Does your faith need strengthening? Are you confused and wondering if Jesus Christ is really "The Way, the Truth, and the Life?" "Fight for Your Faith" is a blog filled with interesting and thought provoking articles to help you find the answers you are seeking. Jesus said, "Seek and ye shall find." In Jeremiah we read, "Ye shall seek Me, and find Me, when ye shall seek for Me with all your heart." These articles and videos will help you in your search for the Truth.

Monday, December 7, 2015

Eternamente Verdadeiro

Compilação
Link

[A Bíblia] é a Palavra de Deus, eternamente verdadeira. Ela é necessária para instrução, reprimenda, justiça, e, sim, para podermos ouvir a Sua voz cada manhã. Os que copiaram as palavras do manuscrito original para os pergaminhos, nem imaginavam que Deus preservaria essas verdades infinitas por tanto tempo. O texto do qual vamos tratar registra as Palavras de Jesus para a mulher com o unguento no vaso de alabastro. Ele lhe disse que o seu ato de adoração seria divulgado em todos os lugares onde o Evangelho fosse pregado. E hoje, dois mil anos depois, em uma sala na Universidade de Michigan, nós vemos, sentimos e desfrutamos da presença de Cristo, nosso contemporâneo sempiterno.

Pensar na Palavra de Deus como “a mesma coisa de sempre”, é um equívoco e menospreza sua natureza transcendental e atemporal. Ela se renova, como o orvalho que molha a grama, como água para uma alma sedenta, e a sede sempre é do momento...

Davi expressou o seu valor de uma ótima maneira: “Escondi a tua palavra no meu coração, para eu não pecar contra ti.”[1] Até aprendermos a valorizar a Palavra e a considerarmos a fonte de toda a vida, seremos como cachorrinhos arranhando a imaginação e a transformando em trapos. A Palavra de Deus é o depósito feito no banco de dados da alma, ao qual devemos recorrer quando a vida nos cobrar algo. Ao usarmos esse capital compartilhamos a maravilha da perenidade, pois o céu e a terra passarão, mas as Suas palavras permanecem para sempre.

Nós mudamos, mas a Palavra de Deus é imutável porque é verdadeira em todas as fases e circunstâncias na vida. Ela nos mantém em sintonia com o que é novo, com o pé no chão em relação às nossas expectativas, e não nos promete um mar de rosas, mas a presença de Deus em cada batalha. Ela mantém nossos passos sincronizados à nossa mente e nos dá forças para a jornada, do começo ao fim.—Ravi Zacharias[2]


Deus soprou o fôlego

Toda palavra da escritura é inspirada por Deus, afirma no Novo Testamento.[3] Por isso, deveríamos esperar evidência externa corroborando o que é dito por meio da história, arqueologia e disciplinas relacionadas. Mas no final, a própria Palavra de Deus comprovará sua autenticidade ao ser percebida por suas afirmações, por sua coerência e porque soa verdadeira. Sem sentimentalismo e sem deixar a imaginação correr solta, quando nos relacionamos com a Palavra de Deus nosso espírito e coração dão testemunho da presença de Deus, e temos certeza que Ele está falando conosco…

Esse é um dos segredos da vida e do testemunho de Daniel. Ele acreditava que as Escrituras eram a Palavra de Deus viva. Essa convicção continua sendo o segredo para viver na “Babilônia” e não deixar a “Babilônia” viver em você.—John Lennox[4]


A carta do amor de Deus

A Bíblia não é apenas um livro religioso, mas o livro mais fantástico e maravilhoso do mundo. Ela oferece respostas para tudo. Explica de onde viemos, como chegamos aqui, por que estamos aqui, como sobreviver e sermos felizes durante nossa permanência na terra, e como amarmos e termos felicidade para sempre.

Pense nos seguintes sete fatos que demonstram a singularidade da Bíblia:

1) A Bíblia é singular em termos de continuidade. Foi escrita em um período de 1500 anos por mais de 40 pessoas de todas as camadas sociais, entre reis, camponeses, filósofos, pescadores, pastores, soldados, poetas, governantes, eruditos, etc. No entanto, do início ao fim, os autores abordam de maneira harmoniosa e sequencial centenas de assuntos controversos, sempre enfatizando o desenrolar de uma história: o amor de Deus e o propósito da humanidade.

2) A Bíblia já foi lida por mais pessoas do que qualquer outro livro. É o maior bestseller da história do mundo, e continua sendo campeã de vendas a cada ano.

3) A Bíblia foi traduzida e publicada em mais idiomas do que qualquer outro livro já impresso. Desde 1966, a Bíblia completa já foi publicada em mais de 240 línguas e dialetos, e um ou mais dos seus livros foram publicados em outras 739 línguas e dialetos.

4) Em comparação com os escritos antigos, a Bíblia tem mais evidências em manuscritos do que dez volumes de obras de literatura clássica. Apesar de escrita originalmente em materiais perecíveis, o que exigiu que fosse copiada à mão durante milhares de anos até a invenção da máquina de impressão, seu estilo e exatidão foram mais preservados do que qualquer outro livro da história. Milhares de manuscritos nas línguas originais foram recuperados, não deixando dúvida de que as Escrituras nos foram passadas no decorrer das eras exatamente como redigidas originalmente.

5) A Bíblia suportou ataques crueis, mais do que qualquer outra obra literária. Muitos tentaram queimá-la, destruí-la e bani-la, já desde a época dos imperadores romanos. A sua existência hoje, e o fato de seus ensinamentos e verdades terem sido preservados apesar das incontáveis campanhas e ataques contra ela comprovam um milagre.

6) Descoberta após descoberta de arqueólogos modernos confirmaram a exatidão da Bíblia e se revelaram uma verdadeira fonte de história. Seguindo referências do Antigo Testamento, arqueólogos redescobriram nações inteiras.

7) A Bíblia é o único livro que contém um grande número de profecias com predições exatas do futuro de diferentes nações, povos, cidades, e a vinda daquele que haveria de ser o Messias. A Bíblia está repleta de detalhes incontáveis e profecias específicas milagrosamente cumpridas, exceto, é claro, pelas que ainda hão de se cumprir.

Cada um de nós se encontra em uma longa jornada. Aquele que conhece o caminho orientou alguns dos Seus homens a desenharem um mapa detalhado para não nos perdermos, e podermos aprender a maneira correta de operarmos aqui e assim chegarmos em segurança ao nosso destino final. Mas afirmar não ter tempo para ler o mapa de Deus, a Bíblia, é como se um motorista saindo para uma longa viagem afirmasse não consultar o mapa das estradas por falta de tempo! Se você simplesmente ler a Bíblia, acreditar e segui-la, estará no caminho certo e acabará no lugar certo.

Logicamente, a coisa mais maravilhosa sobre a Bíblia é que, por meio de suas palavras, podemos conhecer o Autor. A Bíblia é a maravilhosa carta de amor de Deus para nós. Suas palavras dão vida e a tornam o melhor livro do mundo, com o único autor que pode garantir vida, amor, felicidade e o Céu para sempre se você a ler e acreditar no personagem principal, Jesus Cristo, Filho de Deus, aquele que nos amou tanto que deu a Sua vida para nos salvar. Todos os feitos maravilhosos e emocionantes que lemos sobre Jesus na Bíblia podem e ocorrem ainda hoje, pois “Jesus Cristo é o mesmo ontem, hoje, e eternamente.”[5]—David Brandt Berg

Publicado no Âncora em novembro de 2015.


[1] Salmo 119:11.

[2] Recapture the Wonder (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2005).

[3] 2 Timóteo 3:16.

[4] Against the Flow (Oxford, UK: Monarch Books, 2015).

[5] Hebreus 13:8.

How To Manage Your Time: 5 Secrets Backed By Research

By Eric Barker, Barking Up the Wrong Tree, Nov. 2015

It’s the problem we all face at the office: how to manage your time. You’re so overwhelmed with meetings and email that you always wonder if you’re really getting anything done.

Cal Newport knows something about getting stuff done. In the decade after he graduated college he published 4 books, earned a PhD from MIT, published a ton of academic papers and was hired as a professor at Georgetown University.

Cal leaves the office every day before 6PM and rarely works weekends. He’s also married with 2 children.

How does he do it? Cal prioritizes what he calls “deep work.” And in his new book, Deep Work: Rules for Focused Success in a Distracted World, he explains why this is key and how you can incorporate it into your own life:

The one line answer: you’re prioritizing “shallow work.” You’re making your attendance at meetings, the speed of your email replies and looking busy a proxy for real productivity. It’s ineffective and it’s making you miserable.

Everything we do at the office gets called “work.” And that’s a problem. Really, there are two kinds of work:

“Deep work” is using your skills to create something of value. It takes thought, energy, time and concentration.

“Shallow work” is all the little administrative and logistical stuff: email, meetings, calls, expense reports, etc.

Shallow work stops you from getting fired–but deep work is what gets you promoted.

Here’s Cal: Deep work is to focus without distraction on a cognitively demanding task, and shallow work describes activities that are more logistical in nature, that don’t require intense concentration. We just think of work as being any activity that plausibly produces benefit. Once you realize there are different types of work and some types have way bigger returns than others, it completely changes the picture.

The problem is that we’re all “drowning in the shallows” while the world is valuing deep work more and more.

How bad is it? Email and internet searches alone take up 60% of the average knowledge worker’s hours.

From Deep Work: Rules for Focused Success in a Distracted World:

A 2012 McKinsey study found that the average knowledge worker now spends more than 60 percent of the workweek engaged in electronic communication and Internet searching, with close to 30 percent of a worker’s time dedicated to reading and answering e-mail alone.

The CTO of Atlantic Media (the company that makes The Atlantic magazine) wanted to know how much they were paying people just to respond to email. When he ran the numbers, it turned out the number was about $1 million dollars a year. Here’s Cal:

He did all of this and found out that their investment was roughly the same as buying a Learjet every year in terms of how much money they were paying people to send and receive emails.

Now for some, like salespeople and senior management, emails and meetings are their job. But for most of us our real work only begins when the email and meetings are done. And these days those things never seem to end.

And there’s another benefit to focusing on deep work. And it’s a big one: Deep work makes you happier. Spending time on deep work has been shown to make us more satisfied with our jobs, while email and shallow work makes us miserable. Here’s Cal:

We see at the neuroscience level, your world is what you pay attention to. When you’re doing deep work, your attention is really focused very concretely on something that’s very satisfying. “I’m creating something in the world. I have some autonomy.” Your world seems like something that’s good. At the psychology level, we have all the research on flow. We know it’s satisfying to enter a state where you’re giving full, rapt attention to something that you’re good at. Shallow work, on the other hand, fragments your attention and exposes you to a lot of things that aren’t that nice. You’re going to see the Facebook post that makes you jealous and the email that stresses you out.

Cal’s right. We’re happier when we’re focused and immersed. As Daniel Gilbert, author of Stumbling on Happiness, explained in the Harvard Gazette, a wandering mind is not a happy mind:

People spend 46.9 percent of their waking hours thinking about something other than what they’re doing, and this mind-wandering typically makes them unhappy.

I know what some of you are thinking: But the world will burn down if I don’t check email every 30 seconds.

No, it won’t. And your work won’t suffer. And your business won’t lose clients. Harvard Business School’s Leslie Perlow got a team at BCG (a leading consulting firm) to spend one workday a week with no access to email. They all thought the world would burn down. What happened? Here’s Cal:

What happened was it didn’t cause a problem. It increased the quality of their work and the satisfaction of their customers went up after they started spending more time disconnected.

Okay, so deep work is important. But how do we fit it into our insane schedules?

1) Don’t Schedule Distractions. Schedule Deep Work.

We use our calendars all wrong. Meetings get scheduled. Phone calls get scheduled. Doctor appointments get scheduled. You know what often doesn’t get scheduled? Real work.

All those other things are distractions. Often, they’re other people’s work. But they get dedicated blocks of time and your real work is an orphan.

If deep work is the stuff that really affects the bottom line, the stuff that gets you noticed, the thing that earns you raises and gets you singled out for promotion, well, let me utter blasphemy and suggest maybe it deserves a little dedicated time, too? Here’s Cal:

Start time blocking. Actually start scheduling out your day. “What am I doing during this hour? What am I doing that hour?” Get in the habit of actually making a plan for your day and a plan for your weeks. If you’re actually making a plan for your time, you’re going to be much more likely to be able to proactively put aside time for deep work.

Don’t schedule distractions and hope to fit in work where you can. Invert your schedule. Block out a few hours for real, deep work. Cluster your email and other administrative shallow work into “batches.”

So you’re making deep work a priority and giving it dedicated time. But interruptions happen and there are meetings you can’t miss. How do you make sure the week doesn’t become a blur where no real work gets done?

2) Scoreboards Aren’t Just For Athletes. As Peter Drucker once said, “What gets measured gets managed.” Keep a running tally of hours of deep work. This is how Cal makes sure he’s making real progress on things that matter. Here’s Cal:

One of the ideas that I found really useful was having a scoreboard. I keep a tally so I can see every day how many hours of deep work I’ve actually performed. It seems like a simple thing, but without it, it’s so easy to go through a week and just say, “Well, I was busy and I think I did some deep work in there.” Once you start keeping score, you look at it and say, “I did one hour out of a 40-hour week? I’m embarrassed.” A compelling scoreboard drives you to action.

Believe it or not, this was one of Jerry Seinfeld’s secrets to becoming a great comedian. He recorded progress visually on a calendar. If it worked for him, it can work for you.

I know what some of you are thinking: But people keep asking me to do stuff like to go to meetings or help them with projects!

Cal has a one-word solution to this problem…

3) The Most Dangerous Word When It Comes To Productivity: “Yes.”

You have to limit your use of it if you want to get things done. I know it can be hard but something has to give. You need to prioritize deep work and you need to prioritize your work. Here’s Cal:

The people who tend to do things that have an impact say “no” to a lot because what they’re really interested in is, “I want to do the deep things, the things that require my skills and create new value, and I can’t do that if I’m constantly going to meetings and jumping on calls and checking email.”

Still skeptical about telling people “no”? Don’t trust me. Don’t trust Cal. Trust a billionaire. Warren Buffett once said:

The difference between successful people and very successful people is that very successful people say “no” to almost everything.

So you’re setting aside time for deep work, you’re keeping a tally and saying “no.” You’re way ahead of the game. But how do you actually get started once you’re ready to roll your sleeves up?

4) Have a “Deep Work Ritual.” Rituals are powerful. Getting focused can take time. You can make things easier and train your brain to get ready for some fierce concentration by having a personal ritual that helps you shift gears. Here’s Cal:

One way to more consistently achieve a state of real concentration is to have routines and rituals built around deep work. It can be as simple as clearing your desk, or shutting your door. That ritual tells your brain, “I’m now entering deep work mode.” You might have a set routine like getting your coffee and doing a ten-minute walk to clear your head. These type of things can actually help your mind much more easily shift into the right state.

Research shows rituals like these can help you be better at your work and even help you overcome procrastination.

5) The Question You Need To Ask Your Boss. Yes, if you stop going to a bunch of meetings and stop replying to email quickly and then use the time you gain to better curate your Pinterest page, yes, you’re going to get fired.

But if you use that time for deep work, stuff that really moves the needle, and can show that to your boss, you may very well end up as their favorite employee.

It’s a vicious circle: everyone is busy with meetings and emails so little real work gets done. So the measure of productivity becomes email and meetings. When you break the cycle and deliver real results, those false metrics aren’t as important.

But you want to be sure, right? Okay, so talk to your boss. Get an idea of how much time they really do want you spending on meetings and email and how much “deep work” they’d really like you to be doing. Here’s Cal:

Explain the concept of shallow and deep work. Then say, “We need to communicate with our clients, but obviously I need to be doing deep work so I can produce good things for you. I’m tracking my time, so what percentage should I be aiming for?” Get your boss to actually try to commit to a vision like, “About 50% of your time should be unbroken and 50% should be doing these shallow tasks.” When they’re actually confronted with how much time you’re spending trying to produce real results with your skills, they have to start thinking, “Okay, we need to change some things.”

Looking busy ceases to be important when you can show results that make it clear you’ve really been busy.

Okay, we’ve learned a lot from Cal. Let’s round it up and learn the final secret to success in the 21st century…

Don’t schedule distractions. Schedule deep work: Block hours for what really matters, not just for anything with a designated start time.

Keep a scoreboard for deep work: And make it visible. The point is to shame yourself if you’re not up to snuff.

Stop saying “yes” if you want to get things done.

Have a “Deep Work Ritual”: Whatever gets you ready to crank. Hiding in a conference room and throwing your phone into an abyss is a good one.

Ask your boss how much time they want you spending on deep vs shallow work: If they say “100% shallow”, feel free to ignore everything above.

Real craftsmen are proud of their work. Just because you’re not a stonemason or a painter doesn’t mean you can’t be proud of yours.

We get that feeling of real accomplishment when we make things, not when we attend pointless meetings and reply to endless email chains. Here’s Cal:

In the book I quote some well-known philosophers from Berkeley and Harvard who talk about how there’s a sense of sacredness that you uncover when you get really good at doing something. That touches something deep in the human condition that can be very rewarding. No matter what discipline you come at it from, deep work is a type of activity that’s going to be mentally satisfying, especially as compared to a fragmented attention that’s divided up in all these shallow activities.

The world is changing. We’re surrounded by distractions but those distractions matter less than ever. Here’s Cal:

If you can train your ability to focus and then fight to make time for real intense focused work in your schedule, you are absolutely going to thrive in this economy while the people sitting next to you are going to look up one day from their Facebook feed and realize they’ve been left behind.

Want to be the smartest person in the room in this new world of work? Cal sums it up simply: “Focus is the new IQ.”

Saturday, December 5, 2015

4 Things Your Kids Should Know About Atheists

Christian Mom Thoughts
December 2, 2015 By Natasha Crain -



This week I had the opportunity to be on the radio program Cross Defense with Rev. Rod Zwonitzer (KFUO-AM 850 in St. Louis). We discussed the common atheist claim that believing in God is evidentially the same as believing in Santa, why that claim offers a great opportunity to talk to your kids about the evidence for God at Christmas, whether Christians should include Santa in their Christmas celebrations, and how to keep your kids focused on Jesus this time of year. If you’re interested,you can hear the whole interview online here.

In the course of our conversation, Rod asked what I think is the biggest challenge to kids’ faith today. As I’ve written about before, I said it’s undoubtedly atheism. The percent of atheists in America is quickly rising, and those atheists are often quite vocal about their rejection of religion. Our kids are more likely to hear faith challenges from atheists than from any other group. Because of this, it’s incredibly important that we proactively help our kids understand the atheist worldview (here are 14 ways to do so).

It’s also important that we help our kids have an accurate view of atheiststhemselves.

I’ve talked to my kids (ages 7 and 5) a lot before about the fact that not everyone believes in God, but I realized a couple of weeks ago that we haven’t talked much about atheists as people. Today I’ll share some highlights from our conversation that you can use as talking points with your own kids (of any age).

Here are four things your kids should know about atheists.

1. Atheists can be just as friendly and moral, if not more so, than Christians.
I opened our conversation by asking, “Do you think atheists can be nice people and do good things even though they don’t believe in God?” My kids looked at me a little skeptically, sensing a trick question, then my daughter said, “No, they would probably be mean.”

That was a perfect opportunity to clarify the difference between belief and behavior. I explained that all people, regardless of what they believe about God, can be nice and do good things…and all people, regardless of what they believe about God, can be mean and do bad things. I emphasized that you can’t necessarily tell what someone believes by how they behave.

When you explain the difference between belief and behavior, it’s a great time to then make three crucial points:
The Bible says it’s not behavior that makes someone right with God and allows them to be with Him forever. It’s a belief in and acceptance of Jesus as your Savior (John 3:16). Even though two people’s actions may look similar, their status with God can be quite different.
That doesn’t mean that Christians should sin so that “grace may abound” (Romans 6:1). When a person accepts Jesus as their Savior, they are committing to a relationship that should transform their heart; moral behavior should flow out from belief.
The fact that people, regardless of their beliefs about God, know some things are objectively right and some things are objectively wrong, is actually evidence for God’s existence (this is called the Moral Argument). Romans 2:15 tells us that God has placed His laws on the human heart whether we choose to acknowledge the Source of those laws or not. Therefore, it shouldn’t surprise us that atheists know what is right and can choose to live moral lives according to that compass.

2. Atheists are often ex-Christians.
I next asked my kids why they think some people don’t believe in God. My son immediately responded, “Because no one has ever told them about Him! We have to tell them!” While I loved my son’s enthusiasm for sharing his faith (and encouraged him to do so), I also explained that many atheists used to be Christians; they’ve heard about Jesus and have chosen to reject Christianity.

This is important for kids to understand because atheists who are ex-Christians can be especially impactful in their challenges to believers—they can “talk the talk.” For example, atheists who are ex-Christians are often fond of showing how immoral/contradictory/crazy various tough biblical passages sound. To young people with limited Bible knowledge, it can seem like those atheists know more about the Bible than the Christians in their lives who have never brought those passages to their attention…and it can shatter their trust (just one of many reasons parents should proactively bring tough questions like these to their kids’ attention).

Kids need to know that just because someone knows something about or has experience with Christianity doesn’t mean they truly understand it or are presenting it accurately.

3. People can be atheists for good reasons.
Our conversation then turned to some of the specific reasons why people reject God. I asked my kids if they thought atheists have good reasons or bad reasons for not believing in Him. Since we talk a lot about all the good reasons for believing in God, they quickly assumed that atheists must have bad reasons for rejecting Him. Once again, I corrected them.

To use an easily understandable example, I reminded them of how much suffering we see in the world. I explained that one of the most common reasons why people don’t believe in God is that it can be hard to understand how a perfectly good and loving God could allow so many bad things to happen.

I acknowledged that I, too, often find that hard to understand.

I acknowledged that we can’t explain why every bad thing happens.

And I acknowledged that if we only looked at the evil in the world, it would be a pretty good reason to not believe a good God exists.

But I also acknowledged that we have a much bigger picture of “clues” to consider when we search for the truth about God (e.g., the existence of our universe, the fine-tuning of the universe, the complexity of our bodies, how we know right and wrong, the Bible, historical evidence for the resurrection, etc.). I concluded that atheists don’t necessarily reject God because they haven’t thought deeply about Him. They may well have some good reasons for why they don’t believe, and those reasons can sound compelling—even to Christians.

4. People can be atheists for bad reasons.
I then flipped the topic of conversation around and asked my kids if they thought people could be atheists for bad reasons. My daughter replied, “Yes, because maybe you just want to do whatever you want and not worry about God. But that doesn’t mean He’s not there.” I loved that example. What we want to be true has absolutely no bearing on what is true. Wish-fulfillment is a bad reason for choosing a worldview.

Importantly, I made sure my kids understood that Christians can be guilty of choosing their worldview for bad reasons too. I gave the example of how many people incorrectly think that if they’re a Christian, their life will be easier somehow (something Christians were never promised).

There’s a significant reason why it’s important for kids to know that atheists don’t always have good reasons for their beliefs: Passionate atheists often engage with an air of intellectual superiority and can make kids feel that they just don’t know enough yet to reject their faith. If kids don’t understand that behind the intellectual bravado there can lie a pile of poor reasoning, they may easily start to assume the problem lies with them.



Tell me what you think! What else should kids understand about atheists?


Filed Under: Apologetics

Comments
Collin Mc. says:
December 3, 2015 at 7:08 AM


Awesome article, and great interview!
Reply
Mark McGee says:
December 3, 2015 at 9:52 AM


Hi, Natasha. Great article! Former atheist here and I agree with all of your points. It’s so important to make sure our children and grandchildren are knowledgeable about problems with believing in atheism and the amazing reason Christians have for believing in God. Thanks! Mark
Reply
Leigh Ann says:
December 3, 2015 at 9:52 AM


This was great. Thank you for approaching this topic with kindness towards those who don’t believe! They are God’s creation in need of His transformation just as we are, not our enemies.
Reply
Robbienz says:
December 3, 2015 at 12:16 PM


Hi Natasha, I am reading (listening) to Ravi Zacharias’ “The End of Reason” which is essentially a critique of new atheist Sam Harris’ book “Letter to a Christian Nation”.

This is a small book (~130 pages) and one of the best and most beautifully written books I have ever read. The language is excellent, and the arguments are ruthlessly accurate in exposing the meaningless of an atheistic worldview. Common objections that are often used to slay Christians and that have a lot of rhetorical power are clinically dealt with by Ravi as he again and again exposes Harris’ confident assertions for what they are. Over and over again Ravi turns Harris’ own arguments back on to themselves with devastating consequences.

I am a little surprised at how aggressively Ravi takes on Harris. He is not mean spirited and does not attack the man, but he is ruthless with Harris’ shallow and foolish wisdom and its consequences. The reason for the ‘tone” of the book is that Ravi sees this as such an important issue with deep consequences, and one that we cannot afford to ignore.

Personally I regard Harris as a clever guy who is completely out of his depth when it comes to philosophy and religion. His shallow thinking resonates well with my own shallow secular atheistic childhood upbringing and teenage years. The problem is, as JP Moreland has said, that “the make-up man is more important than the speech writer”, meaning that Harris’ weak arguments are more than made up for by his confidence and clever rhetoric.

Highly recommended.

Robbienz

Reply

Two Things Terrorist Attacks Do NOT Tell Us About Religion

Christian Mom Thoughts

November 18, 2015 By Natasha Crain -




With the rest of the world, I’ve felt deeply grieved over the recent terrorist attacks. I feel a true sense of despair that there is no end in sight to events like these.

If you’ve been online much lately, you’ve probably noticed the endless articles pointing fingers of blame for the attacks in all directions. As has been the case since 9/11, many of those fingers are pointing squarely at “religion.”

For example, the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science Facebook page published a post that expressed condolences and stated, “Let us continue to be an opposition to religious fundamentalism!” This was followed by a “Don’t pray for Paris” meme which has been shared over 53,000 times.

Similarly, a cartoonist from Charlie Hebdo (the French magazine whose office has been the target of two terrorist attacks) published a drawing stating, “Friends from the whole world, thank you for #prayforparis, but we don’t need more religion! Our faith goes to music! Kisses! Life! Champagne and joy!

These negative sentiments about religion in general are hardly new in the aftermath of terrorist attacks. Ever since 9/11, atheist authors have used religious violence as a major impetus for their own war on religion (as an example that can be extracted from the title alone, consider Christopher Hitchens’ book, God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything). Their conclusions are generally two-fold: 1) that religion is bad and 2) that religion is (consequently) false.

But terrorist attacks and other religious violence don’t tell us those two things at all.

In a world where such violence is increasingly becoming an issue, and where atheists are increasingly using that issue to challenge any notion of God, it’s important that our kids understand how to think critically about such claims. Note that this isn’t even about Islam specifically; it’s simply about what a person can or cannot conclude about religion based on the existence of religiously motivated violence.

Here’s what your kids should understand about the two erroneous conclusions that religion is bad and religion is false.



1. That religion is bad.

I’ll be honest with you: I find it very difficult to understand why otherwise intelligent people make the seemingly obvious logical error of proclaiming that “religion” is a bad thing based on the morally grievous actions of any particular “religious” people. In fact, if you’re unaware that this is a common claim by atheists—that violence attributable to religious people shows religion is a bad thing in general—you might wonder why I even need to explain it here. But, rest assured, this is an argument many atheists put forth and one that your kids are sure to eventually encounter.

We can establish why such an argument holds no logical weight with three basic points:


First, the word religion simply means “the belief in and worship of God or gods; a system of religious beliefs and practices.” Depending on your criteria for grouping belief systems, there are several hundred to several thousandreligious groups in the world. The beliefs of these groups are extremely wide ranging. It’s logically impossible to make an evaluation of how moral “religion” is in general when religion is simply a collective term for thousands of different beliefs. Most evaluative statements using the bucket term “religion,” therefore, are meaningless.


Second, even if we focus on one specific religion for the sake of argument, it doesn’t logically follow that we can make moral judgments about that religion based on the actions of specific individuals who claim to hold that worldview. Those individuals may or may not have been acting in accordance with the “instructions” of their religion. The appropriate question for moral evaluation is, What are the instructions of that religion?


Third, once you drill down to the actual instructions of a given religion, you have to have some kind of basis for moral evaluation. In other words, when we ask the question, “Is (this) religion morally good?” we have to have a definition of morality. Interestingly, it’s usually atheists who question the morality of religion…yet atheists have no objective basis for defining morality! With no moral authority (such as God), everyone’s opinion on morality is of equal value. If there’s no objective basis for morality, it’s meaningless to say religion is morally bad (except in one’s personal opinion). You can evaluate evidence as to whether or not a given religion is true, but you can’t claim that it’s objectivelyimmoral.



2. That religion is false.

Stating that religion is a morally bad thing (see the first point) is often just the first step in the broader argument that the history of religious violence demonstrates God-based religion is false…that God doesn’t exist because He wouldn’t permit such evil in His name. Once again, we can show how this doesn’t logically follow by looking at three basic points:


First, this really isn’t as much a question about faith-based violence as it is about the broader “problem of evil”—why is there any evil or suffering permitted in the world? Even if no one committed violence in the name of God, this difficult question would still have to be answered, so it’s important to identify it as the real issue to address.


Second, the stated “problem of evil” truly is difficult, but it’s not without answers. As it’s traditionally stated, the problem is this: If God is all good, He would eliminate evil; if God is all powerful, He could eliminate evil; but evil still exists, so how can the existence of evil be reconciled with the existence of God? While it remains a tough question, it’s one that theologians and philosophers have answered in varying ways for centuries. To casually dismiss God’s existence due to the problem of evil—without having investigated some of those thoughtful answers—is, frankly, naïve. I’ve written a whole blog post explaining one such answer here. (For more on this and related topics, see my chapters on the problem of evil, the killing of the Canaanites, the history of Christian violence, and the questions of biblical slavery, rape, and human sacrifice in my upcoming book.)


Third, as in the last bullet of point one, an atheist has no objective basis for labeling something evil. If some things are objectively wrong and not just a matter of opinion, that’s actually evidence for the existence of God—a moral law giver. For more on the “moral argument” for God’s existence, see this blog post.



Get the Conversation Going

If your kids are old enough for this discussion, ask them if they think terrorist attacks and other religiously-motivated violence show that religion is a bad thing. They’ll probably say no, but probe further on why not. Help them learn to think critically by leading them through the bullets here as talking points (What do we mean when we say “religion”? How do we know if people are really acting according to their religion? How do we define “bad”?). Then ask them if they think terrorist attacks and other religiously-motivated violence show religions aren’t true (i.e., that there is no God). Use the same method of walking them through the key questions raised by the bullet points.



What indictments of “religion” in general have you seen stemming from the attacks?

Wednesday, December 2, 2015

THE MURDER OF GENERAL PATTON

George Patton's grandson endorses Rubio, calls Trump 'no Patton'
12 Apr, 2012 by Dr. Mujahid Kamran
Link

General Patton, after whom the Patton tank is named, was the most outstanding, the most daring, the most original and the most honest allied General during World War II. On account of his fiery integrity, brilliance, and exceptional bravery, lesser generals like Eisenhower, even though they were senior to him, feared General Patton. His successes had made him a legend during his lifetime. It is now known that General Patton was murdered on the express orders of the chief of OSS - Office of Strategic Services, the precursor of CIA - General "Wild Bill" Donovan. The British tutored and controlled the OSS through him and Britain was controlled by the "High Cabal", a term used by Churchill during World War II. The "High Cabal" is also known as the One World cabal or the Elite in literature. The "High Cabal" of Churchill was controlled by the Rothschilds because they controlled Britain's money line. Donovan was thus an agent of the Elite, the One World cabal of international bankers, and their allies.

The murder of General Patton was made to look like an accident. General Patton's death, attributed to an "embolism", was announced on December 21, 1945. He had met the "accident" on December 9, 1945. It is said that he had suffered a broken neck in the accident but was reported to have recovered and was to be flown to the US on December 22, 1945. The murder of General Patton, which touches the hearts of even non Americans 65 years later, also establishes that the Elite and its stooges have absolutely no loyalty to any country and that their ruthlessness, planning, cohesion, penetration, anonymity and cunning makes them the most dangerous and persistent foe of humanity. Betrayal and treachery is not unique to developing societies - US history is replete with the most sordid and supremely concealed betrayals that are never revealed or taught in highly controlled US academic institutions. "Democratic" USA was always an insidiously and increasingly controlled state - it is now, for all practical purposes, a totalitarian state and the fig leaf is gone. It is most likely that other "Wild Bills" adorn the US military and intelligence leadership of today, as future historians will establish. And then there is a battery of court historians who subtly, and not so subtly, try to plant disinformation in books, newspaper articles and articles on the internet.

That General Patton was killed is now fairly well established. There had always been a suspicion that he was murdered, but a book "Target: Patton: The Plot to Assassinate General George S. Patton", published in 2008, reveals this with hardly a doubt. Interestingly Wilcox's book was greeted with silence by the US media. The Western Australian newspaper published an article on the book on December 22, 2008 on page 16! On December 25th Bob Patterson wrote for OpEdNews: "Two days after the article appeared, a search of Google-news provided several suggested links to other stories on the same topic, but they were for sources outside (italics added) the United States. Why then isn't this story being reported by the Huffington Post and /or New York Times so that a Google-news search can prove that it isn't up to a blogging columnist in Australia to bring this newsworthy book to the attention of an American website's audience? Could it be that the managing editors of the most influential newspapers have suffered a plague of simultaneous misjudgment or what? Bill O' Rielly will continue to criticize New York Times and the stories it runs, but it seems very unlikely he will plug this column and this website. " So much for the integrity of the mainstream US media, a propaganda organ of the Elite.

The author Robert Wilcox was able to repeatedly interview an OSS agent, a decorated marksman named Douglass Bazata, who admitted to having arranged the "accident". In this accident no one except General Patton was hurt, and once the accident had taken place, Bazata claimed to have shot General Patton with a neck breaking low velocity projectile. [1] Bazata passed away in 1999. According to Bazata the job was finished by the Soviet NKVD (the precursor of KGB) while Patton was in hospital. Whether it was the OSS, or the OSS-NKVD acting jointly that completed the murder of Gen. Patton as Wilcox indicates, the fact is, as we point out, both, the US and the Soviet Union, were controlled by the same Elite. It was the Elite that wanted to kill Patton.

Bazata told Wilcox that Donovan had told him that he had clearance from his superiors about the mission. Bazata also told an interviewer for the magazine The Spotlight that Donovan used to get his orders directly from the President and therefore he understood that Patton's murder had the approval of Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR). "Since Donovan was directly responsible to the President I assumed [FDR] knew and had authorized the action. " He told the interviewer "They thought Patton disobedient, disruptive, and uncontrollable and were going to stop him with or without my help. " That FDR worked for the Elite is something that is known among writers who deal with such matters. Eustace Mullins and Anthony Sutton in particular have revealed devastating facts about FDR's corrupt collusion with the bankers.

In a story of December 20, 2009, a Sunday Telegraph reporter quotes Wilcox as having said that he believed that Bazata was a "sterling guy" and that Bazata "was struggling with himself, all these killings he had done. He confessed to me that he had caused the accident, that he was ordered to do so by Wild Bill Donovan. " That Bazata had inner conflicts is also indicated by his diaries. He writes: "Why am I so bad? None know my inner struggles, the restless nites - not even my wife I am plagued by doubts between the so-called right and so-called wrong I have no confidant save my God. " No wonder in 1979 Bazata stood before an audience of 450 or so ex intelligence agents in a gathering at Hilton Hotel Washington D.C. , to announce that he had been entrusted with the job to kill Patton by OSS Chief Donovan. He was, according to his dairies, and according to Wilcox, angry with Donovan, who, in his view, had betrayed him with false promises. He was angry that he was not even allowed to work for the CIA. On the surface of it, this is very surprising but in view of the fact that he was involved in and aware of a great crime committed at Donovan's behest, he had to be kept at a distance, lest the knowledge be passed on to more workers of the agencies bringing Donovan and his masters in the Elite in criminal limelight. It might have led to patriotic agents initiating a complete unmasking of the intrigue that led to Patton's death. The Elite always strives to conceal because it is guilty of horrific crimes.

In fact it was in 1972 that Bazata had revealed to a British born writer Joy Billington, on condition that she would not publish it, his involvement in the Patton murder. Billington was doing a story on his art - Bazata paradoxically was an excellent artist who had had solo exhibitions with personalities like Princess Grace of Monaco and the Duchess of Windsor. Joy Billington's story on Bazata's artistic work appeared in the Star-News of 17th September 1972. She was later to tell Wilcox that she could hardly believe her ears when Bazata mentioned his involvement in Patton's murder. When, in 1979, Bazata went public on the issue, he actually did so by managing to get Billington at the Hilton Hotel gathering in Washington D.C. He then made her ask him a question about the Patton murder. Bazata's word for word statement made at the Hilton Hotel goes as follows:

"For diverse political reasons, many extremely high-ranking persons hated Patton. I know who killed him for I was the one who was hired to do it. Ten thousand dollars. General William J. 'Wild Bill' Donovan himself, Director of OSS, entrusted me with the mission. I set up the 'accident'. Since he didn't die in the accident, he was kept in isolation in the hospital, where he was killed with a cyanide injection. "

This story was a bombshell that was completely ignored by the mainstream media. Why? The complete silence with which the mainstream media dealt with this bombshell of a story is very intriguing, to say the least. [2] In an obituary published a month or so after his death in 1999, the New York Times mentioned that Bazata was the son of a Catholic clergyman. This is confirmed by Wilcox who also mentions that Bazata's grandfather had emigrated from Czechoslovakia. However at numerous places on the internet it has been stated that Bazata was a Lebanese Jew. Why? The New York Times story failed to mention Bazata's highly newsworthy claim that he was involved in the murder of General Patton. This omission is highly significant since Bazata's claim to fame rests on his penitent confession about Patton's murder. DidNew York Times publish obituaries of all OSS agents and if not why did Bazata deserve that 'honor'? Or, was the Elite carrying on its media tradition of honoring only those who unscrupulously serve its interests?

Wilcox had a series of interviews with Bazata. Further, Bazata, who at one time wanted to write his biography, handed over to him his private and highly confidential diaries that he had maintained - these were about forty notebooks - "ledgers" as Wilcox calls them. When Wilcox cross-checked what Bazata had told him about his own past and what was mentioned in the diaries, with the available archival records he found that Bazata was indeed being truthful. In fact, for his interview with The Spotlight in 1979, Bazata passed the lie detector test. Bazata was indeed an OSS assassin and was a highly decorated officer who had carried out numerous assassinations.

Not relying merely on Bazata's confession and diaries, the author has collected other circumstantial evidence supporting the contention that Patton was indeed assassinated. He also interviewed a counter intelligence agent Stephen J. Skubik who stated that he repeatedly informed Donovan of a threat to Patton's life. In fact Skubik's family has set up a website where a privately published book authored by Skubik can be found. The book is titled: Death : The Murder of General Patton. Skubik's daughter states that her father had told her that "the OSS under Bill Donovan, actively ignored credible threats against Patton's life. My dad used to refer to Bill Donovan as 'that son of a bitch', for his role in Patton's death. " Wilcox has pointed out that instead of being grateful to him for providing valuable information about a threat to Patton's life, Donovan had Skubik jailed. When Patton was murdered Skubik had to flee for his life and stayed underground for five years in USA. Interestingly an article on Wilcox's book in the Daily Telegraph, perhaps the only article on the book in a major newspaper (but still outside the US), merely states that Skubik was sent back to US by Donovan when he informed him of the threat to Patton's life. Donovan did not control Skubik who worked, not for OSS, but for CIC (counter-intelligence corps). But Donovan was extremely angry each time Skubik brought up the threat to Patton's life. This anger is inexplicable unless Donovan felt threatened in some way.

Skubik has given an interesting detail. He writes: "I have spoken to Bert Goldstein, one of Patton's bodyguards during that time. Bert told me that Patton's life was threatened, that he was vulnerable to the ever present danger. Bert states, that had the bodyguards not been removed Patton would not have been murdered. He is convinced that his favorite general was murdered. " So why the body guards were removed when it was known that his life was in danger? When Kennedy was murdered his body guards, the "human shields" were withdrawn at the very moment his car started rolling. [3]
All files pertaining to on the scene investigations have disappeared. Wilcox has pointed out that at least five crucial documents have been removed from the files pertaining to Patton's accident. He remarks that if it were one or two files one could accept that they had been misplaced. He writes: "All such primary, close-to-the-crash documents have vanished. One or two being lost or misplaced is understandable. But five? That's a cover up. They 've been removed - except for quoted bits and pieces that have survived as parts of other documents. "

As if the removal of documents was not enough, the car at display in the Patton museum at Fort Knox, in which Patton was supposed to have met the accident, is not the actual car. This was established by the author Wilcox through the help of a Detroit Cadillac expert. Wilcox states: "After his examination he told me the Cadillac at Fort Knox was not a 1938, but a doctored 1939. Among other incriminating details, he showed me where the car's hard to find vehicle identification number (VIN) had been crudely filed off the metal chassis. Every vehicle has a VIN so it can be traced or verified for potential buyers. The museum wasn't aware of the fraud until we informed them of our findings. So if the museum's car wasn't the Cadillac in which Patton was injured, where then was that car? I believe it disposed of in an effort to destroy evidence. " Why were the documents removed and why has not the actual car been put on display? What is it that the establishment wishes to conceal? It is also interesting to note that according to Wilcox "Patton's driver, who couldn't avoid the crash would later privately tell his son that the truck had been waiting for them on the side of the road as they 'd started up from a railroad track stop. "

It is odd that although the accident took place at a rather isolated place away from populated areas, a large number of apparently military personnel appeared out of nowhere. Wilcox writes in an article dated December 21, 2010: "Although the crash occurred on a quiet no-work Sunday morning, a large crowd of mostly military personnel quickly descended on the scene. These included: a brigadier general accompanied by a major; two sets of military police who, it is written, made official reports; a mysterious "Lt. Valandingham" who appears to have been a clandestine; a lone provost marshal, and various groups of helpers, all military, including a set of medical officers with an ambulance whose officer in charge opted for the lengthier trip to Heidelberg than to nearby Mannheim."

The truck driver Thompson was whisked away to England for four days before being brought back to Germany. Why? The excuse provided is lame - they took him away to prevent him from being attacked by those who loved Patton. But Patton died 12 days after the accident. So the driver was taken away and then brought back well before Patton died! Was he briefed or debriefed in England? Why England? Why not in some safe place in Germany or in some part of Europe? Thompson's wife told Wilcox that he "always felt like a murderer. " Remarkably, Wilcox was able to get his hands on a scrapbook maintained by Thompson. The scrapbook contained clippings and included a clipping of Bazata's 1979 claim that Patton was murdered. Why did Thompson not deny this when he was himself driving the truck that hit Patton's car? A family member, wife of Thompson's stepson, was present when Thompson died in 1994. She said: "It was a short illness. For some reason the doctors could not determine what was wrong with him. He had a lot of pain in his stomach. They were running tests and such. The day he died he suffered terribly. " So Thompson died a painful death after a brief illness the cause of which remained undetermined!

Then there is the mystery of Joe Scruce (written incorrectly, as Wilcox points out, as Spruce). Scruce was driving behind Patton carrying guns for hunting and knew the destination where they were headed - Patton's driver was not familiar with the destination. Just before the accident Scruce moved ahead of Patton's car. He never returned to the scene of the accident and simply disappeared. Why? Scruce's daughter, who was very young when he died, talked to Wilcox. He writes: " because of certain other things that she knew about him, she said she became worried that her father may indeed have been involved in a plot to kill Patton, if only peripherally. " She was so scared that she asked Wilcox not to use her name in the book! Scruce's wife wanted to have a party for his 51st birthday on March 11, 1952. When she told him so, he became deeply perturbed and told her firmly: "No party. I won't live to see it. " So there was no party. Scruce was a very fit person and in his entire service record there was only one day off. He could "run miles without even panting. " He told his wife suddenly that he could not feel anything in his left body and then began hemorrhaging profusely. He bled so much that blood was gushing forth. The ambulance took 45 minutes to come! Wilcox writes (italics added): "Army doctors later told her he had suffered a brain aneurism - a burst blood vessel. Symptoms include a sudden, severe headache, which he did not have, but sometimes paralysis on one side of the body, which he did. Such gushing of blood however, I could notfind in any description of the illness. As in Patton's death there was no autopsy. " So Scruce died a very mysterious death in 1952. Mystery compounds mystery!

Mullins has stated that a few months before he was killed, General Patton's driver of five years, Master Sergeant John L Mims, was transferred. A day before Patton was to return to USA he was "asked by Major General Gay to accompany him on an excursion of a few hours. " What or who prompted General Gay to ask General Patton for a surprising excursion, a hunting trip, just a day before Patton's departure for the US is unknown. Whether these questions were asked of General Gay is also unknown. What was the background and career trajectory of Major General Gay is also something not dealt with by historians. Mullins writes:

"At 11.45 a.m. , in clear weather and a straight stretch of road, the driver of a GMC military truck turned his vehicle directly into the side of the 1938 Cadillac 75 special limousine in which Patton was being driven. Patton was the only person injured."

Mullins also emphasizes:

"Patton was a vigorous sixty years old with enormous reserves of energy, who seldom needed more than a couple of hours sleep at night. Not only did the US Army make no investigation into the 'accident' which had put him into the hospital, but no questions were raised about his 'embolism'. On previous occasions when attempts were made to kill him, no investigations were made, despite the fact that he was one of the most popular and most powerful figures in American history."

In his diary Patton had noted that on one occasion an RAF Spitfire attacked his private plane in an attempt to shoot it down but fortunately crashed after missing. He also mentioned that while his plane was being attacked he saw another four planes hovering overhead. Mullins writes: "The story was later put out that a Polish flyer had been piloting the Spitfire. " Why was no investigation conducted by the US Army into this very serious incident? This is in itself indicative that the powers that be wanted to get rid of Patton. This is a very serious omission that cannot be put down to negligence. And if an inquiry was conducted where is the report? On another occasion a tractor with a huge scythe like object suddenly charged at his vehicle - Patton was saved from being decapitated by "inches". No investigation again!

Patton paid a visit to his family in US during July 1945 after a gap of about three years. Before returning to Europe he told his two daughters that they will never see him again! When they protested he replied: "My luck has run out. I 've used it all up like money in the bank I 've had increasingly narrow escapes. It's too damn bad I wasn't killed before the fighting stopped, but I wasn't. So be it. " Was this a premonition? Was it that he had sensed that the powers that be were after his blood? Was it, as Bazata had told Wilcox, that he had warned Patton? It is difficult to say because Bazata did not reveal the exact or approximate date on which Donovan directed him to get rid of Patton. Because if this was before Patton went to US it meant that it took another four to five months for 'them' to get him. He died in December and he was in US in July. Skubik's sources revealing that Patton was a marked man were all Ukrainian. However Skubik's files on Patton were stolen at some point and he only found out later. Apparently he had not looked at them for a while and when he looked they were gone.

Why was the "fightingest" of all allied Generals, who stayed on the battle ground very close to his troops during combat, instead of staying at a far away and safe distance from them, assassinated? In fact even in his death he chose to stay close to his martyred soldiers. He had willed that he be buried in Europe - he was buried alongside other fallen US soldiers in the Luxembourg American Cemetery and Memorial. In order to understand why Patton was murdered one has to understand the highly suppressed reality that not only is the US and Europe controlled by a supremely rich cabal that has learned the value of secrecy and anonymity, but more astonishingly, the Bolshevik revolution was funded by Wall Street and bankers from within Europe. Trotsky was paid by Rockefellers and issued an American passport on the orders of that great stooge of bankers Woodrow Wilson. Lenin was funded by the bankers, and earlier, Karl Marx was funded by the US bankers as well as the Prussian elite.

Books of historians who were able to dig out this reality are not only suppressed in US, the authors themselves were made to suffer. Men like Anthony Sutton and Eustace Mullins were thrown out of jobs repeatedly on the express instructions of agents of the Elite. Ezra Pound was confined for 13 years in a mental institution when in fact, according to those who visited him regularly, he was in perfect mental condition and, acting as their mentor, suggested to many of them avenues of highly important research. Four people he mentored went on to win the Nobel Prize in literature. His "crime" was that he wanted to expose the big bankers for having manipulated to bring about the two world wars. He also wanted to dig out the truth about the Federal Reserve, a task he then assigned to Eustace Mullins. No wonder Professor Peter Dale Scott talks of "deep" or suppressed history.

The Elite divides mankind and brings about major wars so that it can bring all sides under debt, earn profits, and enhance its control over increasingly large chunks of humanity. The ultimate aim is One World Government, under its control, through wars, economic crises and panics, as enunciated by Mayer Amschel Rothschild in a meeting of the twelve richest men in Prussia as far back as 1773. The Bolsheviks were funded by the bankers and at one point, when the Bolsheviks had spent the money given to them, President Wilson gave them 20 million US dollars from a special fund at his disposal, as established from Congressional records. The Elite wanted to build the Soviet Union, whose leadership it controlled, as a great power, incredible as it might seem. It earned profits by doing business with the Soviet Union. At the same time it wanted to deceive mankind by creating a managed "threat" of Communism against Democracy - today the managed conflict is the "Terrorism" versus "Civilization" ploy. General Patton knew that the allied forces could take Berlin and Prague if their leadership wanted to. But the allied leadership did not so desire and in doing so allowed Communist Soviet Union to emerge as one of the two superpowers.

It was this reluctance on the part of the leadership to really fight communism at a time when the communist state could be fought, and his deep knowledge of the ground realities that first led him to suspect that the leadership was permitting communist Russia to become a great power as revealed in his diaries and letters to his wife. In fact, when, during a Press Conference on May 18, 1945 he was asked as to why Prague was not taken by US forces, General Patton replied: "We were ordered not to. " Eustace Mullins has put it in the following words: "Eisenhower's refusal to allow Patton to take Prague and Berlin, holding him back while the Russians occupied these critical capitals, remains one of the greatest performances of treason since Benedict Arnold, like Eisenhower, sold out to the British. " Patton foresaw the communist enslavement of Eastern Europe. To quote Wilcox:" Patton saw this coming and wanted to head it off by going to Berlin, as he had been briefed was the Allied plan, and capturing it before the Russians did. But he was stopped by Eisenhower for reasons that are still controversial today. " Eisenhower could not be acting on his own but at the dictates of superior authorities. No wonder the docile Eisenhower, who was junior to Patton, who was by far a better general than him, had been elevated earlier above Patton and went on to become the President of the United States. His road to Presidency was paved by the Elite by murdering the exceptionally popular, loved and forthright Patton.

In his diaries Bazata has mentioned that the Allied authorities made special efforts to retard the advance of Patton's armies. Bazata told The Spotlight that the top brass tried to stop Patton "militarily". In his diaries he notes that Patton's truckers were encouraged to sell off "gasoline, clothing and food" on the black market, to deliberately send trucks with black marketers as drivers, etc. He notes in his diaries that the British wanted to prolong the war - he did not know that it was not just the British. He writes that he first noticed this when Donovan asked him to "stop" Patton and when, to quote Wilcox, the "British refused to take the surrender of large number of Germans he captured during the war. " Historians have noted, as Wilcox points out, that Patton was militarily stopped when Eisenhower allocated scarce gas to Montgomery instead of Patton. However Mullins has stated this more emphatically. He writes:

As a result of Patton's bold advances in France, Field Marshal Montgomery persuaded Eisenhower to issue one of the most amazing military orders in history. All Allied Armies must advance exactly abreast so that no one (meaning Patton) would receive "undue credit".The effort to retard Patton was made because, as the "deep" historians have already uncovered in a different manner, the powers that be i.e. the Elite, wanted to prolong the war, not merely to earn more profits from defense sales and to add more to the debts of fighting nations, but also to allow for the emergence of the Soviet Union, as a major global power. That would lay the basis of future conflict and a repetition of the same cycle of war through communism versus democracy conflict.

One of the most important aspects of Wilcox's work is the deep link between Donovan, the Soviet NKVD, and his British promoters. In fact many reputable writers even go as far as saying that Donovan was a British agent. Bazata also believed so. In fact it was the British envoy to US Sir William Stephenson, himself an intelligence operative carrying the codename Intrepid, who worked towards convincing the US President, in an intricate and involved manner, of the need of setting up an intelligence organization, which was then named OSS. He maneuvered to get Donovan appointed as Chief of OSS and triumphantly reported to Stewart Menzies, the British intelligence chief: "You can imagine how relieved I am after three months of battle and jockeying for position that our man [Donovan] is in a position of such importance to our efforts. " Anyone, and there are not too many, who is aware that the Elite controls UK and US agencies, that it brought about the two World Wars, that it brought about the Bolshevik Revolution and controlled the Bolshevik leadership, that it funded Hitler, will easily understand that all these agencies and Heads of State work for the Elite. The collaboration between OSS and NKVD during WWII, over and above the heads of important US military leaders therefore becomes unsurprising. Through its agents on all sides, the Elite pulls the strings as part of a larger design.

Finnish freedom fighters had captured Soviet codebooks and these were available for sale. Donovan was advised by FDR not to buy the Soviet codebooks, and decryption documents - about 1500 documents in all (why?). Yet Donovan did so (why?) and then handed those codebooks to the NKVD (why?). He did not consult with the US military leaders (why?) who were very angry. According to archival records dug out by Wilcox, the Joint Chiefs wrote to Donovan on August 18, 1945 (italics added): "The action of the Office of Strategic Service which led to the Russians being informed of Hoettl network was not coordinated with the War and Navy Departments and has not been confirmed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff as required. " Why did Donovan breach established policy or rules or SOPs involving the highest level of US military leadership?

It was against this background that General Patton came into contact with Germans and displaced Jews, and realized, as he put it in a letter to his wife: "The Germans are the only decent people left in Europe. " It gradually became clear to him that the politicians (actually the Elite, but he was not fully aware of this) had used the US army for the wrong end - they had destroyed Europe and allowed communism to emerge. He did not know that this was by design, but he did conclude that that was the end result of the official policies and he was very vocal in his opposition. His opinions about the Jews he dealt with were not very flattering as his diaries reveal. At the same time, his diaries, and his letters to his wife also reveal, that he was disgusted with the highly preferential treatment that was being accorded, under orders of Washington, to displaced Jews. On August 29, 1945 he noted in his diary: "Today we received a letter to give the Jews special accommodations. If for Jews why not Catholics, Mormons, etc."

Patton had apparently written to Secretary of War Stimson "on the question of pro-Jewish influence in the Military Government of Germany" as noted in his diary of August 31, 1945. He probably did not know that Stimson was a member of the secret society named Skull and Bones and was therefore an agent of the Elite, an Elite with a Jewish component which is richer than the Gentile component, an Elite which has secret societies and organizations working for it, an Elite that stays faceless and anonymous. Thus the Elite had direct and almost complete knowledge of his views. In fact Kissinger, a German born Jew, who was only in his twenties at that time, fought to wrest control of Germany from Patton. And the war criminal Kissinger, as everyone aware of such matters now knows, is a great stooge of the Elite, the deeply concealed cabal of international bankers like Rothschilds, Warburgs, Schiffs, Morgans, Rockefellers, etc. The so called Eastern US establishment meshes with all these through the Yale secret society Skull and Bones, as well as the British Group established at Oxford during the times of Sir Cecil Rhodes - all part of the One World cabal or the Elite. The other secret groups in US and Europe, the Freemasons, the Illuminati, etc. are also interlaced in this web to form this well knit, deeply embedded, anonymous and ominous cabal. The Elite-dictated Washington policy was to divide Germany geographically, destroy it economically, to expel German population from their homes and to starve them. This was the so called Morgenthau Plan. Simultaneously the Elite wanted to create Soviet Union as a power equal to that of the US.

Patton, though he never disobeyed orders, had an independent opinion about how to deal with Germans. While the Washington policy towards the Germans was dictated by the secret societies cum super-rich-Jew dominated Elite, Patton was an honest and forthright American and therefore had an approach based on fair play, justice and humane principles. He was reluctant to evict German families in order to accommodate displaced Jews in their homes. Only after repeated promptings from Eisenhower did he agree to evict German families from their homes to accommodate the Jewish displaced persons. He was also critical of the orders to blow up German factories. In his diary he notes:

"I doubted the expediency of blowing up factories, because the ends for which the factories are being blown up - that is preventing Germany from preparing for war - can be equally well attained through the destruction of their machinery, while the buildings can be used to house thousands of homeless persons."

Patton also wrote in his diaries: "Actually the Germans are the only decent people left in Europe. It's a choice between them and the Russians. I prefer the Germans. " Two days later (September 2, 1945) he noted: "What we are doing is to destroy the only semi-modern state in Europe, so that Russia can swallow the whole. " He probably did not know that the Elite had planned to make Russia a superpower opposed to the US and control both, through the antagonism they planned to maintain between the two powers. He was probably not aware that, as writers like Mullins and Sutton were to dig out later, that the vast majority of concentration camps were controlled by Jewish administrators who were responsible for the deaths of around sixty to seventy million Christians in these camps between 1917-1967, that the Bolshevik revolutionaries were funded and controlled by the Elite, and that their sole aim was to usurp power, keep the aristocracy intact while destroying the middle class as a political factor. The concentration camps were full of working people. The destruction of the middle class is currently being pursued by the banking cabal in the US, as pointed out forcefully by Congressman Bernie Sanders of Vermont on December 2, 1910 in a speech before a stunned house, a house full of stooges and agents of the Elite masquerading as "representatives" of the people of the US.

Patton however was on the opposite track as far as his mindset was concerned. He criticized the use of POWs as slave labor - slave labor is a hallmark of the Elite approach to human kind and such camps are likely to be set up in the coming decades in the US, no matter how far-fetched it might seem at present. So many things have happened in the US in the past 15 years or so, that were unthinkable at one time, from unbridled domestic spying to the awesome powers of FEMA, etc. In fact one of Eustace Mullins pamphlets addressed to fellow Americans carried the title There is a Gulag in your Future. Patton wrote:

We are turning over several hundred thousand prisoners of war to be used as slave labor in France. It is amusing to recall that we fought the Revolution in defense of the rights of man and the Civil War to abolish slavery and have now gone back on both principles.

He was right. He also wrote:

If what we are doing [to the Germans] is 'Liberty' then give me death. I can't see how Americans can sink so low. It is Semitic and I am sure of it.

He was on the right track and the Elite always fears those who stand for the truth in the best American traditions. The Elite has, at least in the last two hundred years or so, used assassination repeatedly to eliminate those who stand in its way. Patton was to become one such martyr.

As the above quotes show, Patton was deeply critical of the Morgenthau plan to destroy Germany. Henry Morgenthau was a ruthless Jew and was the US Secretary of Treasury and a close "friend" of Roosevelts since 1913. Both, Roosevelt and Morgenthau were agents of the Elite. In fact Morgenthau was so loyal to the banking families that he had foreknowledge of the 1929 crash of Black Friday. As Mullins describes it, Morgenthau came to Guaranty Trust and ordered the close down of 60 million dollars worth of securities in Guaranty Trust within three days! When the officers at the Guaranty Trust tried to remonstrate he became furious and shouted at them: "I didn't come here to argue with you. Do as I say!" A few days later the crash occurred. The Morgenthau Plan envisaged partitioning of Germany, internationalization of the rich Ruhr region and the destruction of Germany's factories. His "plan" was the command of the Elite for which he and Roosevelt worked. That Morgenthau was Jewish meant that there was absolute congruence between the desire of the Elite and his own tribal instincts. Patton saw clearly that the Washington policies were aimed at damaging the working relationship of the US army and the Germans. The Americans were ordered not to fraternize with the Germans. Patton wrote to his brother in law:

I think this non-fraternization is very stupid. If we are going to keep American soldiers in a country they have to have some civilians to talk to. Furthermore I think we could do a lot for German civilians by letting our soldiers talk to their young people.

But this was not what the Elite and its stooges in Washington desired.

Joaquin Bochaca wrote in his book Los Crimenes De Los Buenos (published 2001) :

"The abuses committed by the forces of occupation in Germany reached bestial extremes that various people in the Allied command structure opposed it - or tried to Lindbergh mentioned how the American soldiers burned the leftovers of their meals to keep them from being scavenged by the [starving] Germans who hung around the garbage barrels."

Bochaca quotes Colonel Lindbergh, the famous American hero:

"In our homeland the public press publishes articles on how we 'liberated' the oppressed peoples. Here, our soldiers use the word 'liberate' to describe how they get their hands on the loot. Everything they grab from a German house, everything they take off a German is 'liberated' in the lingo of our troops. Leica cameras are 'liberated', food, works of art, clothes are liberated. A soldier who rapes a German girl is 'liberating' her. "

Bochaca further quotes Lindbergh:

"There are German children who gaze at us as we eat our cursed regulations forbid us to give them anything to eat I remember the soldier Barnes, who was arrested for having given a chocolate bar to a tattered little girl. It's hard to look these children in the face. I feel ashamed. Ashamed of myself, my people, as I eat and look at those children. How can we have gotten so inhumane?"

The Elite policy was designed to destroy the innate humanity of the US soldiers and to create a wedge between the US army and the German people. An army devoid of humane sentiment is a mercenary machine. The Washington policies, dictated by the Jew-dominated One World cabal, were demoralizing and degrading the US army. Patton was very sensitive to this. Bochaca writes:

"General Patton, perhaps the most popular of the American generals, immediately opposed the total or partial application of the Morgenthau Plan in his sector of occupation. Soon he had a run-in with another general of higher rank: General Eisenhower. It's well known what extremely violent debates they had about how the civilian population of Germany was to be treated. Patton was sentenced to death by the directors of the scenario. "

Patton's dissent was unacceptable and in view of his great popularity and integrity and his absolute fearlessness, he posed a threat to the plans of the Elite. As the Elite and its agents in Washington became more aware of Patton's clear views, he became a marked man. The Elite controlled media began a campaign against Patton by planting false or highly distorted stories about him. At a press conference on May 8, 1945 Patton was asked whether he intended to treat captured SS troops differently he replied: "No. SS means no more in Germany than being a Democrat in America - that is not to be quoted (italics added). I mean by that that initially the SS people were special sons of bitches, but as the war progressed they ran out of sons of bitches and then they put anybody in there. Some of the top SS men will be treated as criminals, but there is no reason for trying someone who was drafted into this outfit. " However his off the record remarks were picked up by the Elite controlled press and his statement was distorted so as to damage his prestige.

On September 22, 1945, the forthright and direct Patton response to questions by the Elite owned media reporters about his attitude towards Germans, was twisted by the Jewish controlled media. A reporter asked the following, presumably inspired or prompted question: "After all General, didn't most Nazis join their party in about the same way that Americans became Republicans and Democrats?" Patton responded "Yes, that's about it. " The Jewish New York Times headlined Patton as having said: "The Nazi thing is just like a Democratic-Republican fight. " The content of the headline was then taken up by the national press. The Jewish leaders like Morgenthau, Chief Justice Felix Frankfurter, Bernard Baruch who financed the great Elite stooges Wilson and FDR, all of them, and others wanted Patton's head. The whole furor appears managed to the trained eye. General Patton had noted in his diary:

"There is a very apparent Semitic influence in the press. They are trying to do two things: first, implement communism, and second, see that all business of German ancestry and non-Jewish antecedents are thrown out of their jobs. They have utterly lost the Anglo-Saxon conception of justice and feel that a man can be kicked out because somebody else says he is a Nazi. They were evidently quite shocked when I told them when I told them I would kick nobody out without the successful proof of guilt before a court of law. "

So Patton had realized that the "Semitic" influence was in the direction of building communism and destroying Germany economically, the only European nation with the qualities required to fight off communism. If one substitutes the word "Elite" for "Semitic" one may notice that he was as close to the truth as was possible in the world of those days and that was dangerous.

Earlier, on September 14, 1945, he had noted:

"I am frankly opposed to this war criminal stuff. It is not cricket and is Semitic. I am also opposed to sending POW's to work as slaves in foreign lands, where many will be starved to death. "

To quote Mullins: "As a result of Patton's opposition to the Kissingers, who believed they had won the war and should rule Europe, a furious press campaign was launched against him. " This campaign was orchestrated and coordinated at the highest level. According to a Patton biographer Farago the reporters were pawns in the hands of Eisenhower et al. He included General Walter Bedell Smith, whom Patton hated, as among the planners who destroyed Patton. Walter Bedell Smith was appointed Eisenhower's Chief of Staff when Eisenhower became Commander of the European Theater of Operation. Eisenhower requested his appointment on grounds of proven ability to work with the British. Smith was a very close friend of Donovan and, after the war, became US ambassador to Russia. In 1954 Walter Bedell Smith became one of the founders of the Bilderberg Group - a position reserved for the deepest agents of the Elite.

Earlier in the war, when he was posted in Africa, Patton had slapped two soldiers, whom he considered cowards, on different occasions. The incidents took place in Sicilian hospitals. Wilcox writes: "Because one of the soldiers was rumored to be Jewish there were also whispers of anti-Semitism. " Now a couple of years later there was again a campaign against him. In response to the manipulated press campaign the compromised and docile General Eisenhower relieved General Patton of his command of the Third Army. Eisenhower was sleeping with Kay Summersby, seemingly his secretary. However, in reality, she was a British intelligence agent. She had been planted to ensure that instead of British troops, Eisenhower would employ more Americans so that further British loss of life could be avoided. Mullins states that this tactic cost about a 100,000 American lives in battle. Patton was Governor of Germany by virtue of being commander of the Third Army, an army that he had commanded so successfully and brilliantly. He was appointed Commander of the Fifteenth Army. On September 29, 1945 Patton wrote to his wife that he preferred being moved from his position instead of acting as "executioner of the best race in Europe. "

It must be emphasized that Patton was not anti-Semitic or a racist. Wilcox has quoted historian Victor David Hanson:

Patton's bombast supposedly proves that he was anti-Semitic, but a prominent trusted military aide, the intelligence officer Col. Oscar Koch was Jewish and beloved by Patton - as was his official biographer Martin Blumenson. Patton was reportedly racist, but most than other commanders he admired black units ("I don't give a damn who the man is. He can be a nigger or a Jew, but if he has the stuff and does his duty he can have anything I 've got. By God I love him!"), insisted on the presence of some black officers as judges of military tribunals involving black defendants, and spent more time with his African-American aide Sergeant Meeks, than with almost anyone else while in Europe, developing a relation of mutual respect that transcended that of a general and his valet.Many Jews served with him and won his loyalty - as he did theirs.

These things were surely known to his superiors as well as the intelligence community, and therefore the Elite. He was killed because he could have stood in the way of allowing Russia to become a major power and thus could have foiled the design of the Elite to plunge mankind into a new era of confrontation. He would have exposed them too.

Patton represented the true spirit of America, a spirit that the Elite wanted to strangle and degrade, strangulation and degradation that is going on till today, strangulation that has brought the US public to its knees. He was upright and honorable, hated intrigue, stood for justice, was fearless, and wanted to be on the attack against wrongdoing no matter how powerful the wrongdoers were. In so doing he was inviting death. The Elite wants to rule a world comprising of individuals who are afraid of them, will obey their orders, will not think, will not question, will be selfish and will work against fellow humans for the ruling Elite. Integrity and clarity of thought are the greatest foes of the Elite and must be destroyed. Fear and mental confusion are two very important weapons of the Elite. Patton was clear headed because he had integrity and because he never feared death. A speech delivered to American troops before the invasion of Europe Patton revealed his inspiring thought. He said:

"You are not all going to die. Only two percent of you right here today will die in a major battle. Death must not be feared. Death, in time, comes to all men. Yes every man is scared in his first battle. If he says he is not he is a liar. Some men are cowards but they fight the same as brave men or they get the hell slammed out of them watching men fight who are as scared as they are. The real hero is the man who fights even when he is scared. Some men get over their fright in a minute under fire. For some, it takes an hour. For some it takes days. But a real man will never let his fear of death overpower his honor, his sense of duty to his country, and his innate manhood. Battle is the most magnificent competition in which a human being can indulge. It brings out all that is best and removes all that is base. Americans pride themselves on being He Men and they are He Men. Remember that the enemy is just as frightened as you are, and probably more so. They are not supermen. "

The Elite was frightened. What if a man of such integrity and honor were to become President of the United States? He had to be pre-empted, like many others before and after him.

In October 1945 Patton wrote to Maj. Gen. James G Harbord (1866 - 1947) back home in US condemning the Morgenthau Plan and announcing his intention of fighting back. Just like his letter to the Skull and Bones member, Secretary for War Stimson, this letter was also sent to the wrong person. A search on Gen. Harbord reveals that he was a Freemason. They are all part of the networks of the New World Order or the One World cabal - Skull and Bones, Freemasons, Illuminati, Jewish and other agents of the banking cabal, etc. In his book Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Rite of Freemasonry, Albert Pike (1809 - 1891),[4] a Freemason of the 33rd order, has pointed out that a Freemasonic Lodge is always regarded as "representing some part of the Temple of Solomon". Is the Temple of Solomon not a sacred temple of the Jews? The penetration and control of US and European institutions by the secret society brotherhoods is astonishing. [5]

Patton wrote to Harbord:

I shall resign, not retire, because if I retire I will still have a gag in my mouth I should not start a limited counter attack, which would be contrary to my military theories, but should wait until I can start an all-out offensive.

Of all the people in the world he had, unknowingly, addressed the letter to a Freemason! This was most unfortunate. Patton was very happily married to Beatrice Ayer one of the richest women in US and was therefore secure financially - he did not need a pension. The Elite does not allow anyone to stand in the way of its evil designs. In an article Wilcox states that a number of people in positions of importance where one may get to know things have come to believe that Patton was murdered. Skubik has mentioned that Robert Patton, the General's cousin who served with General Patton, told him that the family of General Patton believes that he was murdered. In fact Patton's wife Beatrice Ayer hired a private detective to look into the death of her husband. Wilcox mentions that a Patton contemporary Lt. General George E. Stratemeyer was convinced that Patton was murdered. He chose to inform the FBI that in case he was himself found dead it would be because he espoused the viewpoint that Patton was murdered.

In a postscript to his book, written October 2010, Wilcox mentions a letter written to him by a former OSS agent Ralph de Toledano. The letter was written in January 2005 but Wilcox did not use the information provided by de ToledanobecauseToledano had not allowed him to use his name. Toledano passed away in 2007. Ralph de Toledano, a very important investigative journalist, a "walking encyclopedia" on 20th century politics, had written of numerous important individuals who had told him that Patton was assassinated by OSS. Among them one may mention the following:
Raymond Murphy, head of State Department security during and after WWII;

John A. Clements who was part of a very secret Marine Corps intelligence operation, told de Toledano that Patton had been murdered by an OSS-Rote Kapelle (Red Orchestra, the chief Soviet operation in Germany) team;

Lt. Igor Guezenko the Soviet code clerk who broke up Soviet atomic espionage, told de Toledano that he had also picked up the Patton case

Richard Nixon, two of whose books were written by Toledano, also told him that OSS was involved in Patton's murder

Louis Nichols, de-facto second in command of FBI Director J Edgar Hoover

The much maligned Senator Joe McCarthy also told de Toledano that his investigators were working on Patton's murder and that he planned hearings on Patton's death. That may well be the main reason he was demolished so thoroughly by the Elite that even today his name is associated with "witch hunts" against communists. The Elite will go to any extent to destroy those who seek to expose it.

There are a few more names but the above list gives us a fair indication of many insiders who were aware that Patton was murdered and that the OSS was involved. Someone from the Mannheim region, where Patton met his accident, wrote to Wilcox after reading his book, that it was widely rumored in the Mannheim region immediately after his death, that Patton had been assassinated. Wilcox mentions that there are others who believe that Patton was murdered and are in a "position to know". He has summed it up very well in a December 2010 article:

Rumors that Patton was assassinated have grown since his death. Although I 've mentioned a few, motives to kill him abound. It seems clear what actually happened to him has been covered up. The disappearance of all reports and investigations from that fateful day, as well as the car in which he was injured, are strong indications of foul play. Add two credible witnesses testifying to a plot to kill Patton, the inconsistencies surrounding the accident itself and his questionable death in hospital, and there are compelling reasons to initiate an official investigation even sixty-five years later.

At least the book should have prompted an official investigation. But the US is in complete control of the One World cabal, stupefied through consent engineering techniques and media manipulation. When the Elite kills, the sources are removed or suppressed and the media also kills the stories that reveal the truth. Wilcox's very well researched book has been met with complete silence in the mainstream US media - no reviews in the major newspapers - nothing whatsoever. That silence in itself speaks volumes of foul play and of the deep and bloody involvement of the Elite.

[1] A secret Assassination Manual of the CIA, reproduced in the book, 63 Documents the Government Doesn't want You to Read (Skyhorse Publishing 2011) by Jesse Ventura and Dick Russell, states: "Absolute reliability is obtained by severing the spinal cord in the cervical region. This can be done with the point of a knife or light blow of an axe or hatchet. "

[2] In his book The Secrets of the Federal Reserve (Bridger House Publishers 1991) Eustace Mullins states: "The media monopoly deals with its opponents in one of two ways; either frontal assault of libel which the average person cannot afford to litigate, or an iron curtain of silence, the standard treatment of any work which exposes its clandestine activities. "

[3] Watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=215cs8SrVd0

[4] Albert Pike had written on January 22, 1870 to the Italian revolutionary Giuseppe Mazzini: "We must create a super rite, which will remain unknown, to which we will call those Masons of high degree of whom we shall select. With regard to our brothers in Masonry, these men must be pledged to the strictest secrecy. Through this supreme rite, we will govern all Freemasonry which will become the one international center, the more powerful because its direction will be unknown. " It has been commented by an anonymous writer in the journal "Michael" Oct-Nov-Dec issue of 2002: "This is why 95% of the men involved in Masonry don't have a clue as to what the objectives of the organization actually are. They are under the delusion that its just a fine community organization doing good works. "

[5] FDR was a Freemason of the 32nd degree and so was his Vice President (1940-1944) Henry Wallace, credited with placing the pyramid and the "all-seeing eye" on the dollar bill. Harry S Truman, FDR's successor was also a Freemason. Henry Wallace is now said to have links with NKVD according to researchers. This is not surprising in view of the fact that Elite was building the Soviet Union and that the White House was under its control. The Elite had, in accordance with their dialectic Hegelian philosophy, brought about controlled conflict between Hitler and the Allied powers and was at the same time laying the foundations of the next controlled conflict viz. Communism versus Democracy. It then used the opportunity of Afghan war to dismantle Soviet Union and end Communism and begin the new controlled conflict of Terrorism versus Civilization!

Copyright © Fight for Your Faith