of negotiations, as we are likely to be among the most affected by climate change, Singh said, adding that "We can do even more if a supporting global climate regime is in place."

Singh further observed, "Parties to Kyoto Protocol should deliver on their commitments for emission cuts."

He was obviously referring to the heart of the dispute between the rich and developing countries. The developed nations refuse to accept significantly larger cuts than poorer nations; and are also unwilling to put any significant amount of money or technology (which they possess) on the table.

Wen, Da Silva slam rich nations

Wen Jiabao said in his address that that China takes the issue of climate change "very seriously", and regards it as an important strategic task. He promised that China would not only achieve but also exceed its voluntary climate action targets.

Lula da Silva, President of Brazil, attempted to embarrass the rich world into action by offering to give money from his own country to less developed countries to tackle climate change.

"We are willing to participate in the financing mechanisms if we reach an agreement on a final proposal from this conference," he said.

United States president Barak Obama, in his speech earlier, urged nations to "give up posturing and agree on an international accord".

Reminding countries that climate change was a reality and it was time for action rather than talk, Obama said any international accord would require all nations to share commitments.

"We can share this accord and continue to fine-tune it as we proceed. Or else, we can choose to go away (from the summit) and fall back to the same differences we have had for decades," Obama told the heads of state.

This seemed the kind of bullying but empty-handed rhetoric that has made the US a much-hated country among poor but proud nations. Environmentalists too were not impressed.

Andy Atkins, executive director of Friends of the Earth, said people around the world were "deeply disappointed" that President Obama has not increased the target to cut emissions.

"If the president's idea of action is to cut US emissions by 4 per cent on 1990 levels then we are heading for climate catastrophe. Barack Obama should have taken the opportunity to up his proposed cuts to at least 40 per cent by 2020 and ditch carbon offsetting.
 
"Obama has deeply disappointed not just those listening to his speech at the UN talks - he has disappointed the whole world."
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,510
Re: Copenhagen dead as India, China, Brazil walk out
« Reply #1 on: December 18, 2009, 11:55:07 am »
Seeing as there were very few plants in the auditoriums to enjoy the speeches, bragging, fable telling, jabbering and arguing, it appears Copenhagen 15 was a huge waste of CO2...

Offline vlamingi

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
Re: Copenhagen dead as India, China, Brazil walk out
« Reply #2 on: December 18, 2009, 12:28:40 pm »
Well good, and I'm glad it was a waste of time! One defeat but they will regroup! Next is healthcare here.

That extra co2 may warm us up way down south with our record colds we are having....

Do you think they may shift things now saying.....uh, the planet is actually cooling, so lets all go start our cars up and let them run while we go run around the block a few times to help speed up the co2 process!

Offline America2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,308
  • Romans 10:9-10 King James Version
Re: Copenhagen dead as India, China, Brazil walk out
« Reply #3 on: December 18, 2009, 12:34:32 pm »
But the climate draft deal has been agreed upon?

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/climate-draft-accord-agreed-20091218-l1jo.html

And Christopher Mockton said that all of this was agreed upon before this meeting even started?

Something's fishy really going on behind the scenes - there are alot of questions I would like answered myself.

Offline Kakumei

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 114
Re: Copenhagen dead as India, China, Brazil walk out
« Reply #4 on: December 18, 2009, 01:22:20 pm »
Maybe more should follow suit, and make this a certain failure yes yes?
No one's going to take me alive / The time has come to make things right / You and I must fight for our lives / You and I must fight to survive - Muse, Knights of Cydonia

Offline oyashango

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,520
  • 43 Trillion and counting
VIDEO: Rothschild Regrets Global Governance Tough To Bring into Action
« Reply #5 on: December 18, 2009, 03:52:57 pm »
.VIDEO: Rothschild Regrets Global Governance Tough To Bring into Action

 
http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/35275/Rothschild_regrets_Global_Governance_tough_to_acti/

Offline LoreOnTerror

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
Re: Copenhagen dead as India, China, Brazil walk out
« Reply #6 on: December 18, 2009, 04:11:20 pm »
Source: US, China, India, South Africa reach climate deal

December 18, 2009

Copenhagen (AP) — A senior Obama administration official says the U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement" on climate change.

The official characterized the deal as a first step, but said it was not enough to combat the threat of a warming planet.

Details of the deal with these emerging economies were not immediately clear.

The agreement was reached Friday at the U.N. climate conference in Copenhagen after a meeting among President Barack Obama and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and South African President Jacob Zuma.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the agreement had not yet been officially announced.

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/12/18/climate-copenhagen/
“If the people were to ever find out what we have done, we would be chased down the streets and lynched.” - George H.W. Bush

"There is a tragic flaw in our precious Constitution, and I don’t know what can be done to fix it. This is it: Only nut cases want to be president." - Kurt Vonnegut

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
VIDEO WATCH: Chinese block US press in Copenhagen Gibbs threatens WALKOUT
« Reply #7 on: December 18, 2009, 04:35:44 pm »
Gibbs threatens to leave climate meeting after Chinese block US press
http://rawstory.com/2009/12/chinese-block-us-press-copenhagen/
By David Edwards
Friday, December 18th, 2009 -- 4:21 pm


BREAKING: The White House says it has reached a "meaningful agreement" with China, India and South Africa on climate change...

A scuffle broke out at the climate summit in Copenhagen on Friday when Chinese officials blocked US reporters from entering a room where President Barack Obama and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao were to meet, with the White House press secretary threatening to pull out of the meeting if the American press was barred.

According to CNN, members of the Chinese media arrived before the American press contingent, and Chinese officials blocked the entrance to the room once the Chinese press were inside.

That angered White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, who can be heard on video of the incident saying, "My guys have to get in just like your guys got in. This is a joint meeting, and my guys get in or we're leaving."

CNN's footage of the incident shows a chaotic scene in which Chinese officials can be seen blocking the camera crew from gaining access to the room. The officials can be heard repeating "No, no, no" as Gibbs argues with them.

Bloomberg news service reports that Premier Wen had "snubbed" Obama earlier in the day when the Chinese leader failed to show up to a meeting of world leaders. Obama and the premier met in private later on in the day. The two leaders then scheduled another meeting for Friday afternoon, and it was evidently at this meeting that the scuffle broke out.

The altercation was one of a number of chaotic events at the last day of the Copenhagen summit, as world leaders and negotiators scrambled to come up with some sort of understanding in the face of major disagreements between developing and wealthy countries over issues such as the depth of carbon emissions cuts, who would pay for the cuts, and how they would be verified.

In exchange for offering financial support to developing countries for emissions reductions, US negotiators had asked for a verification system the ensure that the countries that receive aid are actually cutting emissions. China refused that demand, throwing up an obstacle to an international deal on climate change.

Earlier in the day, conference organizers abandoned the traditional "family photo" that's taken of world leaders at summits, ostensibly because of scheduling conflicts during the hectic last day of meetings. Organizers said the photo shoot was being postponed, but Russian President Vladimir Putin had already left Copenhagen at that point, and other leaders were scheduled to leave as well.

-- With Agence France-Presse

This video is from CNN's Newsroom, broadcast Dec. 18, 2009.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline endof

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,707
Obama at Copenhagen
« Reply #8 on: December 18, 2009, 04:43:27 pm »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=og9dN3xxs20

well, that was pretty clear.

still, some will bury their heads in the sand again

Offline rio

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,708
Re: VIDEO WATCH: Chinese block US press in Copenhagen Gibbs threatens WALKOUT
« Reply #9 on: December 18, 2009, 04:56:24 pm »
A "kerfuffal"? Looks like a mad clusterf**k. Good video though...God only knows what is going on there.

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Obama talks about signing an agreement that no one read
« Reply #10 on: December 18, 2009, 05:16:32 pm »
Obama talks about signing an agreement that no one read

WTF?

WHO IS HE WORKING FOR?

live on http://cnn.com
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline chrisfromchi

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,181
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #11 on: December 18, 2009, 05:36:27 pm »
we'll want this clip today on glenn beck's show...

the judge is hosting.


The guy that monckton cites alot that richard linzden is on the show.

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #12 on: December 18, 2009, 05:42:24 pm »
Obama says ‘meaningful’ deal reached on climate change
http://rawstory.com/2009/12/obama-meaningful-deal/
By The Associated Press
Friday, December 18th, 2009 -- 4:58 pm


President Barack Obama announced Friday a "meaningful and unprecedented breakthrough" on a global effort to curb climate change. But Obama said, "It is going to be very hard, and it's going to take some time" to get to a legally binding treaty.

A deal reached by the United States, China, India, South Africa and Brazil includes a method for verifying reductions of heat-trapping gases, a senior administration official said.

The official, speaking on the condition of anonymity before Obama spoke, characterized the deal as a first step, not yet enough to combat the threat of a warming planet.

Under the agreement, the official said each country also will list the actions it will take to cut global warming pollution by specific amounts. The deal reiterates a goal that eight leading industrialized nations set earlier this year on long-term emission cuts and provides a mechanism to help poor countries prepare for climate change.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline TheHouseMan

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,841
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #13 on: December 18, 2009, 05:58:14 pm »
My best advice is to start breeding, get guns, get storable food and take over your local communities and government.

Most of all, BREED.

I can guarantee that population reduction is their number one agenda. Technology has exponentially increased as a result of the baby boom of WWII

Hitler and his backers knew a baby boom was coming, so they desperately tried to cull the population.

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,510
Re: US, China, India and South Africa reach "meaningful agreement" - they left!
« Reply #14 on: December 18, 2009, 06:31:25 pm »
The walkout on Obama spoke volumes about the so-called "meaningful agreement" nobody stuck around to brag about  LOL

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: US, China, India and South Africa reach "meaningful agreement" - they left!
« Reply #15 on: December 18, 2009, 09:29:51 pm »
The walkout on Obama spoke volumes about the so-called "meaningful agreement" nobody stuck around to brag about  LOL

people think obama mended relationships with the international community?

OMFG, they are so deluded.

About the only thing they could have done worse is take a huge steaming shit on the entire envoy!

We need to end these wars ASAP and get back to basics!
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline adissenter2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,044
  • Revolt Time
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #16 on: December 18, 2009, 09:45:50 pm »
incoming false flag to force policy
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ! Molon Labe! Come and take them!

Xill

  • Guest
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #17 on: December 18, 2009, 09:56:14 pm »
As I predicted, in the heat of Climate Gate they've postponed the core of their plan by 1 year.

Let's now predicting much HAARP activity this summer. ;)

Offline chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,998
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #18 on: December 18, 2009, 10:55:32 pm »
Sanes right, lets get back to the wars,the roots of their power, they are expanding, Obama and his tribal masters are up to their neck in blood and loving it.
This cop15, was a commercial break, OK, whats the meat of the abominations.
No wars, bring the boys home, the shiiite is over. The big dohgs loose their toys and their supreme power over the commoner, US.

Ya, I know wishfull thinking, but realisticly, if the wars were the number one issue, the remainder would fall in line, or go bust.

Obami is a wartime president, correct, his tribe drools over the buildup of our military might and their controll. They get off on the genocide, the controll, say a word and few thousand die, gee thats power for ya. Only a part, as long as they keep the wars going they dominate, thats it. This gives them the edge, the power, the tyranic justification.
Yes its time we stopped them from playing Gods.As long as the wars continue, we reamined under their thumbs.

I watched Hillary and Obi hand and hand in the cop15. What a pair of pyscos. They are the same gang, allways have been, this whole insane pony show was for the ultimate deception of the populace.
Geonociding with one hand, and telling the masses they will save the world with the other. 2 faced sociopathic  inhuman scumbag trash.

Iran is on the war tables of the lunatics. If in fact they decide to start their BS, its wwIII. Carbon, horsefeathers, the war is the issue, it has been the key to the takeover since they pulled of 911, then WMD', and on to terrorists behind every corner.
FEAR, on all fronts, why, they have us knee deep in blood and poverty.

Folks, keep spreading the truth, fill your stock and supplies, keep a back door available, don't panic, rage is acceptable if focused. FI, I ranted again.
Sorry folks, but to begin with I have this emotional problem about genoicide, about innocents being slaughtered. Yes, I have that hangup, can't seem to shake it. I have another one too, FREEDOM, ya, I have this thing aobut being manipulated, being a slave,cannon foder, in fact I am against it to the very bottom of my soul.




Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #19 on: December 19, 2009, 03:07:11 am »
Sanes right, lets get back to the wars,the roots of their power, they are expanding, Obama and his tribal masters are up to their neck in blood and loving it.
This cop15, was a commercial break, OK, whats the meat of the abominations.
No wars, bring the boys home, the shiiite is over. The big dohgs loose their toys and their supreme power over the commoner, US.

Ya, I know wishfull thinking, but realisticly, if the wars were the number one issue, the remainder would fall in line, or go bust.

Obami is a wartime president, correct, his tribe drools over the buildup of our military might and their controll. They get off on the genocide, the controll, say a word and few thousand die, gee thats power for ya. Only a part, as long as they keep the wars going they dominate, thats it. This gives them the edge, the power, the tyranic justification.
Yes its time we stopped them from playing Gods.As long as the wars continue, we reamined under their thumbs.

I watched Hillary and Obi hand and hand in the cop15. What a pair of pyscos. They are the same gang, allways have been, this whole insane pony show was for the ultimate deception of the populace.
Geonociding with one hand, and telling the masses they will save the world with the other. 2 faced sociopathic  inhuman scumbag trash.

Iran is on the war tables of the lunatics. If in fact they decide to start their BS, its wwIII. Carbon, horsefeathers, the war is the issue, it has been the key to the takeover since they pulled of 911, then WMD', and on to terrorists behind every corner.
FEAR, on all fronts, why, they have us knee deep in blood and poverty.

Folks, keep spreading the truth, fill your stock and supplies, keep a back door available, don't panic, rage is acceptable if focused. FI, I ranted again.
Sorry folks, but to begin with I have this emotional problem about genoicide, about innocents being slaughtered. Yes, I have that hangup, can't seem to shake it. I have another one too, FREEDOM, ya, I have this thing aobut being manipulated, being a slave,cannon foder, in fact I am against it to the very bottom of my soul.

There is no chance at liberty whiile we are exterminating brown people abroad.

The imperial agenda will always cause tyranny over its people.

Martin Luther King knew this and it is why he opted to focus on ending the Vietnam War more so than the civil rights agenda. He went right after the heart of the beast - the illegal occupation of foreign lands. He knew it was an almost guaranteed death sentence but he was answering the call of a higher authority than his personal survival instincts could control.

Robert Kennedy knew this and that is why he went against his parents' interests and ran for president. He knew it was an almost guaranteed death sentence but he was answering the call of a higher authority than his personal survival instincts could control.

The founding fathers had this higher calling to end tyranny and oppression. They pledged their honor and all material possessions to the goal of a free society. In my opinion, we are starting to see similar sparks in a multitude of people around the world.  I also believe that this time there are not a handful of these people but entire populations that are waking up  at break neck speed. No doubt it will get worse before it gets better, but I am reminded of MLK's last words in the last speech he ever gave...




“I’ve Been to the Mountaintop”

by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Memphis, TN on April 3, 1968.


Thank you very kindly, my friends. As I listened to Ralph Abernathy and his eloquent and generous introduction and then thought about myself, I wondered who he was talking about. It's always good to have your closest friend and associate to say something good about you. And Ralph Abernathy is the best friend that I have in the world. I'm delighted to see each of you here tonight in spite of a storm warning. You reveal that you are determined to go on anyhow.

Something is happening in Memphis; something is happening in our world. And you know, if I were standing at the beginning of time, with the possibility of taking a kind of general and panoramic view of the whole of human history up to now, and the Almighty said to me, "Martin Luther King, which age would you like to live in?" I would take my mental flight by Egypt and I would watch God's children in their magnificent trek from the dark dungeons of Egypt through, or rather across the Red Sea, through the wilderness on toward the promised land. And in spite of its magnificence, I wouldn't stop there.

I would move on by Greece and take my mind to Mount Olympus. And I would see Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, Euripides and Aristophanes assembled around the Parthenon. And I would watch them around the Parthenon as they discussed the great and eternal issues of reality. But I wouldn't stop there.

I would go on, even to the great heyday of the Roman Empire. And I would see developments around there, through various emperors and leaders. But I wouldn't stop there.

I would even come up to the day of the Renaissance, and get a quick picture of all that the Renaissance did for the cultural and aesthetic life of man. But I wouldn't stop there.

I would even go by the way that the man for whom I am named had his habitat. And I would watch Martin Luther as he tacked his ninety-five theses on the door at the church of Wittenberg. But I wouldn't stop there.

I would come on up even to 1863, and watch a vacillating President by the name of Abraham Lincoln finally come to the conclusion that he had to sign the Emancipation Proclamation. But I wouldn't stop there.

I would even come up to the early thirties, and see a man grappling with the problems of the bankruptcy of his nation. And come with an eloquent cry that we have nothing to fear but "fear itself." But I wouldn't stop there.

Strangely enough, I would turn to the Almighty, and say, "If you allow me to live just a few years in the second half of the 20th century, I will be happy."

Now that's a strange statement to make, because the world is all messed up. The nation is sick. Trouble is in the land; confusion all around. That's a strange statement. But I know, somehow, that only when it is dark enough can you see the stars. And I see God working in this period of the twentieth century in a way that men, in some strange way, are responding.


Something is happening in our world. The masses of people are rising up. And wherever they are assembled today, whether they are in Johannesburg, South Africa; Nairobi, Kenya; Accra, Ghana; New York City; Atlanta, Georgia; Jackson, Mississippi; or Memphis, Tennessee -- the cry is always the same: "We want to be free."

And another reason that I'm happy to live in this period is that we have been forced to a point where we are going to have to grapple with the problems that men have been trying to grapple with through history, but the demands didn't force them to do it. Survival demands that we grapple with them. Men, for years now, have been talking about war and peace. But now, no longer can they just talk about it. It is no longer a choice between violence and nonviolence in this world; it's nonviolence or nonexistence. That is where we are today.

And also in the human rights revolution, if something isn't done, and done in a hurry, to bring the colored peoples of the world out of their long years of poverty, their long years of hurt and neglect, the whole world is doomed. Now, I'm just happy that God has allowed me to live in this period to see what is unfolding. And I'm happy that He's allowed me to be in Memphis.

I can remember -- I can remember when Negroes were just going around as Ralph has said, so often, scratching where they didn't itch, and laughing when they were not tickled. But that day is all over. We mean business now, and we are determined to gain our rightful place in God's world.

And that's all this whole thing is about. We aren't engaged in any negative protest and in any negative arguments with anybody. We are saying that we are determined to be men. We are determined to be people. We are saying -- We are saying that we are God's children. And that we are God's children, we don't have to live like we are forced to live.

Now, what does all of this mean in this great period of history? It means that we've got to stay together. We've got to stay together and maintain unity. You know, whenever Pharaoh wanted to prolong the period of slavery in Egypt, he had a favorite, favorite formula for doing it. What was that? He kept the slaves fighting among themselves. But whenever the slaves get together, something happens in Pharaoh's court, and he cannot hold the slaves in slavery. When the slaves get together, that's the beginning of getting out of slavery. Now let us maintain unity.

Secondly, let us keep the issues where they are. The issue is injustice. The issue is the refusal of Memphis to be fair and honest in its dealings with its public servants, who happen to be sanitation workers. Now, we've got to keep attention on that. That's always the problem with a little violence. You know what happened the other day, and the press dealt only with the window-breaking. I read the articles. They very seldom got around to mentioning the fact that one thousand, three hundred sanitation workers are on strike, and that Memphis is not being fair to them, and that Mayor Loeb is in dire need of a doctor. They didn't get around to that.

Now we're going to march again, and we've got to march again, in order to put the issue where it is supposed to be -- and force everybody to see that there are thirteen hundred of God's children here suffering, sometimes going hungry, going through dark and dreary nights wondering how this thing is going to come out. That's the issue. And we've got to say to the nation: We know how it's coming out. For when people get caught up with that which is right and they are willing to sacrifice for it, there is no stopping point short of victory.

We aren't going to let any mace stop us. We are masters in our nonviolent movement in disarming police forces; they don't know what to do. I've seen them so often. I remember in Birmingham, Alabama, when we were in that majestic struggle there, we would move out of the 16th Street Baptist Church day after day; by the hundreds we would move out. And Bull Connor would tell them to send the dogs forth, and they did come; but we just went before the dogs singing, "Ain't gonna let nobody turn me around."

Bull Connor next would say, "Turn the fire hoses on." And as I said to you the other night, Bull Connor didn't know history. He knew a kind of physics that somehow didn't relate to the transphysics that we knew about. And that was the fact that there was a certain kind of fire that no water could put out. And we went before the fire hoses; we had known water. If we were Baptist or some other denominations, we had been immersed. If we were Methodist, and some others, we had been sprinkled, but we knew water. That couldn't stop us.

And we just went on before the dogs and we would look at them; and we'd go on before the water hoses and we would look at it, and we'd just go on singing "Over my head I see freedom in the air." And then we would be thrown in the paddy wagons, and sometimes we were stacked in there like sardines in a can. And they would throw us in, and old Bull would say, "Take 'em off," and they did; and we would just go in the paddy wagon singing, "We Shall Overcome." And every now and then we'd get in jail, and we'd see the jailers looking through the windows being moved by our prayers, and being moved by our words and our songs. And there was a power there which Bull Connor couldn't adjust to; and so we ended up transforming Bull into a steer, and we won our struggle in Birmingham. Now we've got to go on in Memphis just like that. I call upon you to be with us when we go out Monday.

Now about injunctions: We have an injunction and we're going into court tomorrow morning to fight this illegal, unconstitutional injunction. All we say to America is, "Be true to what you said on paper." If I lived in China or even Russia, or any totalitarian country, maybe I could understand some of these illegal injunctions. Maybe I could understand the denial of certain basic First Amendment privileges, because they hadn't committed themselves to that over there. But somewhere I read of the freedom of assembly. Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech. Somewhere I read of the freedom of press. Somewhere I read that the greatness of America is the right to protest for right. And so just as I say, we aren't going to let dogs or water hoses turn us around, we aren't going to let any injunction turn us around. We are going on.

We need all of you. And you know what's beautiful to me is to see all of these ministers of the Gospel. It's a marvelous picture. Who is it that is supposed to articulate the longings and aspirations of the people more than the preacher? Somehow the preacher must have a kind of fire shut up in his bones. And whenever injustice is around he tell it. Somehow the preacher must be an Amos, and saith, "When God speaks who can but prophesy?" Again with Amos, "Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." Somehow the preacher must say with Jesus, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me," and he's anointed me to deal with the problems of the poor."

And I want to commend the preachers, under the leadership of these noble men: James Lawson, one who has been in this struggle for many years; he's been to jail for struggling; he's been kicked out of Vanderbilt University for this struggle, but he's still going on, fighting for the rights of his people. Reverend Ralph Jackson, Billy Kiles; I could just go right on down the list, but time will not permit. But I want to thank all of them. And I want you to thank them, because so often, preachers aren't concerned about anything but themselves. And I'm always happy to see a relevant ministry.

It's all right to talk about "long white robes over yonder," in all of its symbolism. But ultimately people want some suits and dresses and shoes to wear down here! It's all right to talk about "streets flowing with milk and honey," but God has commanded us to be concerned about the slums down here, and his children who can't eat three square meals a day. It's all right to talk about the new Jerusalem, but one day, God's preacher must talk about the new New York, the new Atlanta, the new Philadelphia, the new Los Angeles, the new Memphis, Tennessee. This is what we have to do.

Now the other thing we'll have to do is this: Always anchor our external direct action with the power of economic withdrawal. Now, we are poor people. Individually, we are poor when you compare us with white society in America. We are poor. Never stop and forget that collectively -- that means all of us together -- collectively we are richer than all the nations in the world, with the exception of nine. Did you ever think about that? After you leave the United States, Soviet Russia, Great Britain, West Germany, France, and I could name the others, the American Negro collectively is richer than most nations of the world. We have an annual income of more than thirty billion dollars a year, which is more than all of the exports of the United States, and more than the national budget of Canada. Did you know that? That's power right there, if we know how to pool it.

We don't have to argue with anybody. We don't have to curse and go around acting bad with our words. We don't need any bricks and bottles. We don't need any Molotov cocktails. We just need to go around to these stores, and to these massive industries in our country, and say, "God sent us by here, to say to you that you're not treating his children right. And we've come by here to ask you to make the first item on your agenda fair treatment, where God's children are concerned. Now, if you are not prepared to do that, we do have an agenda that we must follow. And our agenda calls for withdrawing economic support from you."

And so, as a result of this, we are asking you tonight, to go out and tell your neighbors not to buy Coca-Cola in Memphis. Go by and tell them not to buy Sealtest milk. Tell them not to buy -- what is the other bread? -- Wonder Bread. And what is the other bread company, Jesse? Tell them not to buy Hart's bread. As Jesse Jackson has said, up to now, only the garbage men have been feeling pain; now we must kind of redistribute the pain. We are choosing these companies because they haven't been fair in their hiring policies; and we are choosing them because they can begin the process of saying they are going to support the needs and the rights of these men who are on strike. And then they can move on town -- downtown and tell Mayor Loeb to do what is right.

But not only that, we've got to strengthen black institutions. I call upon you to take your money out of the banks downtown and deposit your money in Tri-State Bank. We want a "bank-in" movement in Memphis. Go by the savings and loan association. I'm not asking you something that we don't do ourselves at SCLC. Judge Hooks and others will tell you that we have an account here in the savings and loan association from the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. We are telling you to follow what we are doing. Put your money there. You have six or seven black insurance companies here in the city of Memphis. Take out your insurance there. We want to have an "insurance-in."

Now these are some practical things that we can do. We begin the process of building a greater economic base. And at the same time, we are putting pressure where it really hurts. I ask you to follow through here.
Now, let me say as I move to my conclusion that we've got to give ourselves to this struggle until the end. Nothing would be more tragic than to stop at this point in Memphis. We've got to see it through. And when we have our march, you need to be there. If it means leaving work, if it means leaving school -- be there. Be concerned about your brother. You may not be on strike. But either we go up together, or we go down together.

Let us develop a kind of dangerous unselfishness. One day a man came to Jesus, and he wanted to raise some questions about some vital matters of life. At points he wanted to trick Jesus, and show him that he knew a little more than Jesus knew and throw him off base....

Now that question could have easily ended up in a philosophical and theological debate. But Jesus immediately pulled that question from mid-air, and placed it on a dangerous curve between Jerusalem and Jericho. And he talked about a certain man, who fell among thieves. You remember that a Levite and a priest passed by on the other side. They didn't stop to help him. And finally a man of another race came by. He got down from his beast, decided not to be compassionate by proxy. But he got down with him, administered first aid, and helped the man in need. Jesus ended up saying, this was the good man, this was the great man, because he had the capacity to project the "I" into the "thou," and to be concerned about his brother.

Now you know, we use our imagination a great deal to try to determine why the priest and the Levite didn't stop. At times we say they were busy going to a church meeting, an ecclesiastical gathering, and they had to get on down to Jerusalem so they wouldn't be late for their meeting. At other times we would speculate that there was a religious law that "One who was engaged in religious ceremonials was not to touch a human body twenty-four hours before the ceremony." And every now and then we begin to wonder whether maybe they were not going down to Jerusalem -- or down to Jericho, rather to organize a "Jericho Road Improvement Association." That's a possibility. Maybe they felt that it was better to deal with the problem from the causal root, rather than to get bogged down with an individual effect.

But I'm going to tell you what my imagination tells me. It's possible that those men were afraid. You see, the Jericho road is a dangerous road. I remember when Mrs. King and I were first in Jerusalem. We rented a car and drove from Jerusalem down to Jericho. And as soon as we got on that road, I said to my wife, "I can see why Jesus used this as the setting for his parable." It's a winding, meandering road. It's really conducive for ambushing. You start out in Jerusalem, which is about 1200 miles -- or rather 1200 feet above sea level. And by the time you get down to Jericho, fifteen or twenty minutes later, you're about 2200 feet below sea level. That's a dangerous road. In the days of Jesus it came to be known as the "Bloody Pass." And you know, it's possible that the priest and the Levite looked over that man on the ground and wondered if the robbers were still around. Or it's possible that they felt that the man on the ground was merely faking. And he was acting like he had been robbed and hurt, in order to seize them over there, lure them there for quick and easy seizure. And so the first question that the priest asked -- the first question that the Levite asked was, "If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?" But then the Good Samaritan came by. And he reversed the question: "If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?"

That's the question before you tonight. Not, "If I stop to help the sanitation workers, what will happen to my job. Not, "If I stop to help the sanitation workers what will happen to all of the hours that I usually spend in my office every day and every week as a pastor?" The question is not, "If I stop to help this man in need, what will happen to me?" The question is, "If I do not stop to help the sanitation workers, what will happen to them?" That's the question.

Let us rise up tonight with a greater readiness. Let us stand with a greater determination. And let us move on in these powerful days, these days of challenge to make America what it ought to be. We have an opportunity to make America a better nation. And I want to thank God, once more, for allowing me to be here with you.

You know, several years ago, I was in New York City autographing the first book that I had written. And while sitting there autographing books, a demented black woman came up. The only question I heard from her was, "Are you Martin Luther King?" And I was looking down writing, and I said, "Yes." And the next minute I felt something beating on my chest. Before I knew it I had been stabbed by this demented woman. I was rushed to Harlem Hospital. It was a dark Saturday afternoon. And that blade had gone through, and the X-rays revealed that the tip of the blade was on the edge of my aorta, the main artery. And once that's punctured, your drowned in your own blood -- that's the end of you.

It came out in the New York Times the next morning, that if I had merely sneezed, I would have died. Well, about four days later, they allowed me, after the operation, after my chest had been opened, and the blade had been taken out, to move around in the wheel chair in the hospital. They allowed me to read some of the mail that came in, and from all over the states and the world, kind letters came in. I read a few, but one of them I will never forget. I had received one from the President and the Vice-President. I've forgotten what those telegrams said. I'd received a visit and a letter from the Governor of New York, but I've forgotten what that letter said. But there was another letter that came from a little girl, a young girl who was a student at the White Plains High School. And I looked at that letter, and I'll never forget it. It said simply,

Dear Dr. King,

I am a ninth-grade student at the White Plains High School."
And she said,

While it should not matter, I would like to mention that I'm a white girl. I read in the paper of your misfortune, and of your suffering. And I read that if you had sneezed, you would have died. And I'm simply writing you to say that I'm so happy that you didn't sneeze.


And I want to say tonight -- I want to say tonight that I too am happy that I didn't sneeze. Because if I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been around here in 1960, when students all over the South started sitting-in at lunch counters. And I knew that as they were sitting in, they were really standing up for the best in the American dream, and taking the whole nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

-If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been around here in 1961, when we decided to take a ride for freedom and ended segregation in inter-state travel.

-If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been around here in 1962, when Negroes in Albany, Georgia, decided to straighten their backs up. And whenever men and women straighten their backs up, they are going somewhere, because a man can't ride your back unless it is bent.

-If I had sneezed -- If I had sneezed I wouldn't have been here in 1963, when the black people of Birmingham, Alabama, aroused the conscience of this nation, and brought into being the Civil Rights Bill.

-If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have had a chance later that year, in August, to try to tell America about a dream that I had had.

-If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been down in Selma, Alabama, to see the great Movement there.

-If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been in Memphis to see a community rally around those brothers and sisters who are suffering.
I'm so happy that I didn't sneeze.

And they were telling me --. Now, it doesn't matter, now. It really doesn't matter what happens now. I left Atlanta this morning, and as we got started on the plane, there were six of us. The pilot said over the public address system, "We are sorry for the delay, but we have Dr. Martin Luther King on the plane. And to be sure that all of the bags were checked, and to be sure that nothing would be wrong with on the plane, we had to check out everything carefully. And we've had the plane protected and guarded all night."

And then I got into Memphis. And some began to say the threats, or talk about the threats that were out. What would happen to me from some of our sick white brothers?

Well, I don't know what will happen now. We've got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn't matter with me now, because I've been to the mountaintop.

And I don't mind.

Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over. And I've seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land!


And so I'm happy, tonight.

I'm not worried about anything.

I'm not fearing any man!

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord!!



Excerpt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NW5Y1H1nOug
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline NEPB

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 634
  • Renagade
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #20 on: December 19, 2009, 05:01:02 am »
Sad Day,


http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/12/18/copenhagen-last-day.html

Canada part of Copenhagen climate deal
Last Updated: Friday, December 18, 2009 | 9:39 PM ET


Prime Minister Stephen Harper and other world leaders — including those from the U.S., China, India, Brazil and South Africa — are leaving Copenhagen with a compromise climate deal and a vow to work out the details.

The agreement offers money to developing nations to help them fight global warming provided they agree to open their books to international scrutiny.

Harper called it a "comprehensive and realistic" agreement, while U.S. President Barack Obama hailed it as a "meaningful and unprecedented breakthrough."

However, the agreement is not binding and does not set new greenhouse-gas reduction targets. Instead, countries are to set their own emission-reduction commitments, which would not be legally binding.

U.S. President Barack Obama makes a statement at the climate change conference on Friday. (Susan Walsh/Associated Press)
Those commitments will be the subject of further negotiation, with the aim of a final deal at next year's summit in Mexico. It's a compromise following 12 days of divisive talks that saw hopes dwindle as the summit's close drew near.

Talks in the Danish capital have been marked by rifts between rich countries and developing nations, and between the world's two biggest polluters — the U.S. and China.

Obama met privately with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao twice on Friday morning and afternoon to try to come up with an accord, amid deep divisions between rich and poor nations. Neither leader has publicly offered any new commitments to cut the greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming as they addressed the conference.

Obama said earlier Friday that world leaders' ability to take action on the issue "hangs in the balance."

"I believe we can act boldly and decisively in the face of a common threat," Obama told the conference earlier Friday. "That's why I come here today not to talk, but to act."

Obama called for transparency in determining if countries are meeting their commitment, a remark squarely aimed at China, which is reluctant to allow international scrutiny of its carbon emissions.

A deal without the sharing of information would be a "hollow victory," Obama said.

The U.S. president also displayed some impatience with the pace of negotiations.

"No country will get everything that it wants," he said.

Other political leaders gathered in Copenhagen have been expressing doubt about the conference.

"A deal is still possible, but as of this morning, I think we have a climate change summit in crisis," said Achim Steiner, the head of the UN Environment Program, adding that what the conference needs now is some "inspiring leadership."

Abandoning hopes of reaching a comprehensive deal, a group of about 25 countries sought their own agreement on a two-page political statement setting out critical elements, key among them the mobilization of $30 billion US in the next three years to help poor countries cope with climate change.

As negotiations evolved, several new drafts of the document, titled the Copenhagen Accord, emerged, each time with key clauses updated and modified. Later drafts said rich countries should cut their greenhouse emissions by at least 80 per cent by 2050.

Obama arrived in Copenhagen early Friday, and held an unscheduled meeting with almost 20 world leaders, including the heads of Britain, France, China, Russia, Brazil and a dozen other countries. Harper later met with Obama as the U.S. leader had lunch with about a dozen leaders.

Following that meeting, French President Nicholas Sarkozy accused China of slowing the negotiations. Sarkozy said China is still not agreeing to allow international monitoring.

While Western leaders have pointed at China, some critics have accused the United States of coming into the negotiations too late, with no new proposals.

Jiabao said developed countries must bear their share of responsibility.

"In addressing climate change, it is inadmissible to turn a blind eye to historical responsibilities, per capita emissions, and different levels of development, [which] would undermine the efforts of developing countries to get rid of poverty and backwardness," he said.

Economic rift

Lars Lokke Rasmussen, the Danish prime minister, said earlier that talks went well Thursday night, and that compromise and consensus were starting to emerge.

However, the rift between rich and poor nations appears to be as wide as ever. A draft agreement from the U.S., Britain and other countries circulated overnight, but was rejected.

Some negotiators from developing countries have called the situation disappointing and confusing.

Harper arrived on Thursday and participated in Friday's sessions. In a brief statement on Thursday, Environment Minister Jim Prentice repeated the government's position that it wants what he calls a "fair deal" for all parties.

Offline chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,998
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #21 on: December 19, 2009, 10:07:04 am »
There is no chance at liberty whiile we are exterminating brown people abroad.

The imperial agenda will always cause tyranny over its people.

Martin Luther King knew this and it is why he opted to focus on ending the Vietnam War more so than the civil rights agenda. He went right after the heart of the beast - the illegal occupation of foreign lands. He knew it was an almost guaranteed death sentence but he was answering the call of a higher authority than his personal survival instincts could control.

Robert Kennedy knew this and that is why he went against his parents' interests and ran for president. He knew it was an almost guaranteed death sentence but he was answering the call of a higher authority than his personal survival instincts could control.

The founding fathers had this higher calling to end tyranny and oppression. They pledged their honor and all material possessions to the goal of a free society. In my opinion, we are starting to see similar sparks in a multitude of people around the world.  I also believe that this time there are not a handful of these people but entire populations that are waking up  at break neck speed. No doubt it will get worse before it gets better, but I am reminded of MLK's last words in the last speech he ever gave...




“I’ve Been to the Mountaintop”

by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Memphis, TN on April 3, 1968.



Sane. Each and every time I read or hear MLK it is as though I am listening to God's front man. I recomend that those on board who have not listened to this modern day prophet, purchase his tapes, sit back and feel the strenght of soul and truth united.
JFK, RFK, each of them knew the risk they had taken, they did not betray their souls nor the people.
I am getting old, so what, each time I read these mens words my hair stands on end and my eyes water. WHY, they reek of soul and truth.
I get high on truth, seriously, it gets me up there in place where I feel heavens light shining.
I enjoy having my right arm in tact, however if a bargain was struck and I was told that if I cut of my right arm, the tribal genociders, the elite parasites who ended these mens lives, who dominate this nation, who are the epitamy of evil- would be exposed, incarcerated, and sentenced. In all truth I would have my arm cut off in a heartbeat.

This repulic leaders are ordering  slaughter and mutilating daily of innocents, thats a soul call my freinds.

I discovered something in Nam, a demented sniper was going to rape a young girl, I stopped him. It was at that moment I felt without a doubt the strength of my soul.
Soul power, we are all Gods childen, once that becomes apparent to the masses we have won.
I want to thank Sane for his post, in fact I beleive that the message these men left us can not be forgotten, it sould be our daily bread.






Offline adissenter2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,044
  • Revolt Time
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #22 on: December 19, 2009, 03:13:47 pm »
loafs of putrid feces sold in a bread package with the label that reads -Fresh & Tasty-

the message MLK and men like him left?  what was it exactly?

I believe the "mountain top" MLK spoke of was the tip of the illuminati pyrimid and his "promised land" was the NWO

Family Planning — A Special and Urgent Concern

by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

Quote
Recently, the press has been filled with reports of sightings of flying saucers. While we need not give credence to these stories, they allow our imagination to speculate on how visitors from outer space would judge us. I am afraid they would be stupefied at our conduct. They would observe that for death planning we spend billions to create engines and strategies for war. They would also observe that we spend millions to prevent death by disease and other causes. Finally they would observe that we spend paltry sums for population planning, even though its spontaneous growth is an urgent threat to life on our planet. Our visitors from outer space could be forgiven if they reported home that our planet is inhabited by a race of insane men whose future is bleak and uncertain.

There is no human circumstance more tragic than the persisting existence of a harmful condition for which a remedy is readily available. Family planning, to relate population to world resources, is possible, practical and necessary. Unlike plagues of the dark ages or contemporary diseases we do not yet understand, the modern plague of overpopulation is soluble by means we have discovered and with resources we possess.

What is lacking is not sufficient knowledge of the solution but universal consciousness of the gravity of the problem and education of the billions who are its victims.

It is easier for a Negro to understand a social paradox because he has lived so long with evils that could be eradicated but were perpetuated by indifference or ignorance. The Negro finally had to devise unique methods to deal with his problem, and perhaps the measure of success he is realizing can be an inspiration to others coping with tenacious social problems.

In our struggle for equality we were confronted with the reality that many millions of people were essentially ignorant of our conditions or refused to face unpleasant truths. The hard-core bigot was merely one of our adversaries. The millions who were blind to our plight had to be compelled to face the social evil their indifference permitted to flourish.

After centuries of relative silence and enforced acceptance, we adapted a technique of exposing the problem by direct and dramatic methods. We had confidence that when we awakened the nation to the immorality and evil of inequality, there would be an upsurge of conscience followed by remedial action.

We knew that there were solutions and that the majority of the nation were ready for them. Yet we also knew that the existence of solutions would not automatically operate to alter conditions. We had to organize, not only arguments, but people in the millions for action. Finally we had to be prepared to accept all the consequences involved in dramatizing our grievances in the unique style we had devised.

There is a striking kinship between our movement and Margaret Sanger's early efforts. She, like we, saw the horrifying conditions of ghetto life. Like we, she knew that all of society is poisoned by cancerous slums. Like we, she was a direct actionist — a nonviolent resister. She was willing to accept scorn and abuse until the truth she saw was revealed to the millions. At the turn of the century she went into the slums and set up a birth control clinic, and for this deed she went to jail because she was violating an unjust law. Yet the years have justified her actions. She launched a movement which is obeying a higher law to preserve human life under humane conditions. Margaret Sanger had to commit what was then called a crime in order to enrich humanity, and today we honor her courage and vision; for without them there would have been no beginning. Our sure beginning in the struggle for equality by nonviolent direct action may not have been so resolute without the tradition established by Margaret Sanger and people like her. Negroes have no mere academic nor ordinary interest in family planning. They have a special and urgent concern.

Recently the subject of Negro family life has received extensive attention. Unfortunately, studies have overemphasized the problem of the Negro male ego and almost entirely ignored the most serious element — Negro migration. During the past half century Negroes have migrated on a massive scale, transplanting millions from rural communities to crammed urban ghettoes. In their migration, as with all migrants, they carried with them the folkways of the countryside into an inhospitable city slum. The size of family that may have been appropriate and tolerable on a manually cultivated farm was carried over to the jammed streets of the ghetto. In all respects Negroes were atomized, neglected and discriminated against. Yet, the worst omission was the absence of institutions to acclimate them to their new environment. Margaret Sanger, who offered an important institutional remedy, was unfortunately ignored by social and political leaders in this period. In consequence, Negro folkways in family size persisted. The problem was compounded when unrestrained exploitation and discrimination accented the bewilderment of the newcomer, and high rates of illegitimacy and fragile family relationships resulted.

For the Negro, therefore, intelligent guides of family planning are a profoundly important ingredient in his quest for security and a decent life. There are mountainous obstacles still separating Negroes from a normal existence. Yet one element in stabilizing his life would be an understanding of and easy access to the means to develop a family related in size to his community environment and to the income potential he can command.

This is not to suggest that the Negro will solve all his problems through Planned Parenthood. His problems are far more complex, encompassing economic security, education, freedom from discrimination, decent housing and access to culture. Yet if family planning is sensible it can facilitate or at least not be an obstacle to the solution of the many profound problems that plague him.

The Negro constitutes half the poor of the nation. Like all poor, Negro and white, they have many unwanted children. This is a cruel evil they urgently need to control. There is scarcely anything more tragic in human life than a child who is not wanted. That which should be a blessing becomes a curse for parent and child. There is nothing inherent in the Negro mentality which creates this condition. Their poverty causes it. When Negroes have been able to ascend economically, statistics reveal they plan their families with even greater care than whites. Negroes of higher economic and educational status actually have fewer children than white families in the same circumstances.

Some commentators point out that with present birth rates it will not be long before Negroes are a majority in many of the major cities of the nation. As a consequence, they can be expected to take political control, and many people are apprehensive at this prospect. Negroes do not seek political control by this means. They seek only what they are entitled to and do not wish for domination purchased at the cost of human misery. Negroes were once bred by slave owners to be sold as merchandise. They do not welcome any solution which involves population breeding as a weapon. They are instinctively sympathetic to all who offer methods that will improve their lives and offer them fair opportunity to develop and advance as all other people in our society.

For these reasons we are natural allies of those who seek to inject any form of planning in our society that enriches life and guarantees the right to exist in freedom and dignity.

For these constructive movements we are prepared to give our energies and consistent support; because in the need for family planning, Negro and white have a common bond; and together we can and should unite our strength for the wise preservation, not of races in general, but of the one race we all constitute — the human race.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/reverend-martin-luther-king-jr-4728.htm
( my eyes were bleeding when I first found this )

this bread does not sit well in my stomach therefor I will resist eating it ever again...


MLK = PAWN  just as Honest Abe = TRAITOR

civil rights are not the same as unalienable rights

why all this civil rights pushing by MLK and others like him then? is this a deliberate dumbing down of the language to herd us all along down the path of the NWO?

Inalienable Rights are defined as: Rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights.

Unalienable Rights are defined as: [Rights which are] incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred. http://appeal2heaven.com/2009/04/29/inalienable-vs-unalienable-rights/

Civil "Rights."

   a. Civil "rights" are actually state conferred privileges.
         i- They are granted by men, not God (and therefore are not true rights).
         ii- They vary from nation to nation and from time to time (not fixed, uniform and unversal).
         iii- They may be conditioned, modified or taken away by men (not inalienable).
   b. Civil "rights" cannot negate inalienable rights.
         i- The creation of men cannot supersede the creation of God. Blackstone: "no human laws are of any validity," if contrary to lonang.
         ii- The rights v. privileges and rights v. powers distinctions have legal significance.
         iii- There is no government interest which outweighs an inalienable right.
http://lonang.org/foundation/2/f21.htm (great read)


Unalienable Rights versus Globalism
http://www.freedomadvocates.org/articles/legitimate_government/unalienable_rights_versus_globalism_20091213386/ (read the whole article, Michael Shaw has eyes that see)
Quote
As documented in Understanding Unalienable Rights, the dictionary meaning of unalienable rights has been corrupted. School children are no longer instructed about this most basic element of the Declaration of Independence. Leading liberty minded legal and “think tank” organizations often fronting the freedom movement, treat or label the seeking of unalienable right protections as outdated. They argue a system of “civil rights” [1]- ([1] Civil Rights demand Social Justice: applying the law to members of groups to advance a centralized interpretation of “common good”.) as the appropriate man-made replacement. Think tanks of most stripes quietly argue that the idea of unalienable rights is flawed and indefensible. Correspondingly, the idea has been largely abandoned by academia and intellectuals.

The question then becomes: Can the American experiment in freedom continue without a foundation predicated on the notion that each person possesses a life that is their own? I conclude that without the political recognition of unalienable rights it cannot be assured that the political system will recognize that your life belongs to you.

This is not a moot issue. At the root of the globalist movement is Agenda 21 Sustainable Development. This worldwide program agreed upon by 178 nations, including the United States, reveals the directive that human population is to be decreased by 85% (United Nations; Global Biodiversity Assessment Report, page 673). This policy has appealed to many who argue "overpopulation." Accordingly, says the consensus, everyone’s “right to life” must be discarded in order to achieve globalist objectives.




why do we tend to bask in the illusion and not break free of it completely?

to be a freeman or to be a slave pretending to be a freeman, that is the question

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ! Molon Labe! Come and take them!

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #23 on: December 19, 2009, 03:35:28 pm »
loafs of putrid feces sold in a bread package with the label that reads -Fresh & Tasty-

the message MLK and men like him left?  what was it exactly?

I believe the "mountain top" MLK spoke of was the tip of the illuminati pyrimid and his "promised land" was the NWO

Family Planning — A Special and Urgent Concern

by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/reverend-martin-luther-king-jr-4728.htm
( my eyes were bleeding when I first found this )

this bread does not sit well in my stomach therefor I will resist eating it ever again...


MLK = PAWN  just as Honest Abe = TRAITOR

civil rights are not the same as unalienable rights

why all this civil rights pushing by MLK and others like him then? is this a deliberate dumbing down of the language to herd us all along down the path of the NWO?

Inalienable Rights are defined as: Rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights.

Unalienable Rights are defined as: [Rights which are] incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred. http://appeal2heaven.com/2009/04/29/inalienable-vs-unalienable-rights/

Civil "Rights."

   a. Civil "rights" are actually state conferred privileges.
         i- They are granted by men, not God (and therefore are not true rights).
         ii- They vary from nation to nation and from time to time (not fixed, uniform and unversal).
         iii- They may be conditioned, modified or taken away by men (not inalienable).
   b. Civil "rights" cannot negate inalienable rights.
         i- The creation of men cannot supersede the creation of God. Blackstone: "no human laws are of any validity," if contrary to lonang.
         ii- The rights v. privileges and rights v. powers distinctions have legal significance.
         iii- There is no government interest which outweighs an inalienable right.
http://lonang.org/foundation/2/f21.htm (great read)


Unalienable Rights versus Globalism
http://www.freedomadvocates.org/articles/legitimate_government/unalienable_rights_versus_globalism_20091213386/ (read the whole article, Michael Shaw has eyes that see)



why do we tend to bask in the illusion and not break free of it completely?

to be a freeman or to be a slave pretending to be a freeman, that is the question



Lincoln absolutely was a pawn of the banksters. When he woke up and saw that the British Royalty used the South as well as the North, he defeated the British threat just as the founders did in the revolutionary war and the war of 1812. He then planned to get rid of the rest of the banksters oligopolists with his greenbacks. So they shot his ass.

MLK was initially used by the international banking cartel to get the black vote so that LBJ could get reelected and enact legislation that could be used for intergenerational separation of classes and continual race conflicts.

Exactly one year before the date of his planned assassination he broke with his masters and exploded the agenda by exposing the truth about illegal wars to millions of American Citizens when he gave the following speech (and the banksters shot his ass):



Please listen to one of the greatest American Patriots of the past 100 years and see how much more important Dr. King's words are now then when he spoke them decades ago:




The sermon which I am preaching this morning in a sense is not the usual kind of sermon, but it is a sermon and an important subject, nevertheless, because the issue that I will be discussing today is one of the most controversial issues confronting our nation. I'm using as a subject from which to preach, "Why I Am Opposed to the War in Vietnam."

Now, let me make it clear in the beginning, that I see this war as an unjust, evil, and futile war. I preach to you today on the war in Vietnam because my conscience leaves me with no other choice. The time has come for America to hear the truth about this tragic war. In international conflicts, the truth is hard to come by because most nations are deceived about themselves. Rationalizations and the incessant search for scapegoats are the psychological cataracts that blind us to our sins. But the day has passed for superficial patriotism. He who lives with untruth lives in spiritual slavery. Freedom is still the bonus we receive for knowing the truth. "Ye shall know the truth," says Jesus, "and the truth shall set you free." Now, I've chosen to preach about the war in Vietnam because I agree with Dante, that the hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in a period of moral crisis maintain their neutrality. There comes a time when silence becomes betrayal.

The truth of these words is beyond doubt, but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government's policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one's own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover, when the issues at hand seem as perplexing, as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict, we're always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty. But we must move on. Some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony. But we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. And we must rejoice as well, for in all our history there has never been such a monumental dissent during a war, by the American people.

Polls reveal that almost fifteen million Americans explicitly oppose the war in Vietnam. Additional millions cannot bring themselves around to support it. And even those millions who do support the war [are] half-hearted, confused, and doubt-ridden. This reveals that millions have chosen to move beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism, to the high grounds of firm dissent, based upon the mandates of conscience and the reading of history. Now, of course, one of the difficulties in speaking out today grows the fact that there are those who are seeking to equate dissent with disloyalty. It's a dark day in our nation when high-level authorities will seek to use every method to silence dissent. But something is happening, and people are not going to be silenced. The truth must be told, and I say that those who are seeking to make it appear that anyone who opposes the war in Vietnam is a fool or a traitor or an enemy of our soldiers is a person that has taken a stand against the best in our tradition.

Yes, we must stand, and we must speak. [tape skip]...have moved to break the betrayal of my own silences and to speak from the burnings of my own heart, as I have called for radical departures from the destruction of Vietnam. Many persons have questioned me about the wisdom of my path. At the heart of their concerns, this query has often loomed large and loud: "Why are you speaking about the war, Dr. King? Why are you joining the voices of dissent?" Peace and civil rights don't mix, they say. And so this morning, I speak to you on this issue, because I am determined to take the Gospel seriously. And I come this morning to my pulpit to make a passionate plea to my beloved nation.

This sermon is not addressed to Hanoi, or to the National Liberation Front. It is not addressed to China or to Russia. Nor is it an attempt to overlook the ambiguity of the total situation and the need for a collective solution to the tragedy of Vietnam. Nor is it an attempt to make North Vietnam or the National Liberation Front paragons of virtue, nor to overlook the role they must play in a successful resolution of the problem. This morning, however, I wish not to speak with Hanoi and the National Liberation Front, but rather to my fellow Americans, who bear the greatest responsibility, and entered a conflict that has exacted a heavy price on both continents.

Now, since I am a preacher by calling, I suppose it is not surprising that I have seven major reasons for bringing Vietnam into the field of my moral vision.

There is...a very obvious and almost facile connection between the war in Vietnam and the struggle I and others have been waging in America.


A few years ago there was a shining moment in that struggle. It seemed that there was a real promise of hope for the poor, both black and white, through the Poverty Program. There were experiments, hopes, and new beginnings. Then came the build-up in Vietnam. And I watched the program broken as if it was some idle political plaything of a society gone mad on war. And I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money, like some demonic, destructive suction tube.

And you may not know it, my friends, but it is estimated that we spend $500,000 to kill each enemy soldier, while we spend only fifty-three dollars for each person classified as poor, and much of that fifty-three dollars goes for salaries to people that are not poor. So I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor, and attack it as such.

Perhaps the more tragic recognition of reality took place when it became clear to me that the war was doing far more than devastating the hope of the poor at home. It was sending their sons, and their brothers, and their husbands to fight and die in extraordinarily high proportion relative to the rest of the population. We were taking the black young men who had been crippled by society and sending them eight thousand miles away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not found in Southwest Georgia and East Harlem. So we have been repeatedly faced with a cruel irony of watching Negro and white boys on TV screens as they kill and die together for a nation that has been unable to seat them together in the same school room. So we watch them in brutal solidarity, burning the huts of a poor village. But we realize that they would hardly live on the same block in Chicago or Atlanta. Now, I could not be silent in the face of such cruel manipulation of the poor.

My third reason moves to an even deeper level of awareness, for it grows out of my experience in the ghettos of the North over the last three years--especially the last three summers. As I have walked among the desperate, rejected, and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through non-violent action; for they ask and write me, "So what about Vietnam?" They ask if our nation wasn't using massive doses of violence to solve its problems to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without first having spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own government.

For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence I cannot be silent.


Been a lot of applauding over the last few years. They applauded our total movement; they've applauded me. America and most of its newspapers applauded me in Montgomery. And I stood before thousands of Negroes getting ready to riot when my home was bombed and said, we can't do it this way. They applauded us in the sit-in movement--we non-violently decided to sit in at lunch counters. The applauded us on the Freedom Rides when we accepted blows without retaliation. They praised us in Albany and Birmingham and Selma, Alabama. Oh, the press was so noble in its applause, and so noble in its praise when I was saying, Be non-violent toward Bull Connor;when I was saying, Be non-violent toward [Selma, Alabama segregationist sheriff] Jim Clark. There's something strangely inconsistent about a nation and a press that will praise you when you say, Be non-violent toward Jim Clark, but will curse and damn you when you say, "Be non-violent toward little brown Vietnamese children. There's something wrong with that press!

As if the weight of such a commitment to the life and health of America were not enough, another burden of responsibility was placed upon me in 1964. And I cannot forget that the Nobel Peace Prize was not just something taking place, but it was a commission--a commission to work harder than I had ever worked before for the brotherhood of Man. This is a calling that takes me beyond national allegiances. But even if it were not present, I would yet have to live with the meaning of my commitment to the ministry of Jesus Christ. To me, the relationship of this ministry to the making of peace is so obvious that I sometimes marvel at those who ask me why I am speaking against the war. Could it be that they do not know that the Good News was meant for all men, for communists and capitalists, for their children and ours, for black and white, for revolutionary and conservative. Have they forgotten that my ministry is in obedience to the One who loved His enemies so fully that he died for them? What, then, can I say to the Vietcong, or to Castro, or to Mao, as a faithful minister to Jesus Christ? Can I threaten them with death, or must I not share with them my life? Finally, I must be true to my conviction that I share with all men the calling to be the son of the Living God. Beyond the calling of race or nation or creed is this vocation of sonship and brotherhood. And because I believe that the Father is deeply concerned, especially for His suffering and helpless and outcast children, I come today to speak for them. And as I ponder the madness of Vietnam and search within myself for ways to understand and respond in compassion, my mind goes constantly to the people of that peninsula. I speak not now of the soldiers of each side, not of the military government of Saigon, but simply of the people who have been under the curse of war for almost three continuous decades now. I think of them, too, because it is clear to me that there will be no meaningful solution until some attempt is made to know these people and hear their broken cries.

Now, let me tell you the truth about it. They must see Americans as strange liberators.

 Do you realize that the Vietnamese people proclaimed their own independence in 1945 after a combined French and Japanese occupation. And incidentally, this was before the Communist revolution in China. They were led by Ho Chi Minh. And this is a little-known fact, and these people declared themselves independent in 1945. They quoted our Declaration of Independence in their document of freedom, and yet our government refused to recognize them. President Truman said they were not ready for independence. So we fell victim as a nation at that time of the same deadly arrogance that has poisoned the international situation for all of these years. France then set out to reconquer its former colony. And they fought eight long, hard, brutal years trying to re-conquer Vietnam. You know who helped France? It was the United States of America. It came to the point that we were meeting more than eighty percent of the war costs. And even when France started despairing of its reckless action, we did not. And in 1954, a conference was called at Geneva, and an agreement was reached, because France had been defeated at Dien Bien Phu. But even after that, and after the Geneva Accord, we did not stop. We must face the sad fact that our government sought, in a real sense, to sabotage the Geneva Accord. Well, after the French were defeated, it looked as if independence and land reform would come through the Geneva agreement. But instead the United States came and started supporting a man named Diem who turned out to be one of the most ruthless dictators in the history of the world. He set out to silence all opposition. People were brutally murdered because they raised their voices against the brutal policies of Diem. And the peasants watched and cringed as Diem ruthlessly rooted out all opposition. The peasants watched as all this was presided over by United States influence and by increasing numbers of United States troops who came to help quell the insurgency that Diem's methods had aroused. When Diem was overthrown, they may have been happy, but the long line of military dictatorships seemed to offer no real change, especially in terms of their need for land and peace. And who are we supporting in Vietnam today? It's a man by the name of general Ky [Air Vice Marshal Nguyen Cao Ky] who fought with the French against his own people, and who said on one occasion that the greatest hero of his life is Hitler. This is who we are supporting in Vietnam today. Oh, our government and the press generally won't tell us these things, but God told me to tell you this morning. The truth must be told.

The only change came from America as we increased our troop commitments in support of governments which were singularly corrupt, inept, and without popular support and all the while the people read our leaflets and received regular promises of peace and democracy and land reform. Now they languish under our bombs and consider us, not their fellow Vietnamese, the real enemy. They move sadly and apathetically as we herd them off the land of their fathers into concentration camps, where minimal social needs are rarely met. They know they must move or be destroyed by our bombs. So they go, primarily women, and children and the aged. They watch as we poison their water, as we kill a million acres of their crops. They must weep as the bulldozers roar through their areas preparing to destroy the precious trees. They wander into the towns and see thousands of thousands of the children, homeless, without clothes, running in packs on the streets like animals. They see the children degraded by our soldiers as they beg for food. They see the children selling their sisters to our soldiers, soliciting for their mothers. We have destroyed their two most cherished institutions: the family and the village. We have destroyed their land and their crops. We have cooperated in the crushing of the nation's only noncommunist revolutionary political force, the United Buddhist Church. This is a role our nation has taken, the role of those who make peaceful revolutions impossible but refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that comes from the immense profits of overseas investments. I'm convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, militarism and economic exploitation are incapable of being conquered.

A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our present policies. On the one hand, we are called to play the Good Samaritan on life's roadside, but that will be only an initial act. One day we must come to see that the whole Jericho Road must be changed so that men and women will not be constantly beaten and robbed as they make their journey on life's highway. True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth with righteous indignation. It will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa, and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say, "This is not just." It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of Latin America and say, "This is not just." The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just. A true revolution of values will lay hands on the world order and say of war, "This way of settling differences is not just." This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation's homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into the veins of peoples normally humane, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice, and love. A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

Oh, my friends, if there is any one thing that we must see today is that these are revolutionary times. All over the globe men are revolting against old systems of exploitation and oppression, and out of the wounds of a frail world, new systems of justice and equality are being born.


The shirtless and barefoot people of the land are rising up as never before. The people who sat in darkness have seen a great light. They are saying, unconsciously, as we say in one of our freedom songs, "Ain't gonna let nobody turn me around!" It is a sad fact that because of comfort, complacency, a morbid fear of communism, our proneness to adjust to injustice, the Western nations that initiated so much of the revolutionary spirit of the modern world have now become the arch anti-revolutionaries. This has driven many to feel that only Marxism has a revolutionary spirit. Therefore, communism is a judgment against our failure to make democracy real and follow through on the revolutions that we initiated. Our only hope today lies in our ability to recapture the revolutionary spirit and go out into a sometimes hostile world declaring eternal hostility to poverty, racism, and militarism. With this powerful commitment we shall boldly challenge the status quo, we shall boldly challenge unjust mores, and thereby speed up the day when "every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low, and the rough places shall be made plain, and the crooked places straight. And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together."

A genuine revolution of values means in the final analysis that our loyalties must become ecumenical rather than sectional. Every nation must now develop an overriding loyalty to mankind as a whole in order to preserve the best in their individual societies. This call for a worldwide fellowship that lifts neighborly concern beyond one's tribe, race, class, and nation is in reality a call for an all-embracing, unconditional love for all men. This oft misunderstood and misinterpreted concept, so readily dismissed by the Nietzsches of the world as a weak and cowardly force, has now become an absolute necessity for the survival of mankind. And when I speak of love I'm not speaking of some sentimental and weak response. I am speaking of that force which all of the great religions have seen as the supreme unifying principle of life. Love is somehow the key that unlocks the door which leads to ultimate reality. This Hindu-Muslim-Christian-Jewish-Buddhist belief about ultimate reality is beautifully summed up in the first epistle of John: "Let us love one another, for God is love. And every one that loveth is born of God and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God, for God is love. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us and his love is perfected in us."

Let me say finally that I oppose the war in Vietnam because...

I love America.

I speak out against this war, not in anger, but with anxiety and sorrow in my heart, and, above all, with a passionate desire to see our beloved country stand as the moral example of the world. I speak out against this war because I am disappointed with America.


And there can be no great disappointment where there is not great love.


I am disappointed with our failure to deal positively and forthrightly with the triple evils of racism, economic exploitation, and militarism. We are presently moving down a dead-end road that can lead to national disaster. America has strayed to the far country of racism and militarism. The home that all too many Americans left was solidly structured idealistically; its pillars were solidly grounded in the insights of our Judeo-Christian heritage. All men are made in the image of God. All men are bothers. All men are created equal. Every man is an heir to a legacy of dignity and worth.

Every man has rights that are neither conferred by, nor derived from the State--they are God-given.


Out of one blood, God made all men to dwell upon the face of the earth. What a marvelous foundation for any home! What a glorious and healthy place to inhabit. But America's strayed away, and this unnatural excursion has brought only confusion and bewilderment. It has left hearts aching with guilt and minds distorted with irrationality.

It is time for all people of conscience to call upon America to come back home. Come home, America. Omar Khayyam is right: "The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on."

I call on Washington today.  

I call on every man and woman of good will all over America today.

I call on the young men of America who must make a choice today to take a stand on this issue.

Tomorrow may be too late.

The book may close.

And don't let anybody make you think that God chose America as his divine, messianic force to be a sort of policeman of the whole world.

God has a way of standing before the nations with judgment, and it seems that I can hear God saying to America, "You're too arrogant! And if you don't change your ways, I will rise up and break the backbone of your power, and I'll place it in the hands of a nation that doesn't even know my name. Be still and know that I'm God."


Now it isn't easy to stand up for truth and for justice. Sometimes it means being frustrated. When you tell the truth and take a stand, sometimes it means that you will walk the streets with a burdened heart. Sometimes it means losing a job...means being abused and scorned. It may mean having a seven, eight year old child asking a daddy, "Why do you have to go to jail so much?" And I've long since learned that to be a follower to the Jesus Christ means taking up the cross. And my bible tells me that Good Friday comes before Easter. Before the crown we wear, there is the cross that we must bear. Let us bear it--bear it for truth, bear it for justice, and bear it for peace. Let us go out this morning with that determination. And I have not lost faith. I'm not in despair, because I know that there is a moral order.

I haven't lost faith, because the arc of the moral universe is long,
but it bends toward justice.

I can still sing "We Shall Overcome" because Carlyle was right:
"No lie can live forever."

We shall overcome because William Cullen Bryant was right:
"Truth pressed to earth will rise again."

We shall overcome because James Russell Lowell was right:
"Truth forever on the scaffold, wrong forever on the throne."
Yet, that scaffold sways the future.

We shall overcome because the bible is right:
"You shall reap what you sow."

With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our world into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to speed up the day when justice will roll down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream. With this faith we will be able to speed up the day when the lion and the lamb will lie down together, and every man will sit under his own vine and fig tree, and none shall be afraid because the words of the Lord have spoken it. With this faith we will be able to speed up the day when all over the world we will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we're free at last!" With this faith, we'll sing it as we're getting ready to sing it now. Men will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. And nations will not rise up against nations, neither shall they study war anymore. And I don't know about you, I ain't gonna study war no more.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #24 on: December 19, 2009, 03:41:27 pm »
now there are continued CoInelPro operatives that continue to lure idiotic morons into believing that Lincoln and MLK died as "traitors". The Church commission and thousands of pages of declassified documants show how these psyops techniques started, get ennacted, and how the many are cajoled into believing and even promoting these batshit crazy lies.

You can find much of these facts if you research "Truther was created by the CIA Manual on Guerilla Psyops Warfare".

RFK - "What we need is a revolution of wisdom."

All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #25 on: December 19, 2009, 03:46:36 pm »
Here is what some may call a socialist/communist traitor to inalienable rights (I do not, this man is a patriot to human rights everywhere).

Look at what he has to say about Obama...



John Pilger - Obama and Empire

32 min - Jul 31, 2009
http://vodpod.com/watch/2061045-john-pilger-on-the-obama-deception
John Richard Pilger is an Australian journalist and documentary maker. He has twice won Britain's Journalist of the Year Award, and his documentaries have received academy awards in Britain and the US.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,998
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #26 on: December 19, 2009, 04:35:49 pm »

Sane, YES and YES again.

Now thats what I all cutting through the BS and getting to the bottom line.

Offline mr anderson

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,358
    • WeAreChange Brisbane
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #27 on: December 20, 2009, 12:34:19 am »
Can someone point to me where the IMF, global police force is mentioned in any of the texts?

The only vague mention that could include the IMF is in the Copenhagen final accord text

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/science/20091219-climate-text.pdf

Page 2-3, #8:

[..] This funding will come from a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources of finance.

Quote
The treaty outlines, “Penalties or fines for non-compliance,” in developed countries and the creation of an international police force to “enforce its will by imposing unlimited financial penalties on any countries whose performance under this treaty they don’t like,” Monckton told the Alex Jones Show, saying that it amounted to a total global government takeover on an “unimaginable scale”. - http://www.prisonplanet.com/final-copenhagen-text-includes-global-transaction-tax.html

I can see the 'Penalities and fines for non compliance' in the other text but not the explicit term of international police force.

Is there a legalese or run-around term for that in the text?
WeAreChange Brisbane
I hold personal views, beliefs and opinions that do not necessarily reflect the beliefs and opinions of WeAreChange Brisbane as a whole.

Our Bitcoin address: 1Fzb4bp48oMr7CFzT3SbkTzKpMSvWW1X1t

Offline larsonstdoc

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,733
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #28 on: December 20, 2009, 12:42:27 am »


  I can't say that it is the Copenhagen documents but Soros wants to use IMF gold for green "loans".  We know the scumbag is a big part of the plot.  Of course this scheme would be the one John Perkins mentioned in "Confessions of an Economic Hitman"  which eventually impoverishes most countries that TAKE THE BAIT.

  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6778960/Copenhagen-climate-summit-George-Soros-urges-use-of-IMF-gold-for-green-loans.html
Copenhagen climate summit: George Soros urges use of IMF gold for green loans
George Soros, the billionaire investor, has suggested that the International Monetary Fund should use $100bn (£62bn) of gold reserves to back green loans from rich to poor nations.
 
Published: 12:14PM GMT 10 Dec 2009

George Soros lays out plans for the IMF to use its gold reserves for green loans from rich to poor nations at the Copenhagen climate summit. Photo: AP
Mr Soros waded into the Copenhagen climate change talks this morning, explaining that the “not sufficient” money offered by developed nations to help out developing countries is threatening to “wreck the talks”.
He claims to have “found a way to bridge the gap” between the two sides, calling on the 192 governments at the summit to listen to his proposals.
 
Related Articles
Soros says leaders mining wrong places for climate cash
Climate row threatens Copenhagen summit
Obama given power to cut greenhouse gases
UN pleads for investment deals at Copenhagen
US 'should spend as much on climate as on war'
G20 Summit : George Soros says its success hovers on a 'knife edge'
Mr Soros believes that developed countries should hand over their “special drawing rights” – international foreign currency assets distributed by the IMF – as loans to help poorer nations tackle climate change.
Developing countries would pay interest and eventually the whole loan, but in the event of a default, the sum would be backed by the IMF’s gold reserves.
It is a different approach to the current proposals, which primarily rely on contributions from the balance sheets of developed countries.
“Developed countries’ governments are laboring under the misapprehension that funding has to come from the national budgets but that is not the case,” Mr Soros said.
“They have it already. It is lying idle in their reserves accounts and in the vaults of the IMF”.
The Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, has suggested a $10bn emergency fund for developing nations, rising to $100bn a year by 2020.
But China and the 137 emerging economies want up to 1pc of global GDP – or $600bn a year starting as soon as possible – causing tension at the summit.
“The $10bn fund is more than nothing but not much more because of the magnitude of the problem,” Mr Soros said, criticising Mr Brown’s proposal.
“It’s not sufficient and it’s already becoming apparent that there’s a gap between the developed and developing worlds on this issue that could actually wreck the conference."
The billionaire investor was met with a receptive audience among non-governmental organisations, but the US is understood to be reluctant to consider such a plan because it would need Congressional approval.
“I did have some informal discussions with the US and while there’s sympathy for the plan the difficulty of getting Congressional approval has been emphasised,” he said.
He suggested the best use of the money would be to look at reducing emissions from agricultural, forestry and land use, because they offer the highest potential for cuts.

Offline mr anderson

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,358
    • WeAreChange Brisbane
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #29 on: December 20, 2009, 12:55:26 am »

  I can't say that it is the Copenhagen documents but Soros wants to use IMF gold for green "loans".  We know the scumbag is a big part of the plot.  Of course this scheme would be the one John Perkins mentioned in "Confessions of an Economic Hitman"  which eventually impoverishes most countries that TAKE THE BAIT.

  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6778960/Copenhagen-climate-summit-George-Soros-urges-use-of-IMF-gold-for-green-loans.html
Copenhagen climate summit: George Soros urges use of IMF gold for green loans
George Soros, the billionaire investor, has suggested that the International Monetary Fund should use $100bn (£62bn) of gold reserves to back green loans from rich to poor nations.
 
Published: 12:14PM GMT 10 Dec 2009

George Soros lays out plans for the IMF to use its gold reserves for green loans from rich to poor nations at the Copenhagen climate summit. Photo: AP
Mr Soros waded into the Copenhagen climate change talks this morning, explaining that the “not sufficient” money offered by developed nations to help out developing countries is threatening to “wreck the talks”.
He claims to have “found a way to bridge the gap” between the two sides, calling on the 192 governments at the summit to listen to his proposals.
 
Related Articles
Soros says leaders mining wrong places for climate cash
Climate row threatens Copenhagen summit
Obama given power to cut greenhouse gases
UN pleads for investment deals at Copenhagen
US 'should spend as much on climate as on war'
G20 Summit : George Soros says its success hovers on a 'knife edge'
Mr Soros believes that developed countries should hand over their “special drawing rights” – international foreign currency assets distributed by the IMF – as loans to help poorer nations tackle climate change.
Developing countries would pay interest and eventually the whole loan, but in the event of a default, the sum would be backed by the IMF’s gold reserves.
It is a different approach to the current proposals, which primarily rely on contributions from the balance sheets of developed countries.
“Developed countries’ governments are laboring under the misapprehension that funding has to come from the national budgets but that is not the case,” Mr Soros said.
“They have it already. It is lying idle in their reserves accounts and in the vaults of the IMF”.
The Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, has suggested a $10bn emergency fund for developing nations, rising to $100bn a year by 2020.
But China and the 137 emerging economies want up to 1pc of global GDP – or $600bn a year starting as soon as possible – causing tension at the summit.
“The $10bn fund is more than nothing but not much more because of the magnitude of the problem,” Mr Soros said, criticising Mr Brown’s proposal.
“It’s not sufficient and it’s already becoming apparent that there’s a gap between the developed and developing worlds on this issue that could actually wreck the conference."
The billionaire investor was met with a receptive audience among non-governmental organisations, but the US is understood to be reluctant to consider such a plan because it would need Congressional approval.
“I did have some informal discussions with the US and while there’s sympathy for the plan the difficulty of getting Congressional approval has been emphasised,” he said.
He suggested the best use of the money would be to look at reducing emissions from agricultural, forestry and land use, because they offer the highest potential for cuts.

Thanks! That article skipped my mind. I did look at that yesterday  :P
WeAreChange Brisbane
I hold personal views, beliefs and opinions that do not necessarily reflect the beliefs and opinions of WeAreChange Brisbane as a whole.

Our Bitcoin address: 1Fzb4bp48oMr7CFzT3SbkTzKpMSvWW1X1t

Offline larsonstdoc

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,733
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #30 on: December 20, 2009, 02:06:14 am »


You're welcome mr. anderson

Offline freedomrik

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #31 on: December 20, 2009, 09:26:21 am »
Ok, All this is over my head. In laymens terms. Where do we currently stand with this coppenhagen treaty?  What have we agreed too?
"Believe nothing you are told"

Offline America2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,308
  • Romans 10:9-10 King James Version
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #32 on: December 20, 2009, 10:56:35 am »
Ok, All this is over my head. In laymens terms. Where do we currently stand with this coppenhagen treaty?  What have we agreed too?

Honestly - I'm still trying to figure this out - me thinks that they've already signed this deal well before the summit started, but is making everyone think it's still wishy washy.

Offline Truth2042

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
Re: U.S., China, India and South Africa have reached a "meaningful agreement"
« Reply #33 on: December 20, 2009, 11:37:19 am »
We have to start the restoration of the constitution SOON and FAST, it's already getting too late but pretty soon it's gonna be  almost impossible.. We can't do it violently unless if they start with us first.