THE TRUTH ABOUT TRUTH:

All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.



Thursday, January 8, 2009

The CFR: "CHRISTIANS" On FOREIGN RELATIONS?

.
Boy Howdy, ya learn something new every day. Well, ya do if you’re as ignint as I is. (Are?)

What’d I learn? Something about the COUNCIL On FOREIGN RELATIONS (CFR)? Nah. I’ve had a handle on that subject for a very long time. In fact, anyone who’s known me for even just ninety minutes has heard me bitchin’ ‘n’ moanin’ ‘bout the Council on Foreign Relations for what, to them, must feel like ninety years. I have plenty to say about the CFR, and I’ve said it, too! You can read THIS. Or THIS. Or even THIS.

No, it’s not WHAT but WHO. Certainly I’m aware that the CFR Benedict Arnoldian (traitorodoriferous) stench has wafted into every facet of American life because Council members have been found from the Presidency to the Congress, from the Judiciary to the Media, from Wall Street to Philanthropic Foundations, from Academia to the Center Of The Universe (Prescott, Arizona) and all points between and beyond.

Even so, this story I found on the web took me just a leetle mite by surprise. As you will learn, Barack Obama’s choice of pastor RICK WARREN to lead the prayer at the 44th president’s January 20th inauguration isn’t quite the eyebrow-raising “Whatchoo Talkin’ ‘Bout, Willis?” moment that it might at first blush appear to be. Obama isn’t really ‘Incongrutiating’, it only looks that way. I mean, I too initially asked myself: “Why would a Christian like Obama [*Wink!-Wink! Nudge!-Nudge!*] want a (supposedly) Christian’s Christian like Rick Warren to do the ‘God He’p Us’ at his upcoming coming-out party?” But in reading the following article, I got the answer, and It Came Upon A Midnight Clear… and disturbingly dark:

RICK WARREN, THE CFR, AND BARACK OBAMA

Written by Ann Shibler and Art Thompson
Friday, 19 December 2008

Is Obama’s choice of Rick Warren to give the invocation at the presidential inauguration purposefully driven? The news media, Evangelicals, the gay community, pro-lifers, and the general public are all agog either positively or negatively, over Obama’s choice of Rick Warren, pastor and founder of the mega Saddleback Church to give the inaugural invocation.

Members of the Saddleback Church are happy about the choice. For them it’s a publicity coup that will bring Warren and his church even greater mainstream visibility.

The gay community, however, is fuming. Rick Warren supposedly supported Prop 8 in California that banned gay marriages and in the past has stated that the traditional marriage really need not be disturbed.

The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay rights organization, said, upon learning of the appointment: "We feel a deep level of disrespect when one of the architects and promoters of an anti-gay agenda is given the prominence and the pulpit of your historic nomination." The group sent a letter detailing its complaints to Obama, asking him to reconsider.

Obama, meanwhile, has defended his choice, saying, “dialogue is part of what my campaign is all about," while noting that in his opinion Warren is a "fierce advocate for equality" for gays and lesbians, and will remain so. The president-elect also said a "wide range of viewpoints" will be presented during the inaugural ceremonies. In fact, he enlisted a gay marching band for the parade -- The Gay and Lesbian Band Association. He says he and vice-president elect Biden are proud and honored to have them.

Warren’s pending appearance is also causing pro-life groups and others to wonder why a supposed pro-lifer would want to accept such an invitation from a decidedly pro-abortion minded president-elect. They were equally puzzled when Warren invited then-candidate Obama to speak at his church at a seminar entitled, “We Must Work Together.”

From Ingrid Schlueter’s “Slice of Laodicea,” a website that offers commentary on the modern Christian church, comes this
marvelous insight into Rick Warren’s philosophy:

You may have read Warren’s
quote this week that the “social gospel is Marxism in Christian clothing.” Really, Rick? There is absolutely nothing so effective in the bottomless bag of tricks of our emerging cultural architects than this ploy. Nobody better embodies the social gospel than Rick Warren. For years, he has been exposed for promoting exactly that—helping people externally minus the exclusive Gospel of Jesus Christ. Yet here we have the man who has done more to further the social gospel than any other, actually decrying the “social gospel.”

Schlueter offers more saying that Warren’s message is that one can now “claim to be pro-life while aiding and abetting someone fully committed to continuing the bloodshed of innocents.” Warren, she says, believes that contradictory opposites don’t have to drive each other apart:

This is an irreconcilable difference–being pro-life and pro-death. Rick Warren wants us to believe that out of the two opposing sides, out of the struggle, there can be eventual unity and progress. That there can emerge a synthesis.

Warren’s actions speak louder than his rhetoric. Claiming to be pro-life, he promotes abortion. Claiming to be anti-Marxist, he practices a fundamental tenets of it, that of Lenin’s “unity of opposites.” Claiming to be against modern society’s social gospel, he instead is a practitioner of it.

Human beings cannot look into the soul of man but there are indications that Warren may not be what he seems and that Obama, once again, is getting his marching orders from the New World Order crowd.

The August 18, 2008 issue of Time magazine displayed a large picture of Rick Warren and called him “America’s most powerful religious leader…” The article inside was titled, “
The Global Ambition of Rick Warren.” The subtitle read, “How a charismatic Californian became the closest thing to Billy Graham – and why religion in America will never be the same.”

After the movement against the war in Vietnam, the violence driven civil rights activists, plus the charade of the collapse of communism, Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) and other radical terrorist organizations were given instructions to assimilate into the mainstream of America and work there to bring about socialism.

It is interesting to see how many of the former leaders in the SDS, Black Panthers and other communist controlled organizations became religious leaders.

Stokley Carmichael of “Burn, Baby, Burn” fame, as well as H. Rap Brown, leader of the Black Panthers, became leaders of radical Islam to carry forward their Marxism.

Michael Lerner, whom J. Edgar Hoover called the most dangerous terrorist in America, the leader of the SDS in Seattle, became a rabbi.

And, Rick Warren, who led a march on his local courthouse for the SDS, has soared to great heights. Does he still believe what he professed in the 1960s?

Careful reading of the Time article has many hints that his Christianity is not the Christianity of our fathers. But there is one clue that tells us all we need to know.

In America, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is the primary promoter of the the “New World Order” internationalism once praised by the first President Bush and is linked with several other similar organizations around the world to promote a one world government under a form of socialism. It is an elitist organization. One cannot be a member of the CFR and not realize that their policies lead to the abrogation of the Constitution, sovereignty, and independence of the United States. David Rockefeller, who has admitted in his biography that he is part of a cabal to bring about a one world government, was the chairman for 15 years.

Rick Warren is a member of the CFR.

Obama has surrounded himself, just as Bush did, with members of the CFR. In addition, Obama has shown a propensity to also surround himself with people who came out of the radical and terrorist movement of the 1960s and 1970s, and, in the process the CFR controlled media has made it appear as if it is all centrist politics.

When you know and understand the details, it’s a lot easier to know just who Obama -- and Warren -- are pandering to in all of this, and who’s goals they are furthering.

Say, did you notice how in my opening paragraphs I didn’t call Barack an “Obama-Rama-Lama-Ding-Dong” or a “Marxist Maroon”, or anything like that? It’s because I’ve decided to make a New Year’s Resolution to stop calling all these political pinheads “Political Pinheads.” I’m going to give up all the name-calling and from now on, treat everyone with the utmost respect and civility. No more telling the socialist dogs that they’re “a pack of Socialist Dogs.” No more calling Democrats “Dumb-O-Crats” and Republicans “Repugnantcans.” I won’t be reminding the Liberals anymore that they’re a bunch of weenies; or calling the brainwashed pseudo-conservatives “Neoconned Newtwits.”

Yep, that’s all behind me now, folks. The Feminists are no longer “Brain-dead Bean Curd.” (Well, I mean, I won’t be saying that they are.) I won’t be calling the American Civil Liberties Union “a bunch of Commie f—” … Uhm… “a bunch of Commie f—” … Dang it, I’ve already faggotten what I used to call them. But anyway, I’ll no longer be labeling the— Freaks! That’s what it was: “a bunch of Commie freaks!” Now I remember. … Anyhow… I’ll no longer be labeling the New York Times articles “Democratic Chips And Dipsh#tism”, nor referring to TV’s mainstream Talking Head political pundits as “Very Special Olympians.” Heck, I think I’m even going to withhold my criticism of Rush Limboob. Er… that’s “Limbaugh.” (Doh! Old habits die hard.)

But I’m not ready to try embracing MICHAEL MEDVED yet. I mean, there’s no point in overdoing it in a single year only to perish by heart attack trying to display love that I just ain’t truly acquired yet. (Or more embarrassingly, choking to death on my own vomit.) Perhaps I’ll see if I can add “MENDACIOUS MEDVED” to the mix in 2010 (if I don’t explode and die in 2009).

Yes, sirree, good people, I’m going to “do unto others as I would have others do unto me.” I guess many women will be testifying and I’ll be going to prison soon. “But no, but no, but no!” (…to quote my old friend Pooh) seriously, from this point on, it’s exclusively the kinder, gentler Stephen T. McCarthy.

Damn [*sniffle!*] I miss me already.

~ Stephen T. McCarthy

Psst. Of course, someone could get up a small petition, ya know, like a small petition? And if it said something like “Bring Back The Clown!” or “Can New Coke And Give Us Classic Coke” or “Stephen! Stephen! Come Back!” we here at the STMcC Company would obligingly listen, as we always acquiesce to the will of our readers (when they’re right… or if they’re wrong but we think there’s money in it).
.

2 comments:

  1. Dang it man and Rick Warren actually has a good book on how to study the bible too. The CFR? That ain't right.... Very disappointing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. .
    >>[That ain't right....]<<

    But then again, what IS right about this world we live in?

    >>[Very disappointing.]<<

    "Disappointing"... ain't that just a synonym for "Life"?

    ~ STMcC
    <"As a dog returns to his own vomit,
    so a fool repeats his folly."
    ~ Proverbs 26:11>

    ReplyDelete

--> NOTE: COMMENT MODERATION IS ACTIVATED. <--
All submitted comments that do not transgress "Ye Olde Comment Policy" will be posted and responded to as soon as possible. Thanks for taking the time to comment.