The Christian Science Monitor reports that a new NASA study found that Antarctica has been adding more ice than it’s been losing, challenging other research, including that of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, that concludes that Earth’s southern continent is losing land ice overall.

In a paper published in the Journal of Glaciology, researchers from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, the University of Maryland in College Park, and the engineering firm Sigma Space Corporation offer a new analysis of satellite data that show a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001 in the Antarctic ice sheet, “slowing” to a net gain of 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.

The study’s authors say these findings challenge current explanations for sea level rise, much of which is attributed to melting ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica from “global warming.”

One of the authors, Dr. Zwally, said, “The good news is that Antarctica is not currently contributing to sea level rise, but is taking 0.23 millimeters per year away…. If the 0.27 millimeters per year of sea level rise attributed to Antarctica in the IPCC report is not really coming from Antarctica, there must be some other contribution to sea level rise that is not accounted for.”

Notwithstanding the fact that Antarctica has been gaining, not losing, ice, the climate change activists are proceeding with their agenda.

Leo Hohmann reports for WND that at the upcoming United Nations Climate Summit in Paris, scheduled for Nov. 30-Dec. 11, participating nations have prepared a treaty that would create an “International Tribunal of Climate Justice” giving Third World countries the power to haul the U.S. into a global court with enforcement powers.

According to the proposed draft text of the climate treaty, the tribunal would take up issues such as “climate justice,” “climate finance,” “technology transfers,” and “climate debt.”

The UN climate tribunal will bypass Congress. Policies once left to sovereign nations could be turned over to the U.N. tribunal if the U.S. and its allies approve the proposed deal in Paris during the summit.

Read the proposed treaty here.

See also:

• Third World countries want more than $10B a year as ‘climate change’ reparations
• Greens really are commies: 130 UN-backed green groups call for end of capitalism
• 20 professors & scientists sign letter asking Obama to prosecute climate-change skeptics
• Bill Gates says only socialism can save world from climate change
• Pope Francis calls for a new global authority to combat ‘climate change’
• Top adviser to Australia PM: Global warming is a NWO fraud led by UN
• If Global Warming is true, why would they have to cheat yet again

~Éowyn

If you think the New World Order and a global government are relatively recent ideas that began with Bush the Elder, George H. W. Bush, think again.

Those ideas can be traced back at least to the Kennedy Administration, but under a different terminology — the Arms Control and Disarmament Act of 1961, which began as H.R. 9118. The bill was passed by both houses of Congress and, on September 26, 1961, was signed into law, becoming 22 U.S.C. § 2551.

This is how radical the Arms Control and Disarmament Act is. (Click here for the Act in PDF.)

On page 1, the Act declares that “An ultimate goal of the United States is a world which is free from the scourge of war and the dangers and burdens of armaments; in which the use of force has been subordinated to the rule of law….”

The purpose of the Act is “to provide impetus toward this goal by creating a new agency of peace to deal with the problem of reduction and control of armaments looking toward ultimate world disarmament.”

Here’s a screen shot I took from the Act:

The job of this new federal “agency of peace” is “to provide the essential scientific, economic, political, military, psychological and technological information upon which realistic arms control and disarmament policy must be based.”

The Act defines “arms control” and “disarmament” as “the identification, verification, inspection, limitation, control, reduction, or elimination, of armed forces and armaments of all kinds under international agreement including the necessary steps taken under such an agreement to establish an effective system of international control, or to create and strengthen international organizations for the maintenance of peace.”

Translated into simpler English, the Arms Control and Disarmament Act aims at none other than the elimination of the U.S. military and of all civilian firearms (“armaments of all kinds”) — all to be placed under an international body (“system of international control”).

The “agency of peace” turned out to be the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA), an independent agency of the United States government — an agency established through a separate statute passed by Congress, which exists outside of the federal executive departments (those headed by a Cabinet secretary), and which while constitutionally part of the executive branch, is independent of presidential control, usually because the president’s power to dismiss the agency head or a member is limited.

In 1997, the Clinton administration integrated the ACDA with the State Department. The ACDA’s executive is Obama appointee Under Secretary Rose Gottemoeller. She communicates with the president (Obama) through the secretary of state (John Kerry).

The ACDA’s current programs appear to be international in focus:

• Stopping Nuclear Testing
• Banning Chemical Weapons
• Reducing Strategic Nuclear Arms
• Keeping Nuclear Weapons out of the hands of rogue states
• Preventing the use of disease as a weapon of war

Since its passage into law, the Arms Control and Disarmament Act has been amended 9 times, the most recent amendment was in 1989 in the George H. W. Bush administration.

~Eowyn

Charlie Sheen, 50, in early 2015

Bringing an end to public rumors and speculations as to the identity of the wantonly promiscuous HIV-infected”superstar” actor who is said to favor sex with prostitutes and porn stars, as well as transsexuals, Charlie Sheen admitted on NBC’s “Today” this morning that he has HIV.

Frazier Moore reports for the AP that Sheen said he tested positive for the virus that causes AIDS about four years ago. But when asked by “Today” co-host Matt Lauer if he had transmitted the disease to others, he declared, “Impossible. Impossible.”

He said one reason for going public with his condition was to put a stop to shakedowns from prostitutes and others who threatened to out him. He said he had paid “enough to bring it into the millions” – perhaps as much as $10 million – to buy their silence and now was seeking to “put a stop to this barrage of attacks and sub-truths.”

He said one prostitute took a photo of the HIV-related drugs in his medicine cabinet and threatened to sell it to the tabloids.

Lauer asked Sheen if he’s still “paying these people.” Sheen replied, “Not after today I’m not.”

Sheen said that by going public, he hopes to reduce the stigma still felt by some diagnosed with HIV: “I have a responsibility now to better myself and to help a lot of other people. And hopefully with what we’re doing today, others may come forward and say, ‘Thanks, Charlie, for kicking the door open.'”

The disclosure was only the latest chapter in Sheen’s headline-seizing behavior.

He once revealed that he had spent more than $50,000 as a client of “Hollywood Madam” Heidi Fleiss’ prostitution ring. In 2011, Sheen’s drug and alcohol use led to his being fired from CBS’ “Two and a Half Men” — which made him one of TV’s highest-paid actors and at its peak was TV’s most-watched sitcom — after an explosive meltdown that included calling the show’s producer “a contaminated little maggot.”

Sheen has been married and divorced three times — to model Donna Peele, actress Denise Richards with whom he has two daughters, and obscure actress and real estate investor Brooke Mueller, with whom he has two sons.

A FOTM reader remarked that HIV is “just a chronic medical condition” and should not have a “stigma” attached. This is my response:

“Just a chronic medical condition”?

You make HIV, the precursor to AIDS, sound like a seasonal allergy to pollen, also “a chronic medical condition”. The stigma attached to HIV/AIDS is well-deserved because HIV infection is:

1. Serious business: It means the body’s entire immune system is now compromised, which means T-cells — the body’s natural immune-fighters — no longer work as they are designed by our Creator.
2. A transmitted disease, usually via sexual intercourse. If the U.S. were a sane rational country, people with a transmissible disease would be monitored and knowingly transmitting such diseases would be a crime.

There are 3 stages of HIV infection. Here’s the CDC’s description of stage one, Acute HIV Infection Stage:

Within 2-4 weeks after HIV infection, many, but not all, people develop flu-like symptoms, often described as “the worst flu ever.” Symptoms can include fever, swollen glands, sore throat, rash, muscle and joint aches and pains, and headache. This is called “acute retroviral syndrome” (ARS) or “primary HIV infection,” and it’s the body’s natural response to the HIV infection. During this early period of infection, large amounts of virus are being produced in your body. The virus uses CD4 count to replicate and destroys them in the process. Because of this, your CD4 cells can fall rapidly. Eventually your immune response will begin to bring the level of virus in your body back down to a level called a viral set point, which is a relatively stable level of virus in your body. At this point, your CD4 count begins to increase, but it may not return to pre-infection levels. It may be particularly beneficial to your health to begin ART during this stage. During the acute HIV infection stage, you are at high risk of transmitting HIV to your sexual or drug using partners because the levels of HIV in your blood stream are very high. For this reason, it is very important to take steps to reduce your risk of transmission.

Note: CD4 refers to the glycoprotein found on the surface of our body’s immune cells such as T helper cells, monocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells.

Here are the physical changes to the body of the HIV-infected:

1. Body Fat Changes: Some medications taken to control HIV cause changes in the way your body produces, uses, and stores fat. These changes are called lipodystrophy. This condition causes you to gain or lose fat in particular parts of your body.

You can get extra fat in the following places: abdomen, neck, breasts (both men and women), face. In addition, you can also develop small deposits of fat, called lipomas, elsewhere on your body. Other changes can occur when the fat under your skin (called subcutaneous fat) is lost. This can occur in your face, arms, legs, buttocks. It is important to note that these changes in the way your body handles fat can also coincide with changes in cholesterol, an increase in triglycerides, increases in blood sugar, and lowered sensitivity to insulin, which may lead to diabetes.

2. Wasting Syndrome: The involuntary loss of more than 10% of your body weight, in addition to more than 30 days of either diarrhea or weakness and fever. Wasting refers to a loss of muscle mass, although part of the weight loss may also be due to loss of fat. HIV-associated wasting syndrome is considered an AIDS-defining condition. While this is often a sign of late stage disease, wasting syndrome can be treated by proper diet, medications to stimulate appetite, medications to control diarrhea, hormonal therapy to build muscle.

The body changes of an HIV-infected person would explain why Charlie Sheen, only 50 years old and even with cosmetic help like makeup and hair dye, looks so dreadful — changes to his appearance that are noticeable beginning about 2-3 years ago.

See also “Public Health Ignored as HIV Spreads” for how LGBT activists are responsible for the continuing HIV epidemic.

UPDATE:

To no one’s surprise, at least six women have lawyered up in the last 24 hours and plan to sue Charlie Sheen for intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraud, sexual battery … and more are on the way. A prominent Los Angeles lawyer tells TMZ, the 6 women contacted him Monday, and he has appointments with 4 more today.

The women claim they had both protected and unprotected sex with Sheen, as recently as last month, and he did not disclose his HIV status.

A source directly connected with Sheen says in the last 2 years, Sheen has had at least 200 partners, so the number of women who either will sue or plan to sue will almost certainly grow exponentially.

Reportedly, Sheen was diagnosed with HIV 4 years ago. (TMZ)

H/t FOTM’s MomOfIV

UPDATE (Nov. 19, 2015):

Charlie Sheen may face criminal prosecution, 8 years in prison

~Eowyn

On this Christmas Eve, I bring you good tidings!

Maurice Strong — the New World Order billionaire behind Agenda 21 and anthropogenic global-warming (now renamed “climate change”); former top adviser to the United Nations; and the godfather of the UN’s 1997 Kyoto (global warming) Treaty — is dead.

Maurice Strong died on November 27, at age 86, in Beijing, China, to which he had moved in 2007, shortly after receiving a $1 million check from South Korean businessman Tongsun Park. In 2006, Park was convicted in New York federal court of conspiring to bribe U.N. officials to rig Oil-for-Food in favor of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

Maurice “Dr. No” Strong

Born in 1929 in Manitoba, Canada, Strong said that growing up during the Depression radicalized him and that he considered himself to be “a socialist in ideology, a capitalist in methodology” — just like his counterpart in devilry, George Soros.

From FoxNews:

China is a special place for Strong, a self-declared, life-long socialist. It is the burial place of a woman said to be one of his relatives, the famous pro-communist American journalist Anna Louise Strong, a vociferous supporter of Lenin and Stalin until the mid-‘30s, and a strong booster of Mao Zedong’s China. Maurice Strong’s presence in Beijing, however, raises awkward questions: For one thing, China, while one of the world’s biggest producers of industrial pollution, has been profiting from the trading of carbon emissions credits – thanks to heavily politicized U.N.-backed environmental deals engineered by Strong in the 1990s.

Strong made his billions in oil and carbon trade-offs, which should be a tip-off that something ain’t right. He portrayed himself as an “environmentalist” and had deep roots in the United Nations, having been in leadership positions in a number of UN environment-related programs. He was a proponent of a world government in the name of climate change.

Strong was a member of the board of directors of the privately-owned Chicago Climate Exchange, described as “the world’s first and North America’s only legally binding greenhouse gas emission registry reduction system for emission sources and offset projects in North America and Brazil.”

When Barack Obama was a member of the board of directors of the Chicago-based, pro-gun control Joyce Foundation charity, the Foundation helped launch the Chicago Climate Exchange with two separate grants totaling $1.1 million. The Exchange called itself “North America’s only cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide.”

Maurice Strong was also the father of Agenda 21 — a UN plan on “sustainable development,” premised on climate change, population control, redistribution of wealth and “social justice”.

The number 21 refers to an agenda for the 21st Century.

Agenda 21 was an outcome of the UN Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992, where 178 governments (including the United States) voted to adopt the program. It is a comprehensive blueprint of action to be taken globally, nationally, and locally by organizations of the UN, governments, and major groups in every area in which humans directly affect the environment.

This is what Maurice Strong and other global elitists had planned for the U.S.:

↓Click map to enlarge↓

~Eowyn

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/01/26/michael-moore-god-bless-you-megyn-kelly-war-on-women-question-to-trump-was-great/

Yup, you read that correctly. Megyn Kelly and Michael Moore team up to attack Donald Trump.

Folks, the masks are coming off. Some big players are accidentally showing their cards, and revealing their plans. This current spat is about Kelly hitting Trump with the Liberal dag whistle, “the war on women.”

Where should we stand? In my humble opinion, we should throw out our political constructs of Democrat/Republican, and stand with God. We should wear ourselves out in prayer to the Almighty for the rescue of our nation from the secret power players and puppeteers. And above all, make sure that we are standing with the Lord Jesus Christ on every issue.

♞

Fox News Agenda Revealed

Read Breitbart Article

It’s not about Trump, it’s about national sovereignty

Did you know that Fox News is secretly helping illegal immigrants flood into America, thus destabilizing both our elections and our economy? I didn’t know that until I saw this story today on Breitbart.

I truly don’t know if Donald Trump is a good man, or a Trojan Horse for the Clintons, or something else I wouldn’t like. But I do know one thing. Trump’s actions are not merely forcing the other candidates to show their true colors. In standing up to Fox News this week, he has uncovered the fact that Fox News is working as hard to destroy American sovereignty as any Leftist group in the country. And we now have some insight as to why Fox is pushing Rubio and Cruz on us; both candidates have an indelible record of trying to open the door wide to unfettered immigration.

Did you get that? Fox is our enemy

It’s obvious that there are some really good people at Fox, many in fact. But now we know much more than Fox wanted us to know about it’s owner, Rupert Murdock.

And if this revelation proves true, then what other pieces of the FAUX NEWS secret agenda might yet come to light?

Fair and Balanced?

Conservatives, does Fox have your back?
Or is Fox about to shoot you in the back?

♞

We have all been warned by conspiracy theorists of the existence of a “bankster ruling elite.” This story in Breitbart gives credence our suspicions. The following Breitbart article is absolutely chilling. ~ TD 

Breitbart: How the GOP Insiders Plan to Steal the Nod From Trump

by Roger Stone and Ed Martin – 1 Mar 2016

“Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” – Eric Hoffer

Despite a growing string of victories in the Republican primaries ,the DC-Wall Street cabal that has dominated the GOP since 1988 has no intention of letting the billionaire real estate mogul be nominated. None other than Karl Rove has insisted the stop-Trump effort is not too late and can succeed.

A new superPAC has dumped $10 million dollars into blistering negative TV ads against Trump in the last three days. The Koch brothers and their associates deny funding the effort but they denials are questionable at best. The New York Times reported Sunday that the Rubio and Kasich campaigns are now openly planning on a ‘brokered convention” to stop Trump in the back rooms in Cleveland. The New York Daily News reported that Barbara Bush has vowed revenge against Trump for ending the “low energy” campaign of her son Jeb, the anointed one and that the Bush clan is all-in in the effort to stop Trump. The News reported that Jeb may transfer the $25 to $30 million in SuperPAC funds he has left to an anti-Trump effort…

And it gets much worse! Read the whole BLOCKBUSTER article at http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/01/how-the-gop-insiders-plan-to-steal-the-nod-from-trump/

♞

Breitbart March 2 2016: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/02/kristol-lays-strategy-give-white-house-hillary-trump-shouldnt-win/

For years their agenda remained secret. But now, a whole bunch of our secret enemies are exposed.

I honestly viewed these guys as fellow conservatives with shared values. But one of the best things Donald Trump has done is to shake things up and show us the true colors of formerly trusted people.

Wondering why every new batch of elected conservatives gets neutralized so quickly? Now we are beginning to find out. As horrible as this is, I think it is in answer to our prayers.

♞

Identity politics, affirmative action, and victimhood have arrived at the International Olympics.

Not only are pre-op transgenders (including fully-biological males who will compete as females) now allowed to compete, the 2016 Olympics Games in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, will have a “refugee” team!

Since its inception, the Olympics Games have been nation or country-based, i.e., individuals compete as nationals of a country. But the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has given its approval for 43 athletes to compete at this summer’s Rio Olympics as a team of Refugee Olympic Athletes (ROA) under the Olympic flag.

As BBC News reports, March 2, 2016, IOC president Thomas Bach said, “By welcoming ROA to the Olympic Games in Rio, we want to send a message of hope to all the refugees of the world. This team will be treated like all the other teams. This team may end up between five and 10 athletes maybe. We have no target. It depends very much on the sporting qualifications.”

IOC president Thomas Bach is a German lawyer

Selection criteria for the team of Refugee Olympic Athletes (ROA) are sporting ability, “personal circumstances” (whatever that means), and United Nations-verified refugee status. Athletes will then be supported with funds to train. They will be housed in the athletes’ village and will enter the opening ceremony as the penultimate team, ahead of hosts Brazil.

So far, fewer than half of the 7.5 million tickets issued for the August 5-21 Rio Games have been sold.

My questions are:

1. If these “refugee” athletes are so physically fit as to be Olympian athletes, why don’t they return to their home country and fight?
2. Why are the athletes not competing as members of the country that had generously taken them into their fold?
3. How long is an athlete classified as a “refugee”? Let’s say an individual had fled from Syria to Germany 5 years ago, is this person still considered a “refugee”?

~Eowyn

Whatevs….it’s not like $500M is that big of a deal. Just tack it on to the $19,000,000,000,000+ national debt!

Via Fox News: Two Republican senators are accusing the State Department of misusing taxpayer dollars by green-lighting $500 million for a United Nations climate change program without first obtaining congressional approval. The senators now are demanding the department justify the “cloak-and-dagger” contribution to the Green Climate Fund (GCF) – even threatening legal action.

Senator Cory Gardner

Lawyers cannot replace the constitutional requirement that only Congress can appropriate money,” Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., said, adding that he’s demanding a “full legal analysis.”

Gardner, in a statement to FoxNews.com, alleged the department was trying to “wave a magic wand and write a half-billion dollar check to a Green Climate Fund that they admit was never authorized by Congress.” He also vowed to “pursue legislative action that prevents cloak-and-dagger re-programming of money outside of congressional approval.”

At the center of the dispute is whether the State Department abused its authority in shifting funds between an existing program and the climate fund. The Obama administration – despite resistance from congressional Republicans — has committed the U.S. to contributing $3 billion to the fund, a program established by the United Nations to help poor countries adopt clean energy technologies to address climate change. Nearly 200 other nations have agreed to provide $100 billion per year by 2020, from private and public sources.

Along with Gardner, Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., maintains Congress has not allocated any funding for what he calls the “international climate change slush fund” and has in fact “prohibited the transfer of funds to create new programs.”

The State Department acknowledges the funding was never explicitly approved by Congress – but argues the department was within its authority to shift funding to the Green Climate Fund, because Congress did not explicitly prohibit funding the GCF.  

Under questioning by Barrasso at a March 8 Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Heather Higginbottom told the committee the funds were diverted from the department’s Economic Support Fund — which provides economic funding to foreign countries — to the GCF after a full review by department lawyers.

State Department spokeswoman Katherine Pfaff also confirmed to FoxNews.com the source of the funding was the economic fund, but could not say from which exact program the money came. And she bluntly addressed the GOP senators’ accusation. “Did Congress authorize the Green Climate Fund? No,” she said, adding that department lawyers “reviewed the authority and the process under which we can do it.”  The administration, meanwhile, has requested another $750 million for the GCF in its fiscal 2017 budget. Higginbottom also insisted they were not required to notify Congress about the transfer from the Economic Support Fund.

At the hearing, though, Barrasso said the first installment of the $3 billion pledge was “a blatant misuse of taxpayer dollars.”

Read the whole story here.

DCG

DCG

Executions….whatever. Let’s make a deal with Iran and give them some money! Smart power or something.

Via Huffington Post: The Islamic Republic hit the highest rate of executing people since 1989. The official number indicates that Iran executed nearly two times more people in 2015 in comparison to 2010 when the hardline president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was in office, as well as roughly 10 times more than the number of executions in 2005.

Approximately 1000 people were executed in 2015, according to the latest report from the United Nations investigator, Ahmed Shaheed, the special rapporteur for human rights in Iran. The unofficial number is higher.

The peak of the executions in 2015 was between April and June in which nearly 4 people were executed every day on average. Most of the executions were carried out in prisons located in urban areas such as Ghezel Hesar and Rajai Shahr in Karaj, and Adel Abad in Shiraz.

Iran has surpassed China in the number of executions being carried out per capita. Most of the executions in Iran are being done by hanging. In addition to the alarming increase in executions, fundamental rights of Iranians and ethnic and religious minorities appear to have regressed in 2015 as well. In addition, this year witnessed the highest level of disqualification of political candidates, 61 percent, since the establishment of the Islamic Republic, 1979.

Who and Which Groups are Being Mainly Targeted

Iranian authorities claim that these executions are overwhelmingly related to drugs offenses. Nevertheless, many of the executions were linked to other issues. Only around 65 percent of those who were executed were charged with violating Iran’s narcotics law.

In other areas, according to Amnesty International, the Islamic Republic remains a leading executioner of minors. Currently, 160 juvenile offenders are on Iran’s death row. Other human rights groups also believe that Iran has executed more juveniles than any other country. Michael G. Bochenek, senior counsel of the children’s rights division at Human Rights Watch pointed out “Iran is almost certainly the world leader in executing juvenile offenders.” Some articles in Iran’s criminal code allows girls as young as 9 and boys as young as 15 to receive death sentences.

In addition, ethnic and religious minority communities, including the Sunni, Arabs, and Bahai continue to be systematically targeted and discriminated against.

Iran’s Sunni are the largest minority in the country. Some of the discrimination that the Sunnis have suffered, according the UN report, are that the Sunni communities in Iran “have long complained that Iranian authorities do not appoint or employ them in high ranking government positions such as cabinet-level ministers or governors. They have also raised concerns regarding reported restrictions on the construction of Sunni mosques in Shia-majority areas, including the capital Tehran, and the execution or imminent execution of Sunni activists the government alleges were involved in terrorist-related activities.”

Other groups include journalists, artists, writers, musicians, and human rights activists who witness arbitrary arrests, detentions and prosecutions.

Amnesty International and the United Nations do not have executive power to force Iran to reform its law or hold Iranian leaders accountable, but the UN can offer recommendations such as the latest one in which Iran is asked to “take the necessary steps to ensure and that it citizens fully enjoy the rights and freedoms awarded to by the Iranian constitution with special emphasis on the right to freedom of expression, the right to political activity and their right to assemble”. According to Nazanin, an Iranian lawyer based in Karaj, “ Iran’s judiciary and parliament will ignore these recommendations and not follow up with them”.

Read the whole story here.

DCG

The United Nations is now without excuse if the persecute the Church

Reverend Lee Stoneking addressing the General Assembly of the United Nations in New York City. April 22nd, 2015.

The Great Commission

 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go.  When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” – Matthew 28:16-20

Submitted for your encouragement.

♞

Mysterious boxes containing surveillance cameras are appearing across America, unknown to and without the approval or supervision of local law enforcement.

(1) Phoenix, Arizona

The most recent one, with tainted windows, appeared on a utility pole near 21st and Glendale avenues in Phoenix, Arizona (see below).

Jon Erickson reports for ABC15 Arizona, April 6, 2016, that local resident Brian Clegg alerted Arizona’s largest utilities provider Salt River Project (SRP) to the mysterious box, which faced Clegg’s house, a strip mall and a high school.

An SRP representative told ABC15 that no one had permission to put the box on their utility pole, and that there were indications that law enforcement “was connected” to the box. But SRP would not elaborate.

Clegg said the crew who installed the box came in a truck marked “Field Pros.” A Google search of that name does not return any utility or surveillance company, nor is the company registered in Arizona.

Late last month, Clegg videoed an SRP crew removing the box.

ABC15 reader Paula Frazier wrote in a comment that the mysterious box “was pointed toward a strip mall with an ammo shop” and that ATF wants “to know who’s buying guns and ammo.”

Frazier is right: There is an ammo shop, United Nations Ammo Company, in the strip mall at N. 21st and Glendale Ave. — the location of the mysterious box on the utility pole.

(2) Limestone, New York

Last October, residents in the rural community of Limestone, NY, were also perplexed by cameras mounted on utility poles at the intersection of Route 219 and Bailey Drive.

Ed Reilly reports for ABC7 Buffalo, October 8, 2015, that Limestone officials said the cameras are not being used for traffic, and admitted that they don’t know themselves why the cameras were installed. 

“They should have come to the board first and told us what they are doing because it is our community,” said Former mayor and current board member for the Town of Carrollton Ralph Bottone said inquiries had gone unanswered.

Limestone residents said the cameras were installed approximately a month ago and aimed at Rt.219 traffic heading north and south only a few miles from the Pennsylvania border.

The New York State Department of Transportation (DOT) told 7 Eyewitness News that its only connection to the cameras was approving an installation permit for the Department of Homeland Security, and that the DOT does not operate or monitor the cameras. Homeland Security had little to say other than issuing a short statement: “We can’t confirm or deny that the cameras belong to Homeland Security.”

(3) Lehigh Acres & naples, Florida

Dave Hodges reports for NBC2, March 29, 2016, that a Lehigh Acres resident was suspicious about an electric box that was installed on a power pole outside his home. It didn’t look like anything else in the neighborhood, and it seemed to be pointing toward his house.

Armed with a lengthy pole with his cell phone attached to one end, he lifted his phone up to get a peek at what was inside the box. When he looked at the video, it was unmistakable: A camera was peering out from the other side of black, tinted glass.

The man called the Lee County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) to complain, and not long after, a work crew with a bucket truck was on his street taking down the electric box with the camera inside. But they wouldn’t tell him what the box or camera were for.

A homeowner living near the electric box in Lehigh Acres said she was told the box was there to improve cell reception and might be moved in a few months. By Tuesday morning, the electric box in Lehigh Acres was taken down.

There is at least another identical electric box installed in a different neighborhood in Lehigh Acres. Homeowners in the area were mostly unaware of the camera except for Mike Frisby, who said that “The shape and everything lead me to think it was a camera.”

NBC2 reached out to the Lee County Sheriff’s Office for an interview, but the request was declined. In an email, a spokesperson for the sheriff’s office wrote:

“We are not at liberty to discuss any special investigative techniques or tactics that we employ. It would be ludicrous to comment on our capabilities and inform the criminal element just how we operate. We follow state laws that govern search and seizure, as well as laws handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States.”

The Lehigh Acres electric boxes are similar to fake electric boxes installed in a Naples, Florida community that turned out to be surveillance cameras. Residents in that neighborhood also said they were told the boxes would help boost cell phone reception.

Slade Gurr, CEO of Covert Law Enforcement that sells surveillance technology, says it’s not uncommon for law enforcement to conceal these cameras from the public because “It really defeats the purpose to tell someone that there will be a surveillance system available.” He says these covert cameras have become increasingly helpful to law enforcement — “Officers today using technology are able to do things that in the past it might have taken four or five officers and several days to conduct the type of investigations that we’re able to do.” Gurr believes that most law enforcement agencies are not using covert cameras for general surveillance of the public but for specific investigations where “there’s typically a specific reason or specific type of investigation that is being conducted.”

But ACLU of Florida Executive Director Howard Simon is calling foul: “That is a bunch of bologna. This is not a law enforcement tactic.” Simon says law enforcement agencies should provide proof that surveillance cameras are making a difference by accomplishing their purpose. More important to Simon is whether there are policies in place to prevent potential abuse of surveillance cameras by law enforcement, so that residence in the area under surveillance are assured “there are also protections in place to protect the privacy of the citizens of the community.”

Writing for the blog The Torn Republic, Dave Hodges claims — without providing either evidence or a source citation — that the mysterious boxes with surveillance cameras are installed by the Obama Administration’s ATF “as part of the Safe Cities Network” and in “acquiescence to United Nations authority”.

For what the Safe Cities Network it, please see my post of October 19, 2015, “Obama cedes U.S. sovereignty to international body via Strong Cities Network“.

H/t FOTM‘s Glenn47

~Eowyn

If you’re living in a neighborhood of mainly “whites,” or Christians, or non-refugees, or middle-class income earners, or traditional man-woman households, and your town or city receives federal dollars, say goodbye to the neighborhood as you have known it.

That’s because last July, the Obama Administration’s Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) finalized a new “fair housing” rule called “affirmatively further fair housing choice” (AFFH), which will begin to be enforced nationwide in 2019.

As explained by Ed Gramlich of the National Low Income HousingCoalition, in “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: Final Regulations,” the new rule is an addition to the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which prohibits housing discrimination against the “protected classes” of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or disability, by requiring “program participants” to “affirmatively further fair housing” by taking steps “to actively overcome historic patterns of segregation“.

“Program participants” are defined as “jurisdictions” (towns/cities/counties/states) and public housing agencies (PHAs) that receive federal funds for housing and urban development, which in practice means every neighborhood in the US, for is there a town or city or county or state that doesn’t receive federal dollars for housing and urban development?

Translated into plainer English, that means if your town/city/county/state contains sections and neighborhoods that lack blacks, Muslims, LGBTs, Mexican illegals, Syrian refugees, and the mentally ill, the assumption is that the homogeneity is a result of discriminatory housing practices. And if your town/city/county/state gets federal dollars for housing and urban development — which means everywhere in the U.S. — then your local government is required to “desegregate” and break up your neighborhood’s offensive homogeneity.

In the preamble to the rule, HUD stresses that “the new AFFH approach does not mandate specific outcomes. Rather, it establishes a standardized fair housing assessment and planning process to give program participants a more effective means to affirmatively further the purposes of the Fair Housing Act.” Blah, blah, blah.

What will happen

(1) HUD will provide each “program participant” (henceforth, I’ll call it “your town”) with the following:

• Data on housing in your town and the surrounding region.
• The new “affirmatively further fair housing choice” (AFFH) rule that provides “a standard framework” for program participants to use to identify and examine “fair housing issues” and the underlying “contributing factors” that cause any housing discriminatory issues. A “fair housing issue” is defined as “a condition that restricts choice or access to opportunity, including:
  • Ongoing local or regional segregation, or lack of integration.
  • Racial or ethnic concentrations of poverty.
  • Significant disparities in access to opportunity.
  • Disproportionate housing needs based on the “protected classes” of race, color,
    national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or disability.
  • Evidence of illegal discrimination or violations of civil rights laws, regulations, or guidance.

(2) Your local government then uses the data to assess whether and how “fair” the housing is in your town; identify neighborhoods lacking “fair housing”; and set “fair housing goals and priorities”. All of that should be submitted to HUD in an “Assessment of Fair Housing” (AFH), the development of which requires “public participation”.

(3) HUD receives, reviews, and decides whether to accept your town’s AFH.

(4) If accepted, your town must “certify (pledge) that they are affirmatively furthering fair housing choice” by incorporating its HUD-approved AFH into its Consolidated Plan (ConPlan) and Public Housing Agency (PHA) Plan. Specifically, this means, your town must “take meaningful actions” to “address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to community opportunity” by:

• “Replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns.”
• “Transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity.”
• “Fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing law.”
• Removing “obvious impediments” to “fair housing,” such as “refusing to rent to families with children,” lack of large rental units, zoning that limits multifamily housing, and “insurance practices that reinforce segregated housing patterns” (whatever that means). See “Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice“.

(5) HUD will “monitor” your town’s “compliance” to the new “fair housing” rule by requiring your local government to submit an Annual Performance Report of its ConPlan (called CAPER), wherein your local government must:

• Summarize the “impediments to fair housing” in your community;
• Describe the actions taken in the past year to overcome the effects of those “impediments”.

(6) Your town must submit a new AFH every 5 years, which will result in a new ConPlan and PHA Plan.

When new rule will be enforced

HUD says “Most program participants will not be required to use the new AFFH system until 2019.” The exact timing or due date for a “program participant” to submit an “Assessment of Fair Housing” (AFH) depends on:

• Whether the “jurisdiction” (town/city/county/state) receives less or more than $500,000 in federal funds;
• Whether the public housing agency has less or more than 550 public housing units and vouchers.

If you thought Agenda 21 is bad, this new “fair housing” rule is Agenda 21 On Steroids, and it will wreak havoc in neighborhoods and communities across America. And yet, not a word from Congress or the useless media.

Please help publicize this by disseminating this post via email and social media. Thank you.

~Eowyn

Via Fox News: Immigrants who want to enter the U.S. illegally can learn how and where to avoid the Border Patrol from an advisory on the agency’s own website, which critics say is evidence of the Obama administration’s “schizophrenic” approach to enforcement.   

Safety and sanctuary can generally be found at schools, churches, hospitals and protests, where Customs and Border Protection agents are barred under a “sensitive locations policy” from carrying out their duty of enforcing border security. In fact, the agency’s website states that actions at such locations can only be undertaken in an emergency or with a supervisor’s approval.

“The policies are meant to ensure that ICE and CBP officers and agents exercise sound judgment when enforcing federal law at or focused on sensitive locations, to enhance the public understanding and trust, and to ensure that people seeking to participate in activities or utilize services provided at any sensitive location are free to do so, without fear or hesitation,” the government website states in both English and Spanish.

While the explanation is apparently meant to show the deference Customs and Border Protection agents show to sensitive societal institutions, critics, including the Media Research Center, say it also tells illegal border crossers where to go if they are being pursued. Agents are barred from interviewing, searching or arresting suspected illegal immigrants in such locations.

“So, almost any illegal alien can escape arrest by either walking with a second person (a march), attending some type of class, or finding a nearby church, medical facility or school bus stop,” the Center wrote in a post bringing the advisory to light.

A “Frequently Asked Questions” section explains in detail what the Customs and Border Patrol’s parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security, considers safe zones for illegal immigrants.

• Schools, such as known and licensed day cares, pre-schools and other early learning programs; primary schools; secondary schools; post-secondary schools up to and including colleges and universities; as well as scholastic or education-related activities or events, and school bus stops that are marked and/or known to the officer, during periods when school children are present at the stop;
• Medical treatment and health care facilities, such as hospitals, doctors’ offices, accredited health clinics, and emergent or urgent care facilities;
• Places of worship, such as churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples;
• Religious or civil ceremonies or observances, such as funerals and weddings;
• During public demonstration, such as a march, rally, or parade.

Critics of the Obama administration’s immigration policies have long complained that it undermines the mission of border enforcement by imposing rules on agents that they say leave them unable to do their jobs.

“This administration has systematically and maliciously attacked and deconstructed all phases of border enforcement,” said Dan Stein, president of Federation for American Immigration Reform. “It’s to the point now where virtually nobody has to go home. ICE is no longer carrying out its core mission, of finding, identifying and removing illegal aliens from the country. Agents are in a state of despair,” Stein added. “They are being turned into nursemaids, chaperones and bus drivers.”

Telling people suspected of breaking the law where they can seek refuge makes no sense, said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies for the Center for Immigration Studies.

“It’s schizophrenic,” Vaughan said. “What the Obama administration has done is to create sanctuaries for illegal aliens and to publicize them. That is fine for a social welfare agency, but not for a law enforcement agency. No law enforcement agency would ever want to broadcast where lawbreakers can go to be shielded from the consequences of their actions.”

The site does say the “sensitive locations policy” does not apply to places directly along the border, but warns its own agents that if they plan to move on a suspect in such a location near the border they “are expected to exercise sound judgment and common sense while taking appropriate action, consistent with the goals of this policy.”

The CBP website also provides a toll-free number and email address to allow illegal immigrants to report possible violations of the “sensitive locations” policy.

DCG

This is serious and genuinely alarming.

Bruce Schneier is the Chief Technology Officer of Resilient, an IBM Company, a fellow at Harvard’s Berkman Center, and a board member of Electronic Frontier Foundation — an organization defending our rights in the digital world.

In a blog post, Schneier sounds the alarm that in the past year, the websites of major companies that provide the Internet’s basic services repeatedly have been attacked, each time more sophisticated than the last, which suggests “someone” is practicing how to take down the Internet by learning from the companies’ defensive moves.

Below is Bruce Schneier’s blog post of Sept. 13, 2016, “Someone is Learning How to Take Down the Internet“:

Over the past year or two, someone has been probing the defenses of the companies that run critical pieces of the Internet. These probes take the form of precisely calibrated attacks designed to determine exactly how well these companies can defend themselves, and what would be required to take them down. We don’t know who is doing this, but it feels like a large nation state. China or Russia would be my first guesses.

First, a little background. If you want to take a network off the Internet, the easiest way to do it is with a distributed denial-of-service attack (DDoS). Like the name says, this is an attack designed to prevent legitimate users from getting to the site. There are subtleties, but basically it means blasting so much data at the site that it’s overwhelmed. These attacks are not new: hackers do this to sites they don’t like, and criminals have done it as a method of extortion. There is an entire industry, with an arsenal of technologies, devoted to DDoS defense. But largely it’s a matter of bandwidth. If the attacker has a bigger fire hose of data than the defender has, the attacker wins.

Recently, some of the major companies that provide the basic infrastructure that makes the Internet work have seen an increase in DDoS attacks against them. Moreover, they have seen a certain profile of attacks. These attacks are significantly larger than the ones they’re used to seeing. They last longer. They’re more sophisticated. And they look like probing. One week, the attack would start at a particular level of attack and slowly ramp up before stopping. The next week, it would start at that higher point and continue. And so on, along those lines, as if the attacker were looking for the exact point of failure.

The attacks are also configured in such a way as to see what the company’s total defenses are. There are many different ways to launch a DDoS attack. The more attack vectors you employ simultaneously, the more different defenses the defender has to counter with. These companies are seeing more attacks using three or four different vectors. This means that the companies have to use everything they’ve got to defend themselves. They can’t hold anything back. They’re forced to demonstrate their defense capabilities for the attacker.

I am unable to give details, because these companies spoke with me under condition of anonymity. But this all is consistent with what Verisign is reporting. Verisign is the registrar for many popular top-level Internet domains, like .com and .net. If it goes down, there’s a global blackout of all websites and e-mail addresses in the most common top-level domains. Every quarter, Verisign publishes a DDoS trends report. While its publication doesn’t have the level of detail I heard from the companies I spoke with, the trends are the same: “in Q2 2016, attacks continued to become more frequent, persistent, and complex.”

There’s more. One company told me about a variety of probing attacks in addition to the DDoS attacks: testing the ability to manipulate Internet addresses and routes, seeing how long it takes the defenders to respond, and so on. Someone is extensively testing the core defensive capabilities of the companies that provide critical Internet services.

Who would do this? It doesn’t seem like something an activist, criminal, or researcher would do. Profiling core infrastructure is common practice in espionage and intelligence gathering. It’s not normal for companies to do that. Furthermore, the size and scale of these probes — and especially their persistence — points to state actors. It feels like a nation’s military cybercommand trying to calibrate its weaponry in the case of cyberwar. It reminds me of the US’s Cold War program of flying high-altitude planes over the Soviet Union to force their air-defense systems to turn on, to map their capabilities.

What can we do about this? Nothing, really. We don’t know where the attacks come from. The data I see suggests China, an assessment shared by the people I spoke with. On the other hand, it’s possible to disguise the country of origin for these sorts of attacks. The NSA, which has more surveillance in the Internet backbone than everyone else combined, probably has a better idea, but unless the US decides to make an international incident over this, we won’t see any attribution.

But this is happening. And people should know.

A reader of Schneier’s blog-post, Random Guy 17, wrote this interesting comment:

“An attack on a service is best done by an attacker that doesn’t need that service. You don’t pull the plug on the power company that supplies your own home/business.

With that in mind, a closed, not highly Internet enabled country makes the most sense- like China.”

Other commenters warn that it may be the U.S. government, e.g., the NSA, doing the attacks — to find the Internet’s weaknesses (in order to better defend it), or more malevolently, as bargaining chip for more money allocated to cyber-security.

It doesn’t help that in two weeks, on October 1, control of the Internet — specifically, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) — will pass from U.S. administration to a multilateral body, most likely the United Nations International Telecommunications Union (ITU). (Breitbart)

H/t ZeroHedge and FOTM’s Will Shanley

UPDATE (Sept. 20, 2016):

Rhett Jones reports for Gizmodo, Sept. 11, 2016, that two 18-year-old Israelis — Itay Huri and Yarden Bidani —  have been arrested “in connection with an FBI investigation into vDOS, a cyberattack service that has been credited with perpetrating ‘a majority’ of the DDoS attacks over the last few years.”

The following evidence pointed to the Huri and Bidani as the perpetrators:

1.  Their vDOS service refused to attack Israeli sites in their “home country”.
2. vDOS was hosted on a server that was traced back to Huri.
3. SMS notifications pointed to both men.
4. Huri and Bidani had co-authored a technical paper about DDoS attacks that was published in Israeli security magazine Digitals Whispers.

According to security blogger Brian Krebs, the vDOS site has reportedly raked in $618,000 (£465,835) for its services in two years.

According to Israeli news site The Marker, both men were arrested, then released on $10,000 bonds and placed under house arrest. Their passports have been taken away and they are forbidden from accessing the internet or any other telecommunications equipment for 30 days. It’s unclear if the two men will be extradited to the U.S and formally charged.

It is also unclear if Huri and Bidani are the perpetrators of the increasingly sophisticated DDoS attacks addressed in this post.

H/t FOTM‘s TPR.

~Eowyn

Booker T. Washington was right on the money (sorry for the pun).

Look under the rock of any liberal cause, you’ll find a slimy snake. The end game is always money.

As an example, a year ago, representatives of “developing nations” (Third World countries) to a UN Conference on Climate Change demanded more than $100  billion a year in “climate change” reparations.

Now, a UN panel has issued a report saying that the U.S. owes “African Americans” reparation for the history of slavery and “contemporary police killings”.

As reported by Ishaan Tharoor for the Washington Post, September 27, 2016, the UN panel is the United Nations’ Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, a body of human rights lawyers and law professors who  report to the international organization’s High Commissioner on Human Rights.

On Sept. 26, the group presented their findings to the UN Human Rights Council. The report says:

“In particular, the legacy of colonial history, enslavement, racial subordination and segregation, racial terrorism and racial inequality in the United States remains a serious challenge, as there has been no real commitment to reparations and to truth and reconciliation for people of African descent. Contemporary police killings and the trauma that they create are reminiscent of the past racial terror of lynching.”

Citing the past year’s spate of police officers killing unarmed black men, the panel warned against “impunity for state violence,” which has created, in its words, a “human rights crisis” that “must be addressed as a matter of urgency.”

Ironically, the same UN Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent conducted a fact-finding mission in the United States just this year in January, and hailed the strides that have been to make the U.S. criminal justice system more equitable.

Now, however, the Working Group has changed its mind. It said in a statement:

“Despite substantial changes since the end of the enforcement of Jim Crow and the fight for civil rights, ideology ensuring the domination of one group over another, continues to negatively impact the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of African Americans today. The dangerous ideology of white supremacy inhibits social cohesion amongst the US population.”

The reparations could come in a variety of forms, according to the panel, including “a formal apology, health initiatives, educational opportunities … psychological rehabilitation, technology transfer and financial support, and debt cancellation.”

The members of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent are:

1. Ricardo A. Sunga III (Chairperson, Philippines): a human rights lawyer and law professor.
2. Mireille Fanon-Mendes-France (France): a professor at the University Paris V- Descartes in France; currently a visiting professor at the University of California, Berkeley in international law and conflict resolution.
3. Sabelo Gumedze (South Africa): head and senior researcher of the Research and Development Unit of the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSIRA) of South Africa.
4. Michal Balcerzak (Poland): professor of international human rights law at the Nicolaus Copernicus University in Poland.
5. Ahmed Reid (Jamaica): assistant professor of Caribbean History at the City University of New York

See also “Attn: Useful Idiots! There’s a website for you to pay reparations to blacks“.

~Eowyn