The 'New World Order'
 
Digital ID Or Digital Prison
Home Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 God's Plan
The New World Order
It's An Evil And Sinister Conspiracy That Involves Very Rich And Powerful People Who Mastermind Events And Control World Affairs Through Governments And Corporations And Are Plotting Mass Population Reduction And The Emergence Of A Totalitarian World Government!   By Using Occult Secret Societies The ILLUMINATI Will Bring All Of The Nations Of This World Together As One.   We'll Have No Recourse But To Submit And Be Under Their Control Utilizing Their Digital Central Bank Currency Or To Reject This Ill-Fated Digital Identification.   The Goal Is UN Agenda 2030!   This Is The Beginning Of The End!

Pope Urges All Religions to Unite for Peace, Justice


By Reuters

Pope Francis urged members of all religions and those belonging to no church on Wednesday to unite to defend justice, peace and the environment and not allow the value of a person to be reduced to "what he produces and what he consumes''.
     
Francis, elected a week ago as the first non-European pope in 1,300 years, met leaders of non-Catholic Christian religions such as Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans and Methodists, and others including Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus.
     
"The Catholic Church is aware of the importance of furthering respect of friendship between men and women of different religious traditions,'' the Argentine pontiff told the religious leaders in an audience at the Vatican.
     
Speaking in Italian in the frescoed Sala Clementina, he said members of all religions and even non-believers had to recognize their joint responsibility "to our world, to all of creation, which we have to love and protect.
     
''We must do much for the good of the poorest, the weak, and those who are suffering, to favor justice, promote reconciliation and build peace," he said.
     
Francis told the religious leaders to fight ''a one-dimensional vision of a human person, according to which man is reduced to what he produces and what he consumes," which he said was ''one of the most dangerous snares of our times".
     
While he said history had shown that any attempt to eliminate God had produced ''much violence," he reached out to those who seek truth, goodness and beauty without belonging to any religion.
     
''They are our precious allies in the commitment to defend human dignity, build a more peaceful coexistence among people and protect nature with care," he said.
     
Francis' description of people who belong to no religion as ''precious allies" in the search for truth was a marked contrast to the attitude of former Pope Benedict, who sometimes left non-Catholics feeling that he saw them as second-class believers.
     
Since his election a week ago, Francis has set the tone for a new, humbler papacy, calling on the Church to defend the weak and protect the environment.
     
In another sign of his simpler style, Francis addressed the religious leaders while seated in a beige armchair and not the usual elaborate throne used in the ornate hall for audiences.
     
Catholic-Jewish Commitment     

''I feel a great deal of excitement and optimism and hope," said Jerusalem-based Rabbi David Rosen, International Director of Inter-religious Affairs for the American Jewish Committee.
     
''He is deeply committed to the Catholic-Jewish relationship," said Rosen, who attended the meeting.
     
Yahya Pallavicini, a leader of Italy's Muslim community, said he was impressed by the pope's insistence of inter-religious friendship.
     
''Friendship is a core way to increase brotherhood between believers and also to increase the deepness of the dignity of humanity," he said after the meeting.
     
''We can't consider man only as a consumer or as someone who has to be considered only in terms of the market but as a believer and as a person who has the holiness in his heart."
     
Before his address, the pope had a private meeting with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew from Istanbul, who attended Francis's inaugural Mass on Tuesday.
     
It was the first time the spiritual head of Orthodox Christians had attended a Roman pope's inaugural Mass since the Great Schism between western and eastern Christianity in 1054.
     
At Wednesday's meeting, Francis called Bartholomew ''my brother Andrew," a reference to the apostle who was the brother of St. Peter and was the first bishop of the Church of Byzantium.
     
Francis also held a private session with Metropolitan Hilarion, the foreign minister of the Russian Orthodox Church, the largest in the Orthodox world.
     
Also at Wednesday's meeting was Abe Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League in the United States.
     
Foxman is a Jew born in Poland in 1940 and saved from the Holocaust by his Polish Catholic nanny, who raised him as a Catholic during the war and then returned him to his family. His parents survived the war but 14 family members were killed.
     
''I asked him to bless the memory of the Catholic nanny who saved my life and he said he would," Foxman said.
     
Archbishop of York John Sentamu led a delegation from the Anglican Communion.
     
Other guests included World Council of Churches General Secretary Rev Olav Fykse Tveit and Jordan's Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad, head of an Islamic group that launched a dialogue with the Vatican after Pope Benedict angered Muslims in 2006 with a speech that implied their faith was violent and irrational.

Iraq, Afghan wars will cost to $4 trillion to $6 trillion, Harvard study says



By Ernesto Londoño, Published: March 28


The U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq will cost taxpayers $4 trillion to $6 trillion, taking into account the medical care of wounded veterans and expensive repairs to a force depleted by more than a decade of fighting, according to a new study by a Harvard researcher.
Washington increased military benefits in late 2001 as the nation went to war, seeking to quickly bolster its talent pool and expand its ranks. Those decisions and the protracted nation-building efforts launched in both countries will generate expenses for years to come, Linda J. Bilmes, a public policy professor, wrote in the report that was released Thursday.
“As a consequence of these wartime spending choices, the United States will face constraints in funding investments in personnel and diplomacy, research and development and new military initiatives,” the report says. “The legacy of decisions taken during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars will dominate future federal budgets for decades to come.”
Bilmes said the United States has spent almost $2 trillion already for the military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. Those costs, she said, are only a fraction of the ultimate price tag. The biggest ongoing expense will be providing medical care and disability benefits to veterans of the two conflicts.
“Historically, the bill for these costs has come due many decades later,” the report says, noting that the peak disbursement of disability payments for America’s warriors in the last century came decades after the conflicts ended. “Payments to Vietnam and first Gulf War veterans are still climbing.”
Spending borrowed money to pay for the wars has also made them more expensive, the study noted. The conflicts have added $2 trillion to America’s debt, representing roughly 20 percent of the debt incurred between 2001 and 2012.
Bilmes’s estimate provides a higher range than another authoritative study on the same issue by Brown University’s Eisenhower Research Project. Brown researchers put the price tag at roughly $4 trillion.
Both figures are dramatically higher than what U.S. officials projected they would spend when they were planning to go to war in Iraq. Stephen Friedman, a senior White House official, left government in 2002 after irking his colleagues by publicly estimating that the Iraq war could end up costing up to $200 billion.
It’s unclear how long Washington will keep paying bills for that conflict, which dragged on for nearly a decade and became deeply unpopular at home and in Iraq. Judging from history, it could take quite awhile. The Associated Press recently foundthat the federal government is still cutting checks each month to relatives of Civil War veterans nearly 150 years after the end of that war.

Homeland Security Demands “Obedience” in Message to Agents
Alex Newman   New American  March 29, 2013

The Obama administration and its controversial Department of Homeland Security are under fire for sending what is being described as a “chilling” message to U.S. Border Patrol agents demanding “obedience,”Liberty News Network (LNN) national correspondent and law-enforcement advocate Andy Ramirez revealed in an exclusive video report (see below) calling for Congress to investigate. The word “obedience” was defined on the official TV screens as: “quickly and cheerfully carrying out the direction of those who are responsible for me.”
Reliable sources inside the agency confirmed to Ramirez, who also serves as president of the Law Enforcement Officers Advocates Council (LEOAC), that the controversial message demanding “obedience” was displayed for agents on TV monitors in the San Diego and Tucson sectors last week. In his explosive video for LNN exposing the scheme, Ramirez also provided a picture of the “propaganda” graphic that he obtained from a source within Customs and Border Protection (CBP) who requested anonymity (see photo above).
“This ‘Obedience’ order just continues a long recent history of intimidation going back to the 2004 ‘gag order’ by then-Chief David Aguilar,” Ramirez told The New American in an interview, referring to a controversial non-disclosure agreement purporting to bar agents from releasing important information to lawmakers and the media. “The primary point of this all is to purge the patrol of experienced agents who refuse to go along to get along.”
Calling for congressional hearings to investigate the controversial “obedience” message, Ramirez said the scheme was frightening. “Cheerfully?!” he exclaimed about the graphic, sounding bewildered. “Responses I’m hearing from sources at the Border Patrol include the words Orwellian, creepy, sickening, craziness, Nazi handbook — and those are just the ones I can actually repeat.”
Ramirez also wondered what happens to Border Patrol agents who do not “cheerfully” engage in “obedience” upon demand, especially if orders included instructions to violate the Constitution, for example. “Do they go to one of the long-rumored FEMA camps guarded by employees and DHS armored personnel carriers?” he asked. “Perhaps we hear loudspeakers playing ‘Deutschland, Deutschland Uber Alles’ — something out of Hitler’s Nazi Germany?”
Alternatively, Ramirez speculated half-seriously, there could be an even more chilling fate awaiting those who refuse to carry out unlawful or unconstitutional orders. “Are they now classified as domestic terrorists, in which case a yet-to-be-identified official at the Department of Justice can have them taken out with a drone strike?” he wondered. “As we just heard in recent congressional hearings, that’s pretty much what can now happen; a drone strike on an individual who is considered a terrorist on U.S. soil.
According to Ramirez, both the Border Patrol and Customs have already engaged in a number of “purges” where agents close to retirement were forced to retire even though they still had room for advancement. “They want employees who are loyal to DHS and CBP, which is why the old BP logos and decals have been pretty much removed off the vehicles,” the LNN correspondent told The New American in an exclusive interview.
“Agencies like CBP, ICE, TSA, and the like were placed under DHS’ roof for command and control purposes,” Ramirez continued. “However the real purpose has been to keep the facts from reaching the public. In point of fact, DHS is a propaganda ministry in its own right, given the blatant misinformation released by top officials. In the wrong hands it could easily act in a way similar to ‘State Security’.”
In addition to exposing the controversial image used to condition Border Patrol agents into blind obedience, Ramirez took the opportunity to blast the agency’s leadership as well. “As the Border Patrol enters its 89th year since it was established, there is no figure who has done more to destroy this honorable agency than David Aguilar and his handpicked cronies, including current national Chief Mike Fisher,” he said.
The longtime advocate for Border Patrol agents, who has testified before Congress on multiple occasions, also noted that management was destroying morale. Among other concerns, Ramirez pointed to pay increases for top leadership amid sequester even as agents face potentially massive pay cuts. He blasted what he said was top officials’ efforts to prevent agents from enforcing U.S. immigration laws, too.
Another concern highlighted by Ramirez was the U.S. government’s willingness to “sacrifice agents as scalps through the Justice Department upon request of the Mexican government.” He was referring, of course, to the now-infamous prosecution of Border Patrol agent Jesus “Chito” Diaz, Jr., after Mexican officials complained that the agent had allegedly pulled on the handcuffs of a young drug smuggler.
Indeed, the Mexican government seems to be rapidly expanding its influence on the American side of the border. Ramirez slammed what he described as the U.S. federal government ceding control over the border to the Mexican military, drug cartels, and human smugglers. Notoriously corrupt authorities from Mexico now have “virtual oversight impunity” at U.S. Border Patrol facilities, he explained.
Finally, Ramirez lambasted top officials’ participation in the cover-up of the murder of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry, who waskilled by drug smugglers apparently armed by the Obama administration under operation “Fast and Furious.” While the explosive scandal and the subsequent cover-up eventually resulted in Attorney General Eric Holder being held in criminal contempt of Congress, justice has yet to be served.
“It’s no wonder morale has been broken at the Border Patrol,” Ramirez concluded.
The New American reached out to the Department of Homeland Security with a number of questions about the “obedience” scandal. Who approved this? Is it from DHS, CBP, or some other agency? Are such messages being used in other DHS components? How does DHS respond to criticism from Ramirez and agents about this message? Does DHS consider this type of messaging to be appropriate? Are there any exceptions to “obedience”? What happens if agents do not “quickly and cheerfully” carry out “the direction of those who are responsible” for them?
While most of the questions were left unanswered, Bill Brooks with the CBP Office of Public Affairs offered a brief statement about the issue. “Information Display System slides are meant to communicate important and useful information to personnel,” Brooks told The New American in an e-mail. “This example falls short of that criteria, and has already been removed.”
For Ramirez, however, though he was glad to hear that the offensive slides have already been removed, the official “non-denial” response was not enough. “Well apparently CBP has responded to the Obedience slide, but refused to comment on who ordered it, and the other facts I reported for LNN,” he said. “Clearly they’re not denying it.”
Still, even though the slide is supposedly gone, Congress needs to get involved and provide real oversight of DHS, Ramirez explained. The other alternative is to continue allowing the “out-of-control bureaucracy” to run roughshod over their employees, the rights of Americans, and constitutional principles. For Ramirez, doing nothing should not even be an option.
“Congress needs to publicly investigate this ‘Obedience’ slide as well as the DHS purchase of over 1 billion rounds of ammo,FEMA camps, and armored personnel carriers, for there are many serious implications involved here,” Ramirez concluded, calling on officials to make a public apology to agents. “Also, the officials responsible for this blatant attempt to intimidate our Border Patrol agents must be terminated with the same loss of benefits as employees who get terminated on trumped up charges I’ve documented over the past eight years.”
Who is Adam Lanza? Did He Ever Exist?

Submitted by Denise B

As many of you know, this entire event at Sandy Hook, CT leaves a lot more questions than answers, and with each passing day the story seems to get more convoluted and irrational. I decided to do some of my own digging into Adam Lanza’s background, and so far I have been unable to even confirm that this person actually even exists.

I did two separate searches on Intelius and Spokeo and each of them resulted in the same baffling results. Both Nancy and Peter Lanza are listed in Sandy Brook, CT and their family tree shows Nancy and Peter Lanza with only one child....Ryan Lanza. Adam Lanza does not show up in the family tree at either website and searches for Adam Lanza from CT, yield only two results, which are clearly not him.

Here's one of Intelius on Nancy Lanza listing with only two relatives Peter and Ryan.




The search results are posted below. If you scroll down you will see that on each of Nancy, Peter’s and Ryan’s searches a family tree is given of all known members:
Intelius Search Results:
Search Results of Adam Lanza:
http://www.intelius.com/results.php?ReportType=1&qf=Adam&qmi...
Search Results of Ryan Lanza:
http://www.intelius.com/results.php?ReportType=1&qf=Ryan&qmi...
Search Results of Nancy Lanza:
http://www.intelius.com/results.php?ReportType=1&qf=Nancy&qm...
Search Results for Peter Lanza:
http://www.intelius.com/results.php?ReportType=1&qf=Peter+&q...
Spokeo.com Search Results:
Search for Nancy J. Lanza:
http://www.spokeo.com/search?q=Nancy+Lanza&s8=t55#Connecticu...
Search for Peter J. Lanza
http://www.spokeo.com/search?q=Peter+Lanza&s8=t55#Connecticu...
Search for Adam Lanza:
http://www.spokeo.com/search?q=Adam+Lanza&s8=t55#Connecticut


There is something very, very wrong with this whole situation. How is it possible that two different websites show the Lanza family of consisting of only 3 people and neither one has any record of Adam Lanza? Who exactly is Adam Lanza? 20 Children’s lives have been lost and I think we all owe it those children to get the bottom of what really happened at Sandy Hook, because more and more it is looking like the truth is not being told.