“Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.”
(Luke 7:47)

She Loved Much

Dear Friends,

The above verse, we believe, can be very thought provoking. Below is the verse within the context of the entire story.

“And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee's house, and sat down to meat. And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment, And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment.

Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.

And Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have somewhat to say unto thee. And he saith, Master, say on.

There was a certain creditor which had two debtors: the one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty. And when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both. Tell me therefore, which of them will love him most?

Simon answered and said, I suppose that he, to whom he forgave most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly judged.

And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head. Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the time I came in hath not ceased to kiss my feet.

My head with oil thou didst not anoint: but this woman hath anointed my feet with ointment.

Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.

And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven.” Luke 7

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary on Lukw 7:36-50

“None can truly perceive how precious Christ is, and the glory of the gospel, except the broken-hearted. But while they feel they cannot enough express self-abhorrence on account of sin, and admiration of his mercy, the self-sufficient will be disgusted, because the gospel encourages such repenting sinners. The Pharisee, instead of rejoicing in the tokens of the woman's repentance, confined his thoughts to her former bad character. But without free forgiveness none of us can escape the wrath to come; this our gracious Saviour has purchased with his blood, that he may freely bestow it on every one that believes in him. Christ, by a parable, forced Simon to acknowledge that the greater sinner this woman had been, the greater love she ought to show to Him when her sins were pardoned. Learn here, that sin is a debt; and all are sinners, are debtors to Almighty God. Some sinners are greater debtors; but whether our debt be more or less, it is more than we are able to pay. God is ready to forgive; and his Son having purchased pardon for those who believe in him, his gospel promises it to them, and his Spirit seals it to repenting sinners, and gives them the comfort. Let us keep far from the proud spirit of the Pharisee, simply depending upon and rejoicing in Christ alone, and so be prepared to obey him more zealously, and more strongly to recommend him unto all around us. The more we express our sorrow for sin, and our love to Christ, the clearer evidence we have of the forgiveness of our sins. What a wonderful change does grace make upon a sinner's heart and life, as well as upon his state before God, by the full remission of all his sins through faith in the Lord Jesus!”

“As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one.” Romans 3:10

“I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” Luke 5:32

Who are the “righteous” Jesus is talking about in this verse?

“Self-righteousness (also called sanctimoniousness, sententiousness, and holier-than-thou attitudes) is a feeling or display of (usually smug) moral superiority derived from a sense that one's beliefs, actions, or affiliations are of greater virtue than those of the average person. Self-righteous individuals are often intolerant of the opinions and behaviors of others.” Wikipedia

What this amounts to is that it is very difficult for people who believe they are morally superior and rightous to have as great a love for Jesus because they do not appreciate the great sacrifice He made in redeeming them from their sins. They generally don't have as much gratatude as someone who knows they are a sinner and are completely reliant on the saving grace of Jesus Christ.

Have a great week ahead.

***

theguardian

Jerusalem synagogue attack sparks fear of descent into religious war

Fears spread that peace cannot prevail in aftermath of murder of four rabbis and a Druze policeman

The funeral of Druze Israeli police officer Zidan Sif in the village of Yanuh-Jat. Photograph: Lior Mizrahi/Getty Images

Peter Beaumont in Jerusalem

Wednesday 19 November 2014 14.40 EST

On the stairs into the Kehillat Bnei Torah synagogue in west Jerusalem on Wednesday – where four rabbis and a Druze policeman were killed by two Palestinian cousins in a morning attack the day before – the bloodstains had not quite been expunged.

A bullet hole was visible inside the synagogue, while four memorial candles burned for the four rabbis as worshippers and politicians came and went.

Inside David Herscowitz, who moved to Israel from Gateshead in the 1990s and is a member of the local neighbourhood watch, insisted the ultra-orthodox community in Har Nof district would emerge stronger from the tragedy.

“People are concerned,” he said, “and people will take precautions. No one expected this to happen here. We are religious here. And we believe God has a plan. Which is why you will not hear people here shouting for revenge and arguing about whether we should talk peace or not talk peace or fight. We leave that to the politicians.”

While those like Herscowitz – including many at the synagogue – have responded to the killings by insisting on their faith as a bulwark against the recent deadly violence in Jerusalem, there have been others warning that the recent escalation is in danger of being ever more coloured by religious differences.

And it is a sense of alarm that is spreading. On Wednesday, Pope Francis voiced dismay at the “alarming increase in tension in Jerusalem” and appealed to both sides to take the “courageous decisions” needed to achieve peace.

Jordan, custodian of Muslim holy places in east Jerusalem, said it was following “the serious situation” in the city, condemning all acts of violence and calling for “restraint and calm”.

In Israel too, the justice minister, Tzipi Livni, has warned of her fears that the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is becoming religious: “And a religious war cannot be solved.”

In the aftermath of the synagogue attack deputy finance minister Mickey Levy, a former police commander, warned of the same risk.

The head of Israel’s domestic security agency, Shin Bet chief Yoram Cohen, has also weighed in. On Tuesday he told an Israeli parliamentary committee that much of the tension since the summer was being driven by still strong anger among Palestinians over the murder of teenager Mohammed Abu Khdeir, as well as a deep anxiety over perceived Jewish encroachment into the Noble Sanctuary, known to Jews as the Temple Mount.

The situation is worsening already hostile relations between Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas. Netanyahu has accused Abbas of inciting recent violence by calling on Palestinians to defend the religious site, while Abbas has accused Netanyahu of fanning the flames by allowing provocative visits by members of the Knesset and his own party as part of their campaign for prayer rights there.

The theme has been taken up in the Israeli media. Under the headline “wave of Palestinian terror starting to resemble a religious war”, Amos Harel in Haaretz has blamed both sides, the Israeli government for contributing “to the emphasis on the religious component of the conflict by demonstrating helplessness in the face of recent efforts by right-wing [Jewish] activists to change the status quo regarding Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount”. On the Palestinian side, he added: “Defending al-Aqsa Mosque [on the holy site] provides an appropriate excuse for the recent terror perpetrators.”

The same language was echoed by Ben Caspit in Ma’ariv, who criticised Netanyahu’s response on Tuesday. “The true danger,” wrote Caspit, “which Netanyahu did not mention yesterday is that the wave of terror will turn into a true religious war, such as has not yet occurred here: they will kill Jews in a synagogue, Jews will burn mosques in their towns, and the next big thing could be a terror attack on the Temple Mount.”

The reality is that a religious subtext to the violence has become increasingly difficult to ignore.

In interviews with the families of the men behind a string of recent deadly Palestinian attacks, relatives – talking to the Guardian – more often than not have emphasised how “religious” the men were, and the importance to them of al-Aqsa mosque.

On Wednesday, in the ruins of the apartment in the east Jerusalem neighbourhood of Silwan once occupied by Abdelrahman al-Shaludi, 21, who was shot dead by police after killing a three-month-old baby and a woman in a hit-and-run attack, someone has painted graffito on the wall. The message, written in the home demolished with explosives a few hours earlier by Israeli forces in retribution for the attack, read: “God will supersede above all of the arrogant.”

Sitting opposite the house the imam of the local mosque, Moussa Odeh, supplied his own interpretation of recent events. “Five years ago the conflict in Silwan was about settlers coming in. The issue today is al-Aqsa. Al-Aqsa is our faith. It is our essence. People are willing to give up everything for it.”

The issue of al-Aqsa – important as it is – has become the metaphor and distillation of a wider mistrust on the Palestinian side that has accrued a visceral meaning in recent months. A campaign by far-right Israeli politicians to change the status quo at the sensitive holy site in the Old City has been accompanied by increased visits that until recently Netanyahu’s government has been unwilling or unable to control. That in turn has led to friction, restrictions and a controversial closure that has contributed to a cycle of tension.

Reassurances by Netanyahu and senior ministers that Israel has no intention of changing the status quo that allows Jews to visit but not pray have not been believed. When you speak to Palestinians in Jerusalem, from the grand mufti of al-Aqsa to imams such as Odeh and ordinary people, many will insist that – to the contrary – they believe an Israeli plan exists to divide the Noble Sanctuary, and rob them of their patrimony.

For those such as Odeh – who does not believe that peace can prevail – that implies an inevitable conflict that can only get worse until one side prevails.

Back at the Kehillat Bnei Torah synagogue, Herscowitz was fearful that more violence might be ahead he did not believe it was inevitable. “I think it can be pulled back. It does not have to get worse. It doesn’t need to continue. I am hopeful,” he added.

His message was echoed in a visit to the synagogue by an interfaith delegation of Christians, Jews and Muslims who visited the scene of the murders, although absent from the meeting were Muslim authorities from Jerusalem and senior Israeli rabbis.

“People from all religions which are here in the Holy Land want to express the common belief that this is not the way,” said Rabbi Michael Melchior, a former Israeli legislator active in interfaith efforts. “We can have our differences, political differences, our religious differences, but this is not the way.”

***

The Atlantic

The Dangers of the Temple Mount

Clashes over the Jerusalem holy site can tip a political battle between Israelis and Palestinians into a religious battle between Jews and Muslims.

ADAM CHANDLER

NOV 15 2014, 8:30 AM ET

Darren Whiteside/Reuters

On Friday, protests and clashes between Israelis and Palestinians continued throughout Israel and the West Bank. From northern Israel to northern Jerusalem to Hebron, there were reports of protesters and police throwing rocks and stun grenades, respectively.

INSERT IN_ARTICLE AD

Surprisingly or perhaps miraculously, one place where there wasn't violence on Friday was the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. The central point of focus in the recent unrest in Israel and the West Bank, the Temple Mount, the same location as the al-Aqsa Mosque, is Judaism's holiest site and Islam's third-holiest site.

Late last month, Yehuda Glick, a rabbi advocating for Jews to be allowed to pray on the Temple Mount (which is forbidden by the Israeli Supreme Court) was shot several times in an assassination attempt by a Palestinian man. After the assailant was killed in a later confrontation with Israeli forces, violent clashes ensued and, in light of the violence, Israeli security forces decided to fully close the Temple Mount for the first time in over a decade.

As things tend to do in the Levant, the situation got bad in a hurry. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas called the closure "a declaration of war," riots, knife and car attacks followed, and the killing of a Palestinian man in a northern Israel town by police brought more riots and clashes.

On Friday, for the first time in weeks, the Temple Mount was opened to Muslim worshippers of all ages, including younger Palestinians, who are frequently barred from attending Friday prayers when tensions in Jerusalem are high.

Israeli poet Yehuda Amichai once wrote, "What does Jerusalem need? It doesn’t need a mayor, it needs a ringmaster." In his poem "In Jerusalem," Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish adds:

I was walking down a slope and thinking to myself: How do the narrators disagree over what light said about a stone? Is it from a dimly lit stone that wars flare up?

The Old City of Jerusalem is that fortunate one-third of a square mile in the world where holy sites of the three major monotheistic religions are intimately contained. In its four quarters are the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the Via Dolorosa, the Western Wall, and the Temple Mount, upon which sit the al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock, an Islamic shrine and one of the Middle East's most recognizable buildings.

For Jews, as Ruth Margalit explains, the Temple Mount "is where Abraham almost sacrificed Isaac, and where God gathered the dust that created Adam. It’s there, the Bible says, that King Solomon built the First Temple, circa 1000 B.C., where Herod refurbished the Second Temple, and where Titus tore it down, in 70 A.D. Its inner sanctuary is known as the Holy of Holies—a place where no one but the High Priest was allowed to tread. The Western Wall, the extant remnant of the wall that flanked the courtyard of the Second Temple, is the holiest site in Judaism."

Owing to the delicate nature of everything associated with the site, the name Temple Mount doesn't even cover all of the theological bases. Last week, the Palestinian Liberation Organization demanded that media stop using the term "Temple Mount" to describe the venue, which it says doesn't "adhere to international law." The Temple Mount, the widely used term for the site in English, is known as the Haram al-Sharif or Noble Sanctuary by Muslims. (Cautious diplomats employ all of the aforementioned names.)

The Al-Aqsa Mosque Compound is the name for which the PLO was lobbying. The context was political, but the subtext was religious; in essence, saying that Jewish claims to the site (and Jerusalem in general) are bogus. It would not be a stretch to say that this is very much a standard part of political playbook of Palestinian and Islamist groups.

Of course, this dynamic goes both ways. In 2010, Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel took out full-page ads in the International Herald Tribune, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, and The New York Times in which he talked about the sanctity of Jerusalem for Jews. But he couldn't resist making this point:

For me, the Jew that I am, Jerusalem is above politics. It is mentioned more than six hundred times in Scripture -- and not a single time in the Koran.

"The Virgin Mary is mentioned a lot more in the Koran than she is in the Bible," Hussein Ibish of the American Task Force on Palestine told me. "But I don't know anyone who would claim on the basis of that, that the Virgin Mary is more holy to Muslims than to Roman Catholics."

While Wiesel's claim is technically true, "the farthest mosque" mentioned in the Koran is widely believed to be the al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem near which the Islamic prophet Muhammad tethers his horse on the way to heaven. Jerusalem is also mentioned several times in the Hadith, a collection of the reported teaching, sayings, and stories of Muhammad. Regardless, the talking points put forth by the PLO and Wiesel are two examples among countless number by partisans on each side trying to discredit the other.

It is in this religious realm that everything grows inexorably more dangerous. Israeli leaders have pointed to the recent violence and blamed their Palestinian counterparts for incitement. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' decision to call this month's closure of the Temple Mount "a declaration of war" had its echoes among Palestinian groups and others who frequently allege that Israel is plotting to destroy the al-Aqsa Mosque.

"It always begins with the claim that Jews are threatening al-Aqsa," Michael Oren, Israel's former ambassador to the United States, told me last week. "And to the best of my mind, the Jews have never threatened al-Aqsa." Oren, a historian before his ambassadorship, cited similar violent riots in 1921, 1929, 1936, and 1947 in which he says that claim was used to incite violence.

The case of Yehuda Glick, the Religious Zionist rabbi who was shot last month, straddles this incendiary divide. Glick is a prominent advocate for Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount, a fringe cause generally frowned upon by most Jews as a violation of Jewish law.

"It's problematic in the Jewish sense," Oren explained. "The Talmud, after the destruction of the Second Temple, put strict prescriptions around Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount because the exact location of the Holy of Holies is not known."

Glick's mission may not appeal to many on religious grounds, but it resonates for other reasons. "There's complete freedom of worship in Jerusalem for everyone but the Jews," Oren added. "Jews are not allowed to pray formally on their holiest site. It's one of those absurdities."

Ibish counters that the issue of Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount "registers profound alarm" for Palestinians especially when placed alongside a number of aggravating factors in Jerusalem. Among the recent developments: the growth of the Jewish population in the Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem (plus Israeli settlements in the West Bank outside Jerusalem), the light rail system that runs across East and West Jerusalem (once seen a possible mechanism for coexistence, but recently a new target for Palestinian attacks), and even Israeli archeological excavations.

"On a practical level, it seems part of a series of things that may be religious or not; measures or gestures or statements, a whole melange of things, by different actors among Jewish-Israeli society whether the government, activist groups, pols, that all collectively seem to send the message that 'We are here to stay, we are here to rule, this belongs to us' and to give the impression that compromise on East Jerusalem is not going to happen."

Ibish and Oren both agree that the religious aspect of the conflict over the Temple Mount is exploited to create a frenzy. For groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad, Ibish says, the issue is a convenient tool in their efforts to "foment uprisings" in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Beyond the immediate borders, the issue of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount is frequently seized upon by Islamists.

"That's the part of Palestine and the part of the Palestinian struggle that has universal resonance with Muslims from Indonesia to Morocco and back," Ibish said.

It certainly doesn't help that the holy places in Jerusalem also play an integral part in the Armageddon narrative among evangelical Christians. I'd say that's another story altogether, but it's really not. Should the centerpiece of the conflict continue to zero in on the supernatural, a political reconciliation naturally gets harder to manage. As Ibish explained:

The danger is that these narratives seem to push this conflict away from being an ethno-national struggle between two competing ethno-national projects over land and power in a given area, which is a resolvable struggle, into being a religious conflict, a religious apocalyptic confrontation over the will of God and the nature of reality and the holy places, which is not nearly as resolvable.

He added: "If you think the Israel-Palestinian conflict is elusive in terms of solutions, try that one."

***

RT

Israel will 'never' limit settlement building in East Jerusalem – Israeli FM

Published time: November 16, 2014 18:28

Israel will never stop its settlement constructions in occupied East Jerusalem, according to Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman.

“One thing should be clear: we will never accept the definition of building in Jewish neighborhoods of Jerusalem as settlement activity,” Lieberman told a news conference. “We won't accept any limitation on building in Jewish areas of [East] Jerusalem.”

Lieberman’s comments come just four days after Israel approved plans to construct some 200 homes in Ramot, despite clashes in the region prompted by settlement expansion.

Settlement expansion has been a controversial issue; Palestinians regard the holy city of Jerusalem as the capital of a future state, and strongly oppose any Israeli expansion.

Washington responded to the news negatively, reasserting its opposition to the construction of settlements in East Jerusalem. It stated that Lieberman’s announcement may “exacerbate this difficult situation on the ground and...will not contribute to efforts to reduce the tension.”

Lieberman’s comments were made during a meeting with his German counterpart, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who later expressed hope that peace talks be reignited.

“Unilateral decisions pose an obstacle to the success of negotiations,” Steinmeier said, according to Reuters.

Earlier this week, the US State Department expressed deep concern that Israel’s actions would hamper efforts to reach a two-state solution for Israelis and Palestinians.

Israel could soon find itself in trouble with Brussels, as any further attempts to pose obstacles to a two-state solution with occupied Palestine could result in sanctions, Haaretz revealed on Sunday, citing a ‘confidential’ EU document.

“The peace process is in deep freeze, but the situation on the ground is not. There is big frustration in Europe and zero tolerance for settlement activity. This paper is part of the internal brainstorming being done in Brussels these days, about what can be done to keep the two-state solution alive,” a European source told the paper.

In an October statement, Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat said: “We strongly condemn the latest Israeli announcement to expand its illegal settlements in and around occupied East Jerusalem, the capital of the State of Palestine.”

“This announcement amounts to evidence of intent to further commit crimes defined by, and punishable under international law,” he added.

Israel claimed East Jerusalem during the 1967 Six-Day War, with its annexation never being recognized internationally. Since then, Israel has built numerous settlements which are now under military regulation, with different laws being applied arbitrarily to certain areas.

Some 500,000 Israelis have settled in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, among 2.4 million Palestinians. The Israeli occupied territories have been seeking full Palestinian statehood and independence from Israel for decades. But despite international criticism, the Israeli government encourages the Jewish population in the West Bank to build new settlements.

***

MailOnline

Baroness Warsi’s blunder over Jerusalem rabbi massacre: Peer slapped down after comparing Palestinians ‘storming’ synagogue with Israelis ‘storming’ mosque

• Former Foreign Office Minister rebuked by Conservatives over Twitter post

• Likened killing of four in Israel to Israeli extremists storming Al Aqsa

• Tory chairman Grant Shapps insists she 'speaks for herself, not the party'

By DANIEL MARTIN FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 12:25 EST, 18 November 2014 | UPDATED: 19:36 EST, 18 November 2014

A former Tory foreign minister was rebuked by her party chairman after comparing the deaths of four people in a synagogue in Israel to protests at the Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem.

Baroness Warsi, who resigned in August over the government’s policy on Gaza, tweeted: ‘Israeli extremists storm Al Aqsa & intimidate worshippers – Palestinian extremists storm synagogue & kill 4 worshippers.’

Her comments sparked claims that she was comparing protests at a mosque to the murderous attack by two Palestinians armed with a gun and axe.

A British-born father and three American citizens were killed in the attack by Palestinian terrorists.

They were slaughtered in a dawn attack by two cousins who screamed 'god is great' as they attacked at random.

Victim Rabbi Avraham Shmuel Goldberg, described as a 'pillar of the community', was born in Liverpool and held a dual British-Israeli passport.

Mr Goldberg, 68, is a grandfather who lived in Golders Green in London before moving to Israel and was a regular visitor to the synagogue.

The others killed in the attack have been named as Rabbi Moshe Twersky, Rabbi Arieh Kopinsky, 43, and Rabbi Calman Levine, who were all dual US-Israeli nationals. The two terrorists were shot dead after the attack by police.

Thousands of people attended a funeral for Twersky at the Torat Moshe yeshiva in Sanhedria early this afternoon, which was closely followed by a joint funeral for Kupinsky, Levine and Goldberg before sundown - the latter held outside the synagogue where the attack occurred.

Baroness Warsi posted the comments on Twitter at 10.16am. SHe asked another user: 'r u suggesting there is NO link (nt justification) between murders in the synagogue & the weeks of intimidation & attacks.'

Grant Shapps responded on Twitter ‘to be clear’ that the Conservative peer ‘speaks for herself, not the party’. He said: ‘Our prayers are with families of those murdered. No justification for terrorism’.

Thousands of people attended a joint funeral for Kupinsky, Levine and Goldberg before sundown - held outside the synagogue where the attack occurred

Baroness Warsi replied to insist she was calling for ‘justice for all’ rather than ‘hypocrisy’.

‘Both Palestinian & Israeli lives have been lost in recent weeks at the hands of extremists,’ she wrote.

‘Both David_Cameron & Ed_Miliband say a Palestinian life is equal to an Israeli life so let's ALL condemn the killing on BOTH sides.’

She also asked one commenter whether they believed there was no link between the murders at the synagogue and weeks of protest at the Al Aqsa mosque.

The Al Aqsa mosque, on Temple Mount in the heart of the Old City of Jerusalem, is one of the holiest sites for Muslims. Temple Mount is also a holy site for Jews, although traditionally they worshipped outside the walled area itself – at the Western Wall.

In recent months, some Jews have visited Temple Mount itself, which has been fiercely resisted by Muslims worshipping at the site.

Jews have had to be protected by armed guards as they tour the site, with some people believing the visits are deliberately aggravating the situation.

Later, Baroness Warsi wrote on the Huffington Post UK website: ‘These murders must be condemned. I condemn them, as I have loudly condemned previous instances of Palestinian violence against civilians.’

But she said: ‘My successor as Conservative Party chairman, Grant Shapps, is only too willing to criticise Palestinian terror while refusing to vote in favour of a Palestinian state in parliament, and give young Palestinians hope and dignity.‘Remember: the indisputable lesson of modern Middle East history is that violence breeds violence.’

***

WND

'SCIENCE SHATTERED': HAND OF GOD SUDDENLY REVEALED?

'Everything we think we know about our universe is wrong'

Published: November 16, 2014

DREW ZAHN

In the late 1800s, Albert A. Michelson, the first American to win the Nobel Prize in the sciences, devised an experiment to prove the Earth is moving through space, through a medium for bearing light called the “aether.”

If he could show that light was slowed down by being fired into an aether headwind, like a swimmer swimming against a stream, Michelson reasoned, it would prove the Earth’s motion through space.

But the experiment didn’t work the way he expected. In fact, it proved the opposite.

The world of science was baffled. Was the Earth not moving?

Eventually, however, another Albert, with the last name of Einstein, developed a theory called special relativity to explain Michelson’s results.

It wouldn’t be the last time, a startling new documentary called “The Principle” suggests, that scientists had to scramble to make their theories about space fit observable facts and experiments that didn’t jive with their prevalent understandings.

Increasingly, bizarre and unproven theories such as the mysterious “dark matter,” “dark energy,” “multiverses” and the creation of “everything from nothing,” the moviemakers claim, have been thought up to try to make the hard data fit with an underlying assumption science has accepted since the 16th century.

But what if instead of dreaming up wild theories to explain away inconsistencies, the moviemakers suggest, scientists allowed the facts to challenge the underlying assumption itself? What if everything science believes about space … is wrong?

“The Principle,” which is opening now in select cities around the U.S., boldly challenges the widely accepted Copernican Principle, named after Renaissance astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus. He famously argued Earth revolves around the sun and went further to suggest Earth is in no central or favored place in the universe.

We inhabit, in famous cosmologist Carl Sagan’s words, “an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people.”

Hogwash, the makers of “The Principle” say.

“Everything we think we know about our universe is wrong,” the movie’s trailer asserts.

Citing Isaac Newton, various current astronomers, Einstein himself and even defenders of the Copernican Principle, the documentary makes the case that the data science is discovering indicate the entire known universe is pointing directly at Earth.

“We are in a special place,” argues one of the voices quoted in the documentary. “I do believe that the universe was created by God.”

Rick DeLano, writer and producer of “The Principle,” declares the “question of our place in the cosmos is the greatest scientific detective story in all of history.”

“The world has been shaped by two great assertions: One places us in the center of it all, and the other one relegates us to utter insignificance. Amazingly, ‘The Principle’ is the first documentary to examine this persistent puzzle at the heart of modern science.”

The film traces the “persistent puzzle” from the ancient astronomer Ptolemy, centuries before Copernicus, to today. But rather than assuming science is at odds with religious faith, as in Galileo’s day, “The Principle” assumes the two dovetail.

“I have great respect for science,” DeLano said. “Where I become offended is when people ignore the evidence. They haven’t proven that something can come from nothing.

“Strong evidence shows there is a special direction in the cosmos, and it points toward Earth. This is a serious claim that could indicate that perhaps the Bible was true in its account of creation … and they’re ignoring it,” he continued. “Experimentation is supposed to be the acid test of an assumption. Experiment trumps all. In the universe, we are told there are no special places – no up, no down, no left, no right. But every experiment tells us we are indeed in a special place, which the scientific community sees as impossible.

“For them to even remotely consider that the Bible could be true is a laughable joke. It’s beyond ignorant,” DeLano said. “The arrogance of the scientific atheist is unbelievable. But as the Bible says, ‘Pride [goeth] before a fall.’

“What they don’t understand is that science and theology have the same author: ‘In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth,’” DeLano concluded. “We have the distinct advantage of having the truth on our side.”

“The Principle” opened Oct. 24 in select theaters in Chicago with plans to expand to Los Angeles and then to various theaters around the country. Those interested in the film can learn more at its website, ThePrincipleMovie.com.

***

Zero Hedge

The New World Order: Does It All Just Boil Down To A Battle For Your Soul?

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/19/2014 22:06 -0500

From its very inception, the Leninist/Marxist ideology of the Soviet Union made it a central priority to dispel and subjugate religious and spiritual expression. The state was “god.” No other god could be allowed to flourish, for if the people were given license and freedom of belief in something beyond themselves and beyond the establishment, they would retain a sense of rebellion. The collectivist philosophy requires the utter destruction of all competitors; otherwise, it can never truly prevail.

Atheism became the cult of choice among the communists, for in an atheist world there is nothing beyond the veil. There is no greater goal and no inherent self. There is no true individualism, only self interest (not the same thing), the trappings of environmental circumstances, and the constant substantiation of the greater good. By extension, there is no inborn moral compass or conscience, only the social fashions and mores of the moment. In such a world, tyrants reign supreme because atheism allows relativism to flourish; and any crime, no matter how heinous, can be rationalized. Beyond this, if you know and study the real history of the rise of communism, you know through great researchers like Antony Sutton that the very fabric of the system would never have existed without the monetary and military aid of international financiers (i.e. the NWO).

The atheist position uses the same arguments I have just made as a reason to remove religion and spirituality from our cultural influences. And in some respects, atheists are right. Religion is a tool that can be exploited to manipulate the masses. Any system of belief that is faith-based can be misinterpreted and abused in order to lure unwitting dupes and mindless followers into the fray of an engineered disaster. Atheists commonly argue that it is the encumbering nature of faith that causes mankind to destroy itself in the name of zealotry and self-righteous ignorance.

The difference, however, is that religious zealots are still required by the confines of their dogma to at least appear as though they follow a moral code. Therefore, they can be exposed as violators of this code and weakened over time. The atheist/collectivist system, though, thrives on the concept that there is no such thing as a moral code and that one is vindicated and heroic if he takes extreme action to prove that traditional morality is a vice, rather than a virtue. Atheists in positions of power often make no attempt to affirm their actions; rather, they demand that society abandon all conscience and sense of natural law. They do not ask for forgiveness; they order you to apologize for your moral compass. Are some atheists good and honorable people? Surely. The point, however, remains; atheism is the new flavor of the era, the increasingly predominant gravitational center of modern culture, the philosophical soil in which the NWO has chosen to grow its globalist experiment.

What atheists don’t seem to grasp is that atheism is itself based on an act of faith: faith in the idea that there is nothing beyond our perceptions of existence. They have no more factual knowledge of what lay at the center of life than any of the religious acolytes they so fondly attack, yet their own hypocrisy is apparently lost on them.

I would not pretend to deny that religion has the ability to create a volatile atmosphere edging toward genocidal tendency, but so does any belief system that assumes it is the paramount of knowledge denying all others. The intellectual intolerance of the socialist atheism of the 20th century spawned a death machine that claimed the lives of millions of people. So, clearly, atheists should be more concerned with the violent tendencies of their own ilk rather than the religious “fiends” they seem so obsessed with. Of course, this is a history modern atheists would rather ignore or rewrite.

I have always been concerned with the dilemma of the collectivist ideology, but even more so in recent months, as our world creeps closer toward global crisis. Crisis always provides circumstance and cover for dangerous philosophical totalitarianism.

Not long ago I came across the column “Some Atheists And Transhumanists Are Asking: Should It Be Illegal To Indoctrinate Kids With Religion?” on Huffington Post. It was written by Zoltan Istvan, a transhumanist and self-proclaimed “visionary and philosopher.”

Firstly, I have a hard time taking anything published by the Huffington Post seriously. Secondly, I have a hard time taking anyone using the name “Zoltan” seriously. Thirdly, I have a hard time taking anyone who labels himself a “visionary” seriously. That said, it is important to study the propaganda of the other side carefully. You never know what kinds of truths you might come across amid all the lies.

The article does not really define what it considers “indoctrination", but I would assume transhumanists and atheists would argue that anything not scientifically proven could become indoctrination. Interestingly, Istvan starts his tirade against the handing down of religious beliefs by admitting that science has added very little to our overall knowledge of the universe. After all, human beings experience only a narrow spectrum of the world around us, and there is indeed much we do not know. For some reason, it does not dawn on atheists that perhaps our limited scientific observations of the universe do not necessarily outweigh or deny the existence of an intelligent design.

In order to distract from their fundamental lack of knowledge, modern collectivist governments and movements have always made the promise of technological utopia and endless abundance in order to sway the populace into supporting establishment power. We will all work far less, or we will never have to work at all. Shelter, food, health and wealth will be provided for us. Our free time will be spent studying the nature of the cosmos and perpetuating the cult of academia, protected by a benevolent technocratic governing body straight out of an episode of “Star Trek.”

Not surprisingly, John Maynard Keynes himself predicted in 1930 that technological advancement and economic abundance would result in a three-hour workday and infinite time to amuse oneself by the year 2030 in his essay “The Economic Possibilities For Our Grandchildren.”

This was the same essay in which Keynes referred to the financial concerns of many at the onset of the Great Depression as “misinterpretations” and “pessimism.”

Transhumanism, a mainstay of global elitism and the New World Order, also uses fantastical images of scientifically created contentment to sell itself to starry-eyed rubes packed into the circus tent of the technocratic carnival. The very essence of the movement is the argument that one day ALL knowledge of the universe will be obtained by mankind and that through this knowledge, we (a select few anyway) will obtain godhood.

Again, as in the Huffington Post column, the claim is that science knows all or will eventually know all and that whatever has not been dissected and observed by science like the conceptions of religion must, therefore, be dubious myth.

Ironically, there is far more scientific evidence of God and spiritual life than there is evidence against. So by the very standards many atheists hold dear, it is they who are peddling indoctrination rather than truth.

In the world of mathematics, the good friend of Albert Einstein, Kurt Godel, is famous (but not as famous as he should be) for writing what would be called the “incompleteness proof.” In mathematics, a proof is a statement that is ALWAYS true and can always be proven true. Godel’s proof shook the very foundations of the mathematical world, because it outlined the fact that all mathematical knowledge is limited by numerical paradox, and that humanity will never be able to define all things through mathematical means.

Global elites such as Bertrand Russell had spent years of effort attempting to prove that mathematics was the unbridled code of the universe and that the universe could be understood in its entirety through the use of numbers. Godel shattered this delusion with his incompleteness proof, establishing once and for all that math is limited, not infinite. The existence of mathematical paradox along with an undefinable “infinity” lends credence to the religious view that there are indeed some things man will never know, but at least he has the ability to prove that he can never know them.

In the world of quantum physics, the work of Werner Heisenberg, along with that of many other scientists, has shown that the very mechanics of the world around us are not at all what they seem and that traditional physics is only a hollow shell of knowledge limited by our ability to observe.

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle dictates that the observer of a particular physical state always affects the object being observed, making it impossible to know all the data necessary at one time to predict the future of that object. If a person hoped to become a god, he would certainly need to be able to tell the future; and to tell the future, one would need the ability to observe and record every aspect of every particle interacting in the environment around him. Any unknown quantity could change the outcome of any particular event. Heisenberg found that particles act very differently depending on how they are observed. In some experiments, he even discovered that individual particles appeared to be in two places at the same time, thus making them wholly unpredictable.

This behavior in the building blocks of matter is confounding to many in the realm of physics. Add to it the fact that scientists remain fixed on an endless and apparently futile quest to find the base particle that makes up the universe, and once again we find that the dreams of the transhumanist atheists to attain godhood fall terribly short. In addition, the apparently "intelligent" behavior of inanimate particles under observation leads one to question whether the universe is really just a chaotic mess of matter, or a dynamic living machine.

In the realm of psychology, Carl Gustav Jung discovered through decades of research the existence of inborn psychological contents. That is to say, from the moment of our birth, human beings contain complex elements of knowledge and identity, meaning we are NOT merely products of our particular environments. Jung called these pieces of inherent information “archetypes.”

The most important aspect of archetypes for our discussion is the existence of opposing views, or “dualities.” The concepts of good and evil, the concepts of conscience as well as guilt and regret, are not necessarily taught to us. Rather, we are born with such elements already within us. The fact that we are born with an at least unconscious understanding of good versus evil means we have the potential power of choice, a power beyond the realm of environment and beyond the reach of would-be tyrants and collectivists. If this does not constitute scientific evidence of a human “soul,” then I do not know what does. The fact of archetypes is undeniable. The question is: Since they do not come from environment, where do they come from?

Istvan’s column doesn’t mention or regard any of the scientific evidence for the existence of an intelligent design. He merely argues that science is the only definable known quantity, and only the known quantity is an acceptable form of belief. But what if the known quantity is so limited as to make a society dangerously ignorant?

The article goes on to promote (somewhat shamelessly) the author’s book, in which the hero, a transhumanist atheist, is given the power to reshape society into any form he wishes. The hero questions whether he should remove religion from the picture entirely, for if religion were erased, wouldn’t the world finally be at peace? Istvan himself questions whether religious expression should be banned in the case of children, so that they are given the chance to “choose” what they wish to believe later in life. This, of course, disregards the fact that children are already born with the prospect of choice, which is why many children who grow up Christian do not practice it later in life, and why many children from atheist homes end up joining religious movements. The idea that all children are permanently molded or damaged by their parent’s unchecked beliefs is complete nonsense.

What the author reveals in his work of fiction is the greater threat of the atheist and transhumanist ideology — namely, the arrogant assumption that they know what is best for the world and the public based on their scientific observations, which are limited and often misinterpreted. This problem extends into the oligarchy of globalists, who adore the theories expressed in Plato’s “The Republic,” in which an elite cadre of “philosopher kings,” men who have achieved a heightened level of academic knowledge, are exalted as the most qualified leaders. However, leadership requires more than knowledge, even if that knowledge is profound. Leadership also requires compassion and informed consent, two things for which the elites have no regard.

The New World Order, an ideal often touted by globalists and defined by their own rhetoric as a scientific dictatorship in which collectivism is valued and individualism is criminalized, seems to me to be — in its ultimate form and intention — a battle for the human soul. They try to convince us that there is no such thing, that there is no inborn conscience, that there is a rationale for every action, that spiritualism is a frivolous and terroristic pursuit, and that cold logic and science, as defined by them, are the paths to prosperity and peace. They also seek to tempt the masses with imaginary stories of attainable godhood and artificial Eden, promises on which they can never deliver. Anyone can point a gun at you and demand your fealty, but this is not what the elites want. Rather, they want you to voluntarily resign yourself over to the hive mind and sacrifice your conscience in the process. While one might argue over what it is they "truly" believe at the core of their cult, it is undeniable that collectivism, moral relativism, and atheism are their favorite promotional weapons.

The reactionary responses to my criticisms of the elitist philosophy will likely involve endless renunciations of crimes committed in the name of religious fervor. I agree; religion has always been exploited, usually by the elites themselves, to enslave as well as to murder. Even today, I hear some so-called Christians argue in favor of genocide using half-baked interpretations of biblical reference. But at bottom, I much prefer a world in which religious expression is free, rather than abolished in the name of an overarching zealotry in the form of a stunted mathematical morality. I prefer a world where the spiritual side of existence is allowed to add to observational awareness. Logic alone is not wisdom, after all. Wisdom is the combination of reason, intuition and experience.

I refuse to live under any form of theocracy, whether religious or scientific. The idea that we must choose between one or the other is a farce — a controlled debate. The individual soul (or whatever you want to call it) is the only thing that matters. It is important that we never forget that when we fight against the NWO, we are not just fighting for liberty; we are also fighting for something profoundly and inherently spiritual. Though we might not be able to define it, we can feel it. And that is enough.

(For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another. Romans 2:14-15)

***

METRO

Saudi Arabia outlaws ‘tempting eyes’

Harry Readhead for Metro.co.uk

Tuesday 4 Nov 2014 6:12 pm

An unnamed journalist said beautiful women would ‘be in trouble’ whether they wore makeup or not (Picture: AP)

A new law in Saudi Arabia banning ‘tempting eyes’ has become the latest example of female oppression in the country.

The law, which states that women with alluring eyes will be forced to wear a full veil, has been branded ‘stupid’ by dissenters and roundly criticised on social media, aina.org reports.

Sheikh Motlab al Nabet, spokesman of the Saudi Arabian Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice, said they ‘had the right’ to force women to cover their face.

‘The men of the committee will interfere to force women to cover their eyes, especially the tempting ones,’ he said.

‘We have the right to do so.’

Many commentators wondered how the word ‘tempting’ would be applied.

One unnamed journalist in the country suggested it referred to ‘uncovered eyes with a nice shape and makeup.’

‘Or even without makeup, if they are beautiful, the woman will be in trouble,’ they added.

Prince Naif, whose impending ascension to the Saudi throne many hoped would spell an end to this kind of draconian oppression, looks likely to be as intolerant as his father King Abdullah after suggesting that any Muslim should support the Committee’s new law.

‘The committee is supported by all sides,’ he said.

‘It should be supported because it is a pillar of Islam. If you are a Muslim, you should support the committee.’

***

Natural News

Obama the tyrant king unleashes dictatorial order that will now invoke "open rebellion" - Senate aide

Friday, November 21, 2014

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

(NaturalNews) With the stroke of a pen, President Obama has now set America on the path toward open rebellion and revolt. By declaring that he alone has the right to dictate immigration policy without the legislative approval of Congress, he has committed yet another lawless act in a long series of illegal schemes that cement his position in history as nothing more than a sociopathic liar and destroyer of nations.

The liberal media won't report this, but Obama has just crossed the line in the minds of tens of millions of Americans and their representatives in Congress. This President has gone from merely being "deceptive" to being thought of as an outright criminal who must be restrained to save America from tyranny. There will be public calls for his arrest and prosecution. There will be revolts, both political and on the streets. You will see attempts to march on Washington and "throw the bum out" of the White House. The era of all-out revolt and rebellion is now upon us.

Don't just take my word for it, though. Read the words of a Senate aide:

A Senate GOP aide told Breitbart News conservatives will spread chaos across Washington. "If Obama announces executive amnesty and the House passes an omnibus with no language blocking it, there will be no Senate vote, because conservatives will burn down the Capitol," the aide said. When asked to clarify if he was serious they'd burn the building to the ground -- or if he was speaking metaphorically -- the aide said "open rebellion." [1]

Burn down the Capitol? Open rebellion? These are not the words of people who are going to sit down and compromise with an out-of-control tyrant dictator who recognizes no law and no limits to his power. These are the words of lawmakers who are moving toward a political rebellion to arrest and depose President Obama, then try him as a criminal while seeking to restore the balance of government that places specific limits on the power of the executive branch.

Obama supporters don't care about the balance of power. They want a tyrant king in power as long as it's their king. They are, in essence, Obama cultists who worship the person and are willing to cast aside all laws and legal boundaries to grant "their man" total dictatorial control over the future of this nation. But that's not how a Republic works. The President is not a dictator, and he or she cannot simply invent whatever wishful edicts he wants to enact at the stroke of a pen. That's not freedom; that's outright tyranny. And it must be stopped or the nation will collapse into despotism and runaway government corruption. (It may already be too late to stop that accelerating collapse, however...)

"President Obama is going rogue," writes Patrick Buchanan. "Our rogue president has crossed an historic line, and so has the republic. Future presidents will cite the 'Obama precedent' when they declare they will henceforth not enforce this or that law, because of a prior commitment to some noisy constituency. We have just taken a monumental step away from republicanism toward Caesarism. For this is rule by diktat, the rejection of which sparked the American Revolution." [2]

Again, another reference to revolution and rebellion. What Buchanan recognizes is that Obama hasn't merely done something politically disturbing; he has done something that shreds the very fabric of political balance in America. Obama has just declared Congress to be null and void. And in nullifying Congress, he has simultaneously given the finger to every man and woman in the nation, telling them that their own voices and representatives in Congress are utterly irrelevant.

Obama is telling America he can do anything he wants because Congress didn't do it when he first demanded it. Here is how Obama spins it, in his own words:

The actions I'm taking are not only lawful, they're the kinds of actions taken by every single Republican President and every single Democratic President for the past half century. And to those Members of Congress who question my authority to make our immigration system work better, or question the wisdom of me acting where Congress has failed, I have one answer: Pass a bill.

But as Ben Shapiro of TruthRevolt.com explains, "This is the opposite of 'lawful.' This is dictatorship in a nutshell: do what I want, or I will do it for you." [3]

Shapiro goes on to say:

[Obama's] speech represented a closely-woven and incredible tapestry of falsehood, exposited with a straight face by the greatest liar in modern American history... To those versed in immigration and constitutional law, watching Obama lay out his program felt like watching a madman describe, with preternaturally perfect sincerity, how the moon was constructed of cheese: you know the argument is untrue, but it's incredible to watch its dogged exposition."

The revolt begins now: We must restore America to a nation of law

I have been warning readers about the rise of tyranny in America for more than a decade. Now the era of in-your-face lawlessness and tyranny is here, and it is celebrated by delusional left-wing denialists who have no grasp whatsoever of history and how nations rise and fall. Obama has put America on the path toward "open rebellion," revolt and civil war. Such scenarios usually do not reach a conclusion without bloodshed, sadly.

Recognize right now that we may all be living in the last days of the American empire. We might narrowly avert it if those of us who still believe in the Constitution, justice and liberty manage to demand lawful restoration of this nation's Constitutional foundations and take America back from the corruption and tyranny that the Obama administration has cast down upon us all. It is time to rise up and call for impeachment. It is time to take to the streets in non-violent protests, and then march on Washington by the millions, to send a message that lawless tyranny will not be tolerated in the "Land of the Free."

And yet, even as the severity of the situation now demands mass action in the name of saving America from domestic political traitors, I cannot help but observe that most Americans are too obese, too fluoridated, too medicated and too apathetic to do anything other than reach for the TV remote with one hand and another bag of MSG-laced Doritos with the other. America may have already become too diseased, too confused and too mentally suppressed to rise up against anything... including a self-declared psychopathic dictator who will truly go down in history as one of the most malicious and destructive liars ever recorded.

Sources for this story include:

[1] http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014...

[2] http://www.wnd.com/2014/11/caesar-obama/

[3] http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014...

***

WND

U.S. INSERTS REMOVAL OF ASSAD INTO ISIS STRATEGY

Tactics in question as effort to train 'moderate' rebels stalls

Published: November 15,2014

F. MICHAEL MALOOF

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad

BEIRUT, Lebanon – The Obama administration is contemplating ways to remove the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad as part of its ISIS strategy, but the approach requires the acquiescence of Syria backers Russia and Iran, who don’t want to see him removed by force.

The Obama administration’s method for removing Assad is still open to discussion. Two possibilities are establishment of a no-fly zone over Syrian opposition-controlled territory and a Turkish military invasion.

The U.S. and a loose coalition of Sunni Arab countries have been bombing strictly ISIS targets in Syria, although the Arab allies are less inclined to go after ISIS than to topple the Assad regime.

Informed U.S. sources tell WND that airstrikes alone will not be sufficient to eliminate the ISIS threat. The thinking now is to go for the removal of Assad in an effort to prevent Syrian opposition fighters from joining ISIS, which has declared the establishment of a “caliphate” ruled by Islamic law over the territory it has captured in Syria and Iraq.

Sources say that the strategy of bombing only ISIS targets helps Assad and, by extension, Iran and the Shiite government in Iraq, which also is battling ISIS.

The majority of the population in Syria is Sunni while Assad is a Shia-Alawite. The Assad regime has protected many of the minorities in Syria, including Christians, even during the tenure of his father, Hafaz Assad, before him.

ISIS would be the strongest Sunni group to take over if Assad were forcibly removed. However, ISIS has no tolerance for religious minorities and has a reputation for beheading and crucifying those who do not convert to Sunni Islam under its strict interpretation of Islamic law, or Shariah.

ISIS-al-Qaida unification

The intent of the Obama administration is to weaken ISIS membership by redirecting Syrian opposition forces to topple Assad and not join ISIS. However, the Syrian opposition is comprised mostly of jihadist fighters who are siding with ISIS and the al-Qaida-affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra.

Now, al-Nusra and ISIS have decided to put aside their differences temporarily in the interest of furthering the objectives of creating the caliphate and subjugating the population to its more radical Sunni interpretation of the Quran.

In effect, the Obama administration is bowing to pressures not only from the Sunni Arab countries that are members of the anti-ISIS coalition but also to Turkey, which has been a conduit for the flow of fighters and financial resources to ISIS and other jihadist groups.

The U.S. also is reacting to the growth of Iranian influence in Syria and the region through the Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon, which has sent fighters to back Assad in Syria.

Sunnis in the region have become more concerned recently about the growing influence of Iran, which backed the recent Houthi clan takeover of Yemen, which borders Sunni Saudi Arabia. They’ve also seen recent concessions by the U.S. to allow Iran to maintain some of its nuclear development program, which they believe Tehran would use to develop nuclear weapons.

Removal by force, if necessary

Still left unanswered by the administration is the approach to removing Assad.

It either can be done through a political transition subject to the approval of Russia and Iran or through a military campaign undertaken by a combination of U.S. bombing and a military invasion of Syria by Turkish forces.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been advocating the removal of Assad by force, if necessary.

According to a CNN report, the White House has convened four meetings of the president’s national security team on defeating ISIS and how its strategy on Syria can accomplish the objective.

Sources say the Obama administration believes its approach of training “moderate” Syrian opposition forces will take too long in light of ISIS’ increasing strength. Until now, removal of Assad wasn’t the priority.

Indeed, the vetting and training of any moderate Syrian forces by the Pentagon hasn’t yet begun.

“The vetting hasn’t started,” said Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby. “Once it does start, that will be a three-to five-month process, and then it’s about eight to nine months of training after that. So we still got a ways to go.”

Strategy adjustment

Calls for the administration to review its current Syria policy came after a letter from Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel last month to National Security Adviser Susan Rice.

In a three-page memorandum to Rice, Hagel warned the U.S. would risk gains in the war against ISIS if adjustments weren’t made to the policy, especially on the future of the Assad regime.

In weighing the approach to removing Assad, Secretary of State John Kerry has been meeting with diplomats from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Russia to work out a diplomatic transition for Assad, his family and inner circle while maintaining large portions of the government and its institutions.

The Arab countries, however, are impatient, sources say. But the sources add that the fundamental elements of the Assad government must remain in place, or Iran, which appears to be calling the shots on the future of Syria, will not agree.

The Russians already tacitly have agreed to a Syria without Assad but with the Shiite minority remaining in power. Sources have confirmed to WND that the Iranians want to maintain Assad in power, for now.

Syrian sources tell WND, however, that the Assad regime’s days are numbered anyway, and they see the country potentially dividing into three parts, for Sunnis, Shia and the Kurds. They add that this ultimately may be the outcome for Iraq as well.

Other sources contend, however, that Russia and Iran will insist on maintaining Shia leadership in Syria. It would retain Iranian influence while keeping the basic institutions of the Syrian government in place with added reforms. It’s a scenario the Syrian opposition originally wanted before becoming radicalized with the influx of foreign jihadist fighters.

***

Theguardian

Growth: the destructive god that can never be appeased

George Monbiot

The blind pursuit of economic expansion stokes a cycle of financial crisis, and is wrecking our world. Time for an alternative

‘Perhaps it’s inaccurate to describe this as another crash. Perhaps it’s a continuation of the last one, the latest phase in a permanent cycle of crisis.’ Photograph: Tyrone Siu/Reuters

Tuesday 18 November 2014 14.41 EST

Another crash is coming. We all know it, now even David Cameron acknowledges it. The only questions are what the immediate catalyst will be, and when it begins.

You can take your pick. The Financial Times reported yesterday that China now resembles the US in 2007. Domestic bank loans have risen 40% since 2008, while “the ability to repay that debt has deteriorated dramatically”. Property prices are falling and the companies that run China’s shadow banking system provide “virtually no disclosure” of their liabilities. Just two days ago the G20 leaders announced that growth in China “is robust and is becoming more sustainable”. You can judge the value of their assurances for yourself.

Housing bubbles in several countries, including Britain, could pop any time. A report in September revealed that total world debt (public and private) is 212% of GDP. In 2008, when it helped cause the last crash, it stood at 174%. The Telegraph notes that this threatens to cause “renewed financial crisis … and eventual mass default”. Shadow banking has gone beserk, stocks appear to be wildly overvalued, the eurozone is bust again. Which will blow first?

Or perhaps it’s inaccurate to describe this as another crash. Perhaps it’s a continuation of the last one, the latest phase in a permanent cycle of crisis exacerbated by the measures (credit bubbles, deregulation, the curtailment of state spending) that were supposed to deliver uninterrupted growth. The system the world’s governments have sought to stabilise is inherently unstable; built on debt, fuelled by speculation, run by sharks.

If it goes down soon, as Cameron fears, in a world of empty coffers and hobbled public services it will precipitate an ideological crisis graver than the blow to Keynesianism in the 1970s. The problem that then arises – and which explains the longevity of the discredited ideology that caused the last crash – is that there is no alternative policy, accepted by mainstream political parties, with which to replace it. They will keep making the same mistakes, while expecting a different outcome.

To try to stabilise this system, governments behave like soldiers billeted in an ancient manor, burning the furniture, the paintings and the stairs to keep themselves warm for a night. They are breaking up the postwar settlement, our public health services and social safety nets, above all the living world, to produce ephemeral spurts of growth. Magnificent habitats, the benign and fragile climate in which we have prospered, species that have lived on earth for millions of years – all are being stacked on to the fire, their protection characterised as an impediment to growth.

Cameron boasted on Monday that he will revive the economy by “scrapping red tape”. This “red tape” consists in many cases of the safeguards defending both people and places from predatory corporations. The small business, enterprise and employment bill is now passing through the House of Commons – spinelessly supported, as ever, by Labour. The bill seeks to pull down our protective rules to “reduce costs for business”, even if that means increasing costs for everyone else, while threatening our health and happiness. But why? As the government boasted last week, the UK already has “the least restrictive product market regulation and the most supportive regulatory and institutional environment for business across the G20.” And it still doesn’t work. So let’s burn what remains.

This bonfire of regulation is accompanied by a reckless abandonment of democratic principles. In the Commons on Monday, Cameron spoke for the first time about the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). If this treaty between the EU and the US goes ahead, it will grant corporations a separate legal system to which no one else has access, through which they can sue governments passing laws that might affect their profits. Cameron insisted that “it does not in any way have to affect our national health service”. (Note those words “have to”.) Pressed to explain this, he cited the former EU trade commissioner, who claimed that “public services are always exempted”.

But I have read the EU’s negotiating mandate, and it contains no such exemption, just plenty of waffle and ambiguity on this issue. When the Scottish government asked Cameron’s officials for an “unequivocal assurance” that the NHS would not be exposed to such litigation, they refused to provide it. This treaty could rip our public services to shreds for the sake of a short and (studies suggest) insignificant fizzle of economic growth.

Is it not time to think again? To stop sacrificing our working lives, our prospects, our surroundings to an insatiable God? To consider a different economic model, which does not demand endless pain while generating repeated crises?

Amazingly, this consideration begins on Thursday. For the first time in 170 years, parliament will debate one aspect of the problem: the creation of money. Few people know that 97% of our money supply is created not by the government (or the central bank), but by commercial banks in the form of loans. At no point was a democratic decision made to allow them to do this. So why do we let it happen? This, as Martin Wolf has explained in the Financial Times, “is the source of much of the instability of our economies”. The debate won’t stop the practice, but it represents the raising of a long-neglected question.

This, though, is just the beginning. Is it not also time for a government commission on post-growth economics? Drawing on the work of thinkers such as Herman Daly, Tim Jackson, Peter Victor, Kate Raworth, Rob Dietz and Dan O’Neill, it would look at the possibility of moving towards a steady state economy: one that seeks distribution rather than blind expansion; that does not demand infinite growth on a finite planet.

It would ask the question that never gets asked: why? Why are we wrecking the natural world and public services to generate growth, when that growth is not delivering contentment, security or even, for most of us, greater prosperity? Why have we enthroned growth, regardless of its utility, above all other outcomes? Why, despite failures so great and so frequent, have we not changed the model? When the next crash comes, these questions will be inescapable.

***

***

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS TIMES

Is Hungary The Next Ukraine? Protests Show Country Ripe For Conflict Between Russia And Europe

By Dennis Lynch@neato_itsdennis on November 18 2014 4:40 PM

Is Hungary the next Ukraine? A man shouts slogans during a protest against perceived corruption within the country's tax authority, as well as a lack of wider democratic freedoms, in front of the Hungarian parliament in Budapest November 17, 2014. Reuters/Laszlo Balogh

A protest movement in Hungary over corruption and an increasingly pro-Russian leadership broke out this week, raising questions about whether the former communist nation is on the verge of becoming the next Ukraine. Hungary is more stable than Ukraine, which has been besieged by sectarian conflict for months, and seems less likely to fall into violent conflict, but growing anti-government demonstrations could become another battleground between Europe and Russia.

The wave of Hungarian protests is focused on Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s increasingly pro-Russian governance. Many shouted “Europe, Europe!” at Monday’s “Public Outrage Day” protest and one protester told AFP demonstrators "don’t want Orban to take us towards Putin and Russia.” Others chanted for Orban to resign.

The chants and gripes with Orban are eerily similar to those Ukraine's Euromaidan protesters lodged against former President Viktor Yanukovych, who fled the country in late February after four months of violent protests over his decision to sign a $15 billion investment deal with Russia and reject a popular bid to move closer to Europe economically. The decision mobilized pro-European Ukrainians and saw a new pro-Western transitional government come to power after Yanukovych was ousted. That largely divided Ukrainians along the line of being either pro-Russian or pro-Western.

Some Ukrainians, many of whom are ethnic Russians and live in the heavily Russian east, sought to distance themselves from the pro-Western government. Russia annexed Crimea, a southern Ukraine region with close ties to Russia, arguing it was protecting Russians living there. No shots were fired there, but that wasn't the case in eastern Ukraine where pro-Russian rebels took up arms and declared a separatist state. The U.S. and EU accuse Russia of supplying the rebels and directly invading on their behalf.

While Hungary was never as close to Russia as Ukraine, an astounding 72 percent of Hungarians said in 2010 most Hungarians are worse off than they were under communist rule when they were intrinsically linked to Russia and the rest of the Eastern Bloc.

Like Yanukovych, Orban did not initially seek to deepen ties with Russia early in his tenure as prime minister. In fact, the former anti-communist was intent on moving toward Europe, but he’s since turned toward Russia for economic deals and policy inspiration. Hungary is part of the European Union, but it hasn’t yet adopted the euro, which has maintained a distance between it and the rest of the Eurozone.

Is Hungary the next Ukraine? Thousands of people protest against perceived corruption within the country's tax authority, as well as a lack of wider democratic freedoms, in front of the Hungarian parliament in Budapest Nov. 17, 2014. Reuters/Bernadett Szabo

Orban and the Hungarian parliament, of which Orban’s Fidesz party has a majority two-thirds control, passed a law earlier this month that would allow for a Russian gas pipeline that bypasses Ukraine for Hungary. The EU is starkly opposed. He also signed a $12.5 billion euro deal with Russia to upgrade a nuclear facility in Hungary. The gas deal means Russian giant Gazprom would have an effective monopoly over Hungarian gas, but Orban argues that it will secure Hungarian gas in the future, particularly in light of the Ukrainian crisis.

“Small countries benefit from having a role in pipeline transit and for many of these countries, this is cost-free,” Andrej Nosko, a Budapest energy analyst told the Financial Times, but “it all adds up to a more pro-Russian policy than expected, which is worrying.”

Critics say both deals solidify Hungary’s energy dependence on Russia and the nuclear plant deal, which was taken out with a loan from Russia, increases Hungary’s already high debt. Those criticisms are similar to those levied on Yanukovych in the wake of his decision to sign his $15 billion investment deal with Russia.

Until recently, Orban’s government was largely opposed to Western sanctions on Russia over the Ukrainian crisis, arguing they would hurt the entire global economy. That stirred up objections among European officials, which prompted him to back off.

A series of laws and policies that helped suppress political dissent and put pressure on democratic watchdogs have garnered Orban considerable criticism from his European counterparts as well. The U.S. is keeping a keen eye on Orban too. That was made clear when the U.S. put travel bans on six high-level Hungarian officials for corruption. U.S. Charge d’Affaires Andre Goodfriend openly said the alleged corruption was the result of a weakening democracy in Hungary and the ban was a warning from Washington.

Despite Western condemnation of Orban’s shift toward authoritarianism, Orban isn't afraid to say he admires Russia's, Turkey's and China’s economic and political systems, which he described as “not Western, not liberal, not liberal democracies, maybe not even democracies, and yet making nations successful,” in a speech in July. He went on to advocate for “parting ways with Western European dogmas [and] making ourselves independent from them.”

Orban has been involved in Hungarian politics since it became a democratic nation in 1989 and his Fidesz party remains immensely popular with voters. Fidesz has had a two-thirds majority in parliament for four years and will continue to for another four.

Like many other post-Soviet and communist nations, Hungary sits on the seam of East and West. With both sides tugging at that seam, Hungary is bound to be a flashpoint for future tensions. Unlike Yanukovych, Orban showed he would bow to public sentiment if need be when he backed off his Internet tax proposal after protests earlier this month.

***

The Telegraph

David Cameron: Google, Facebook and Twitter have duty to take down extremist material

PM warns tech companies that internet cannot remain an 'ungoverned space'

Opta Widget start Opta Widget end

Those who attempt to return in secret will face a five-year jail term under a new criminal offence Photo: Suzanne Plunkett/Reuters

By Steven Swinford, Senior Political Correspondent, Canberra

4:48AM GMT 14 Nov 2014

Facebook, Google, Twitter and other technology giants must “live up to their social responsibilities” and do more to take down extremist material from the internet, David Cameron has suggested.

Mr Cameron said that the internet cannot remain an “ungoverned space” and that technology companies must be “more proactive” in helping authorities remove “harmful” material.

His intervention came after Robert Hannigan, the new head of GCHQ, warned last month that Facebook and Twitter have become “command and control centres” for Isil terrorists.

The security services are increasingly concerned that jihadists are exploiting social networking websites to spread their propaganda.

Meanwhile, the Metropolitan Police is currently taking down one terrorist-related posting every ten minutes from the internet, equivalent to 5,000 a week.

Mr Cameron disclosed that after negotiations lead by Downing Street, internet service providers including Virgin, Sky, BT and Talk Talk have agreed to incorporate a button enabling the public to report extremist material on their websites.

They have also agreed to ensure that their child protection filters protect young people from being exposed to jihadist material online.

However, Mr Cameron indicated that he wants to see major technology companies go further.

In his address to the Australian Parliament ahead of the G20 summit, Mr Cameron said: "A new and pressing challenge is getting extremist material taken down from the internet. There is a role for government in that. We must not allow the internet to be an ungoverned space.

"But there is a role for companies too. In the UK we are pushing companies to do more, including strengthening filters, improving reporting mechanisms and being more proactive in taking down this harmful material.

"We are making progress but there is further to go. This is their social responsibility. And we expect them to live up to it."

The Metropolitan Police is host to a counter terrorism unit dedicated to identifying and removing extreme graphic material from the internet.

In an average week the unit removes over 1,000 pieces of content that breach the terrorism act, 800 of which are related to Islamic State in Syria and Iraq.

A Downing Street spokesman said: “We will now need to do further work with industry to implement this in practice. And we will keep pressing internet companies to be more proactive given the scale of threats and persistent propaganda from the terrorist groups.”

Mr Cameron made the announcement after unveiling a series of new anti-terror laws, including the power to bar terror suspects from returning to Britain for at least two years.

Earlier this month Mr Hannigan warned that Isil terrorists have “embraced the web” and are using it to intimidate people and inspire “would-be jihadis” from all over the world to join them.

He urged the companies to work more closely with the security services, arguing that it is time for them to confront "some uncomfortable truths" and that privacy is not an "absolute right".

He suggested that unless US technology companies co-operate, new laws will be needed to ensure that intelligence agencies are able to track and pursue terrorists.

His comments represent some of the most outspoken criticism yet of US technology giants by the security services, and come amid growing tensions following leaks by whistleblower Edward Snowden.

He highlighted the eruption of extremist jihadi material online on websites such as Twitter, Facebook and Whatsapp, and said that terrorists are now able to hide their identities using encryption tools which were once only available to states.

He said that in the past, al-Qaeda and its terrorists have used the internet as a place to anonymously distribute material or "meet in dark spaces".

Isil, however, has taken a much more direct approach, using social networking services to get their messages across in a "language their peers understand".

He highlighted the production values of videos in which they attack towns, fire weapons and detonate explosives, saying that they have a "self-conscious online gaming quality".

He said that even the groups grotesque videos of beheadings highlight the sophistication of their use of social media. "This time the 'production values' were high and the videos stopped short of showing the actual beheading," he said.

***

ENENEWS

West Coast Scientists: Many animals on sea floor looking sick or dead — “Everything’s dying… Dead, dead, dead, and dead” — Experts investigate what’s killing sea urchins and cucumbers in Pacific Northwest — “Seeing things never previously observed”

National Geographic, Nov 17, 2014 (emphasis added): Urchins and cucumbers seemed to have escaped the ill effects of the virus until now. But in recent weeks, reports have started to come in that they too are dying along beaches in the Pacific Northwest, Hewson said… [He and his team are] studying the urchins and sea cucumbers that are already dying to see if the same killer is responsible.

Dr. Bill Bushing, kelp forest ecologist, Nov 2, 2014: I’ve mentioned before that [in Southern California] our starfish and sea urchins have been dying… I’ve recently seen sea cucumbers that appear to be diseased as well… I’ve also observed strangely colored sea hares (big shell-less snails) in the park. The red algae they normally eat seems to have died out… Divers also report seeing far fewer of the sea hares this year.

Ronald L. Shimek, PhD, marine biologist, Nov 10, 2014: Jan Kocian, diving photographer extraordinare… has been actively surveying several marine subtidal areas in northern Puget Sound for some time… [During a Sept. 18] dive… on Whidbey Island, Washington… he started seeing things he had never previously observed.… there were many animals lying exposed on the sandy sea floor, looking limp, sick or dead. Red sea cucumbers were flaccid and dead… Aleutian Moon snails were in odd postures… pink/yellow worms [were] another rare or unusual sight…. Nuttall’s cockles were on the sediment surface with their siphons out, instead of being buried… 22nd

September, the area containing dying animals was not only still present it was spreading; whatever seemed to be the cause was still doing its dirty work… 25th September [many] red sea cucumbers… were lying fully exposed, and apparently dead… 29th of September… A few living Cucumaria were acting oddly, not quite dead, but just slightly responsive to touch… Numerous green sea urchins were found with their spines in abnormal postures, definitely not looking healthy… The full extent of the dead area, and the reason for the mortality, remain indeterminate.

ENENEWS

Attempt to stop flow of highly radioactive liquid at Fukushima “in doubt” — AP: Much of it is pouring in trenches going out into Pacific — Experts: Amount entering ocean “increasing by 400 tons daily” — Problem “so severe” it’s consuming nearly all workers at site — Top Plant Official: “Little cause for optimism”

Natural News (Edited from longer article.)

MO city government issues urgent emergency preparedness alert to citizens ahead of anticipated Ferguson riots

Thursday, November 13, 2014

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

(NaturalNews) The city of Berkeley, Missouri has issued an emergency preparedness alert to its citizens, urging them to stockpile food, water, gasoline, prescription medications and fully-charged cell phones in anticipation of widespread rioting.

The letter, shown below (with h/t to TheGatewayPundit.com), also urges citizens to have a "contingency plan for picking up your children from school," warning that roads may be blocked, preventing vehicular traffic from moving. The local airport, says the letter, will be "protected by the National Guard" and curbside drop-offs of luggage will not be allowed.

Local government now following the advice of survivalists and preppers

The content of this letter can only be honestly characterized as a "social chaos survival alert," and it's the kind of straight talk the local citizens really need to hear.

The city government of Berkeley Missouri, in other words, is into prepping and survival. Although the letter didn't go as far as telling people how many days' worth of food, water and other supplies to store, it has clearly sent a strong message that citizens' lives may be in danger and that critical infrastructure may be offline.

Riots are expected to take place following the announcement of the grand jury decision regarding the police officer shooting of Michael Brown, an African-American. According to widely-reported rumors, riots are expected to take place regardless of whether the decision indicts the police officer or clears him.

Why all the anger? In the wake of the disastrous economic failures of the Obama administration, African-Americans are reaching a breaking point in terms of frustration with government. They have been largely abandoned by the democrats who are now focused on amnesty for illegal immigrants, and the economic nightmare of joblessness and poverty has only worsened under the Obama regime. The government shooting of a young African-American man -- justified or not -- may be the pivotal event that causes many angry, frustrated members of the Ferguson community to erupt into violent outrage.

Here's the letter from the city (with h/t to TheGatewayPundit.com)

Is the city expecting critical services to collapse?

The city's advice to store water ahead of the anticipated riots is particularly interesting because it implies the city's water supply may somehow fail.

How bad do riots have to get in order to disrupt the city's water supply? VERY bad. The letter seems to be anticipating a "Let's burn this town to the ground" scenario where even municipal water workers are hunkered down in their own homes, terrified of commuting to work because the streets have collapsed into complete chaos and violence.

If that extreme scenario really unfolds, it's difficult to imagine how police officers, fire fighters, ambulance drivers and 911 dispatchers would get to work, either. Would all these emergency services therefore experience severe outages and interruptions?

Calling 911 might not do any good at all for two reasons: 1) There's nobody manning the 911 center to take your call, and 2) Even if they could take your call, there are no police to respond to your emergency.

If this unfolds, I fully expect the National Guard to operate invoke, at minimum, a kind of "soft martial law" where curfews are in effect but martial law is never officially declared. Without question, these riots will be contained by armed government forces. But no one knows just how much damage or harm may be caused to the community or its citizens before the situation is quieted down.

Citizens rush to buy firearms for self defense

Not surprisingly, gun sales have exploded in the local areas as citizens arm up to protect their own homes against the expected social chaos. "Gun sales in Ferguson and surrounding areas have increased by 50 percent in recent weeks, as residents and law enforcement alike prepare for what might come from the grand jury’s ruling," reports the Washington Times. [1]

The Times goes on to explain:

"So maybe I get trapped here or something and have to have a John Wayne shootout," said Dan McMullen, the owner of an insurance agency located near the site of the August shooting death of Brown, 18, CNN reported. "That's the silly part about it: Is that going to happen? Not a chance. But I guess, could it? I'm the only white person here."

The fact that white people like Dan are arming up against what they perceive as the possibility of racially-targeted violence against whites is, of course, a sign of just how precarious the situation may become. That's a recipe for itchy trigger fingers, and it can't end well.

***

WND

YOU'RE BEING WATCHED ONLINE VIA YOUR WEBCAM

'Broadcasting private lives on the Internet'

Published: November 18,2014

BOB UNRUH

Tens of thousands of webcams – positioned in private homes, businesses and elsewhere – are posting private images online, according to a number of reports from technology-based websites such as TechCrunch.

“Last week, I sat at my computer and watched a young man from Hong Kong relaxing on his laptop; an Israeli woman tidying the changing room in a clothes store; and an elderly woman in the UK watching TV,” said a commentator at the Motherboard blog recently,

“All of these people were completely unaware that I was spying on them, thousands of miles away, through devices that were inadvertently broadcasting their private lives on the Internet.”

The images are on a website called Insecam, which uses computer software to troll the Internet for signals from security cameras and the like that are using the pre-programmed security codes that are installed by the manufacturers.

And left unchanged by the consumers.

That are simple like “admin” or “12345″ and easily can be broken.

Techcrunch reports that it investigated the feeds, and found many dead, likely because the owner discovered the online appearance and changed the pass-code.

“You can see some live cameras if you move away from the front page and start viewing cameras further afield …” said Techcrunch.

Online image from security camera focused on baby, in the Netherlands

At the Tampa Tribune, Tom Jackson reported that he saw “cluttered family rooms and tidy kitchens. Vacant pool decks. A dock looking out on sparkling blue water. Lonely front porches. A blue-and-gold striped tropical fish. Several empty cribs. And one crib containing a blissfully snoozing toddler.

“To be clear: What Insecam’s designers have done falls ever so slightly outside the realm of hacking. Instead, its robot is simply coming through an unlocked back door. Keeping it out of our business is up to us.”

He continued, “The timing for understanding this could not be better. The season ahead is, of source, rich with traditions, not the least of which is this: In our haste to get gifts assembled and running, we – and I am speaking as a been-there-done-that dad – will skip details in the owner’s manual that seem incidental to the operation of the gizmo at hand.”

But that’s bad, he said.

“Security and information technology professionals have known forever that manufacturers’ default user names and passwords – that thing you must convert to make your system truly yours – follow simple patterns, often something like admin for the user name and ABC123 for the password,” he continued.

“Just change the dang password. And it’s not just because you don’t want Russian thugs watching your teens play video games,” he continued. “There’s lots of stuff you can skip over the holidays, but changing the password on your new DIY surveillance system isn’t one of them. What you do in your hot tub should stay in your hot tub.”

Insecam offers choices of cameras from dozens of nations, including Sweden, Singapore, Chile, Denmark, Brazil, Czech Republic, Israel, Greece and even Bulgaria. And dozens more.

With many of the cams, it also offers the location on a Google map.

In not-entirely fluent English, the site explains: “Sometimes administrator (possible you too) forgets to set the default password on security surveillance system, online camera or DVR. This site now contains access only to cameras without a password and it is fully legal. Such online cameras are available for all Internet users. To browse Cameras just select the country or camera type.”

The site continues, “This site has been designed in order to show the importance of the security settings. To remove your public camera from this site and make it private the only thing you need to do is to change your camera default password.”

Techcrunch reported there were 73,000 camera feeds available from around the globe.

***

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS TIMES

NASA Photos Suggest Possibility Of Existence Of Life And Technology On Mars—Report [Watch Video]

By jaskiran kaur | November 13, 2014 4:34 PM EST

NASA Images captured by Curiosity Rover have sparked up speculations about existence of life and technology on Mars, once again. Photos show what looks like "a white ball of light moving" on the surface of the red planet.

According to Examiner, a series of eight images were posted on NASA JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) website on Jan. 29. According the website, the position of the ball varies in each photo "which were taken from the same position with slightly different perspective over a period of 15 minutes." The abovementioned publication infers that these pictures provide a proof that the mysterious orb of light "is under intelligent control."

These photos were first picked up by YouTube user Paranormal Crucible and posted a video of these images on Nov. 9, 2014. Scroll down to watch the video. In its description section, the user explains that the "mysterious light" is moving as captured on Mars.

It is noted that the anomaly was captured in Sols Front Hazz Camera and it "clearly shows a white ball of light, surveying the Martian surface," explains the rest of the description provided by the blogger.

Examiner states that on earth appearance of ball lighting is a "rear occurrence." On Mars, if the ball of light is not a natural phenomenon then it is possible that it is artificial. The website provides two explanations. According to the publication it is either an "intelligently guided manned drone" originating from a technologically equipped community residing on Mars. Or it is some kind of "indigenous intelligence" wandering on the surface of red planet. However, NASA never declared such a discovery to the public according to the daily news website. Thus the conclusion and explanation remains unverified.

Meanwhile, UFO Sightings Daily notes that this circle of light is "very similar in colour and shape" to the orb photographed in the old Apollo mission.

This is not the first time photos suggesting existence of life on Mars have surfaced. On Oct. 31, 2014, Enigma Digest reported about another YouTube video that shows NASA photo that suggests that the technology might be a possibility on the red planet. This image is said to be also taken by Mars' Curiosity Rover showing high pressure valve that resembles those on Earth. The report notes that the craftsmanship of the object is an indication of "intelligent design."

***

FOX NEWS

Man eats sugar-heavy diet for 60 days, receives shocking diagnosis

Published November 19, 2014

Following in the footsteps of Morgan Spurlock, who ate only McDonald’s food for one month in the film Super Size Me, an Australian man has undergone a sugar-heavy diet for 60 days to explore the ingredient’s impact on his health.

In the upcoming That Sugar Film, Damon Gameau, a filmmaker and TV actor, vows to follow a strict diet of “healthy,” low-fat food with high sugar content, News.com.au reported.

Within three weeks, the formerly healthy Gameau became moody and sluggish. A doctor gave him the shocking diagnosis: He was beginning to develop fatty liver disease. According to the Mayo Clinic, the most severe outcome for fatty liver disease is liver failure.

“I had no soft drink, chocolate, ice cream or confectionery,” Gameau told Yahoo. “All the sugars that I was eating were found in perceived healthy foods, so low-fat yogurts, and muesli bars, and cereals, and fruit juices, sports drinks ... these kind of things that often parents would give their kids thinking they’re doing the right thing.”

Gameau reportedly consumed 40 teaspoons of sugar per day, or slightly more than the average teenager worldwide, according to News.com.au. According to the American Heart Association (AHA), the average American consumes 20 teaspoons of sugar daily.

The AHA’s daily recommendations for sugar consumption are 6 teaspoons for women and 9 teaspoons for men.

In That Sugar Film, Gameau observeed that the additive impacted his physical and mental health. Doctors called his mental functioning “unstable,” and the father-to-be reportedly put on nearly four inches of visceral fat around his waist. He was on the fast track to obesity.

Gameau said his sugar-laden diet left him feeling hungry, no matter how much he ate.

His final meal— which consisted of a juice, a jam sandwich, a bar, and a handful of other snacks— is similar to an ordinary child’s school lunchbox.

“Sadly, it was very easy to do and fitted comfortably into the small plastic container,” Gameau wrote on his blog documenting his experiment.

“The last meal was for all the people out there, especially parents, who are led to believe they are doing the right and healthy thing for their children. They are making an effort yet are horribly let down by the lack of integrity in marketing and packaging strategies.”

Gameau told News.com.au that the experiment’s findings don’t suggest a need to completely cut sugar— but rather a need for more awareness about how much sugar has been added to perceptibly healthy food.

“Sugar’s now in 80 percent of the processed food we’re eating,” he said. “If we can remove that, that’s the first step towards making a change.”

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 29.1 million Americans, or 9.3 percent of the population, have diabetes. In adults, type 2 diabetes accounts for about 90 to 95 percent of all diagnosed diabetes cases.  Research has shown that sugary drinks are linked to type 2 diabetes.

Consuming excess added sugar is also associated with a higher risk of developing cardiovascular disease—the leading cause of death for men and women in the United States, according to the CDC. Heart disease accounts for one in four deaths in the United States, or about 600,000 annual deaths.

That Sugar Film will be released in Australian movie theaters in February 2015. A U.S. release date has not been listed on the film’s website.

***

Until next week...keep on believing.
Almondtree Productions

“Feed me with food convenient for me.”
(Proverbs 30:8)