ARABIA BEHEADS AND CRUCIFIES MURDER CONVICT

GM STRUCTURE I-INVESTMENT O-OWNERSHIP
U.S GOVT. I-$50 BILLION,O-60%
CANADIAN GOVT. I-$9.5 BILLION,O-12.5%
U.A.W O-17.5%
BONDHOLDERS O-10%
SHAREHOLDERS O-0%

OBAMA MOCKS PEOPLE ASKING FOR BIRTH CIRTIFICATE RECORDS - VIDEO,STORY
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=99616
http://www.politico.com/singletitlevideo.html?bcpid=1155201977&bctid=24410823001

Should Obama Control the Internet? A new bill would give the President emergency authority to halt web traffic and access private data.—By Steve Aquino Thu April 2, 2009 12:33 PM PST.Should President Obama have the power to shut down domestic Internet traffic during a state of emergency?

Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) think so. On Wednesday they introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor—an arm of the executive branch that would have vast power to monitor and control Internet traffic to protect against threats to critical cyber infrastructure. That broad power is rattling some civil libertarians.The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to declare a cybersecurity emergency and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any critical information network in the interest of national security.The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access.This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.Rockefeller made cybersecurity one of his key issues as a member of the Senate intelligence committee, which he chaired until last year. He now heads the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, which will take up this bill.

We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs—from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records—the list goes on,Rockefeller said in a statement. Snowe echoed her colleague, saying, if we fail to take swift action, we, regrettably, risk a cyber-Katrina.But the wide powers outlined in the Rockefeller-Snowe legislation has at least one Internet advocacy group worried.The cybersecurity threat is real,says Leslie Harris, head of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT),but such a drastic federal intervention in private communications technology and networks could harm both security and privacy.The bill could undermine the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), says CDT senior counsel Greg Nojeim. That law, enacted in the mid '80s, requires law enforcement seek a warrant before tapping in to data transmissions between computers.It's an incredibly broad authority, Nojeim says, pointing out that existing privacy laws could fall to this authority.Jennifer Granick, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, says that granting such power to the Commerce secretary could actually cause networks to be less safe. When one person can access all information on a network, it makes it more vulnerable to intruders,Granick says. You've basically established a path for the bad guys to skip down.

The bill's scope, she says, is contrary to what the Constitution promises us.That's because of the impact it could have on Internet users' privacy rights: If the Commerce Department uncovers evidence of illegal activity when accessing critical networks, that information could be used against a potential defendant, even if the department never had the intent to find incriminating evidence. And this might violate the Constitutional protection against searches without cause.Once information is accessed, it can be used for whatever purpose, no matter the original reason for accessing something,Granick says. Who's interested in this [bill]? Law enforcement and people in the security industry who want to ensure more government dollars go to them.Nojeim, though, thinks it's possible the bill's powers could be trimmed as it moves through Congress. We will be working with them to clarify just what is needed and how to accomplish that,he says.We're hopeful that some of the very broad powers that the bill would confer won't be included.

MARK KLEIN VIDEO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_qYGbieoMM&feature=player_embedded

Cybersecurity Is Framework For Total Government Regulation & Control Of Our Lives Paul Joseph Watson & Kurt Nimmo Prison Planet.com Monday, June 1, 2009


The Obama administration’s new Cybersecurity system will only make the Internet more vulnerable to attack, while creating the framework for a massively upgraded government surveillance grid that will control and regulate every aspect of our daily lives through the implementation of smart technology.Obama’s announcement of the new cybersecurity grid dovetails with a recently introduced Senate bill, the Cybersecurity Act of 2009, that would hand the president the power to shut down the entire Internet in the event of a cybersecurity crisis.The bill’s draft states that the president may order a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic and would give the government ongoing access to all relevant data concerning (critical infrastructure) networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access,reports Raw Story.The legislation would allow the government to tap into any digital aspect of every citizen’s information without a warrant. Banking, business and medical records would be wide open to inspection, as well as personal instant message and e mail communications.This is President Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program on steroids, yet the reaction from the liberal left has been muted to say the least.Furthermore, the reasoning behind the proposal is a farce, since cybersecurity will make the Internet even more vulnerable to attack.According to Jennifer Granick, director of civil liberties at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the program would basically establish a path for the bad guys to skip down.One of the bill’s authors, Democratic Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, admitted that the bill was about more than just military or intelligence concerns. It is a lot more than that. It suddenly gets into the realm of traffic lights and rail networks and water and electricity,said Rockefeller.Essentially, this is the framework within which every aspect of our lives will be managed and regulated by a gargantuan government bureaucracy designed to control and shape every aspect of our behavior through our dependence on technology.

This is what Nancy Pelosi was referring to when she visited China last week and let slip the fact that Every aspect of our lives must be subject to inventory in order to fight global warming.Under the cybersecurity grid, our electricity consumption, our water consumption and every other basic utility that we rely upon will be subject to state regulation.This is already being introduced through smart technology, manifesting in such things as fridges that are controlled by power companies and not the individual. If you are deemed to have bypassed government-approved levels of consumption, your fridge will be automatically turned off remotely.A domestic refrigerator that can be turned on and off by the electricity supplier without the homeowner being aware is to go on trial,reported the Daily Mail in January. Npower will distribute 300 smart fridges free to homeowners throughout Britain within the next five weeks as part of the energy companies’ efforts to tackle climate change.

At times of high demand, the National Grid will activate the switches in the fridges to achieve a balance in the power supply. The development means that, for the first time, consumers will lose control over the use of electricity in their own homes, stated the report.All British homes are also set to have smart electricity and gas meters installed by law by 2020. The meters would record energy use according to a Reuters report.Likewise, water companies are preparing to force homeowners to install water meters so that water consumption can be accurately recorded and restricted in times of drought.This is just the beginning of the imposition of a suffocating prison planet whereby our every action will not only be recorded by big brother but also subject to government approval and control.The Cybersecurity grid will also be an upgrade of the pervasive snoop network that has already been operating under NSA auspices for decades.During a speech last week on cybersecurity, Obama told a whopper. He said the government’s effort to protect us from cyber bad guys will not include monitoring private sector networks or Internet traffic. We will preserve and protect the personal privacy and civil liberties that we cherish as Americans.Is it possible Obama has never heard of Mark Klein, the retired AT&T communications technician who said years ago that the company shunted all Internet traffic — including traffic from peering links connecting to other Internet backbone providers —to semantic traffic analyzers, installed in a secret room inside the AT&T central office on Folsom Street in San Francisco? There are similar rooms in Seattle, San Jose, Los Angeles and San Diego, all sucking up internet data.

Klein explained that the multinational corporation is doing this at the behest of the NSA. It is vacuum-cleaner surveillance approach that grabs everything.Despite what we are hearing, and considering the public track record of [the Bush] administration, I simply do not believe their claims that the NSA’s spying program is really limited to foreign communications or is otherwise consistent with the NSA’s charter or with FISA [the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act],said Klein in 2006.After the NSA showed up in 2002 at AT&T’s Folsom Street facility, Klein began connecting the dots. You might recall there was a big blowup in the news about the Total Information Awareness [TIA] program, led by Adm. [John] Poindexter, which caused the big upsetness in Congress, because what Poindexter was proposing to do was draw in databases from everywhere — and this was in The New York Times — draw in Internet data, bank records, travel records, everything into one big conglomeration which could be searchable by the government so they could find out everything about what anybody’s doing at any time of day,Klein told PBS.And all this would be done without any warrants. This is how it was presented by Poindexter himself in The New York Times, and that caused a great upset, brouhaha, in Congress.On January 16, 2003, Senator Russ Feingold introduced legislation to suspend the activity of the Total Information Awareness program pending a Congressional review of privacy issues involved. In February 2003, Congress passed legislation suspending activities of the IAO (Information Awareness Office) pending a Congressional report of the office’s activities.Congress acted after William Safire published an article in the New York Times claiming [TIA] has been given a $200 million budget to create computer dossiers on 300 million Americans (see You Are a Suspect, November 14, 2002).Of course, the program didn’t go away. Legislators included a classified annex to the Defense Appropriations Act that preserved funding for TIA’s component technologies, if they were transferred to other government agencies. TIA projects continued to be funded under classified annexes to Defense and Intelligence appropriation bills.

Total Information Awareness — the all-seeing terrorist spotting algorithm-meets-the-mother-of-all-databases that was ostensibly de-funded by Congress in 2003, never actually died, and was largely rebuilt in secret by the NSA, according to the Wall Street Journal’s Siobhan Gorman,Ryan Singel wrote for Wired on March 10, 2008. There’s been no real debate in Congress or in the press about whether the government should be allowed to track every Americans phone calls, emails and web browsing.Jon Stokes, writing for Ars Technica, notes that TIA technology is nothing new. TIA-like efforts are still going on Stokes wrote in 2005, and the government has been trying to use new technology, like database tech and voice recognition, for domestic surveillance for a long time. And when I say a long time, I mean well before the current administration came into office.It really got a boost under Clinton in 1995 when the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) was passed.CALEA mandated that the telcos aid wiretapping by installing remote wiretap ports onto their digital switches so that the switch traffic would be available for snooping by law enforcement.In other words, Mark Klein had but scratched the surface.Truman created the NSA in 1952, supposedly to serve as America’s ears abroad, but the agency has long served as a secret Stasi-like organization dedicated to snooping on Americans. The NSA, writes Siobhan Gorman for the Wall Street Journal, and other intelligence agencies were found to be using their spy tools to monitor Americans for political purposes.The NSA’s predecessor, the Armed Forces Security Agency, launched Project SHAMROCK in 1945. It obtained copies of all telegraphic information exiting or entering the United States with the full cooperation of RCA, ITT and Western Union. A sister project known as Project MINARET involved the creation of watch lists,by each of the intelligence agencies and the FBI, of those accused of subversive domestic activities. The watch lists included such notables as Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Jane Fonda, Joan Baez and Dr. Benjamin Spock, according to Patrick S. Poole, writing for Nexus Magazine in 1999. The FBI, the NSA, and other intelligence agencies were actively involved in creating the watch lists.NSA has attempted to keep up on technology as the secretive agency continues to snoop on subversives and others the government considers miscreants. In February, trade publications reported the agency is offering billions to any firm able to offer reliable eavesdropping on Skype IM and voice traffic. Skype is particularity troublesome because it utilizes P2P networks, that is to say peer-top-peer (no central server owned and operated by a telecom required). The government and the corporate media may tell you they want to crack down on P2P — for instance, the vastly popular BitTorrent — because of copyright infringement, but a more practical reason is because the government has yet to figure out how to crack the file sharing protocol. Skype and BitTorrent account for a large amount of traffic on the internet.

If you think Obama will roll back the government’s massive and unconstitutional snoop program, think again. On April 3, the Obama Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss one of the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s landmark lawsuits against illegal spying by the NSA. The DOJ demanded that the entire lawsuit be dismissed based on both the Bush administration’s claim that a state secrets privilege bars any lawsuits against the executive branch for illegal spying, as well as a novel sovereign immunity claim that the Patriot Act bars lawsuits of any kind for illegal government surveillance (see the EFF press release, Obama Administration Embraces Bush Position on Warrantless Wiretapping and Secrecy).In March, Obama’s coordinator for cybersecurity programs, Rod Beckstrom, a former Silicon Valley entrepreneur, quit because he opposed the role of the NSA in the so-called cybersecurity initiative. Beckstrom said the threats to our democratic processes are significant if all top level government network security and monitoring are handled by the NSA.Obama’s moves drew praise from key lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who vowed to work with the president to implement new security measures as needed,CQPolitics reported shortly after his cybersecurity speech. Obama said his cybersecurity adviser — who will be a member of both the National Security Staff and the National Economic Council staff — will head a new office within the White House.We applaud President Obama for highlighting the extraordinarily serious issue of cybersecurity,Sens. Johns D. Rockefeller IV, D-W.V., and Olympia J. Snowe , R-Maine, said in a joint statement. No other president in American history has elevated this issue to that level and we think him for his leadership.

No other president so far has had the power to shut down the internet. The Rockefeller-Snowe bill, S 778, would grant Obama dictatorial power declare a so-called cyber emergency and pull the plug, or at least cripple networks deemed a threat. The U.S. government is not seriously worried about Chinese hackers or mischievous kids in Latvia (as Rockefeller cited as a danger) but rather fear free and unfettered speech and activism on the part of its own citizens.Obama’s promise is merely an effort to string you along with a big fat lie. He has absolutely no respect for you or the Bill of Rights.

10 COMMANDMENT JUDGE AUDIO
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=99615

He's back! Ten Commandments judge takes on Obama,Roy Moore runs for governor, promotes So Help Me God June 01, 2009 12:37 am Eastern 2009 WorldNetDaily

Judge Roy Moore

WASHINGTON – Barack Obama has another outspoken critic on the stump today – Judge Roy Moore, former chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court launches his run for governor of that state and hits the national media promoting release of his autobiographical manifesto, So Help Me God.Moore is scheduled for appearances tomorrow on Fox & Friends, the Dennis Miller radio show, the Steve Malzberg radio show and other venues. He appears tonight on Alan Colmes' radio show and later on Bill Cunningham, Lee Rodgers and Sean Hannity's Fox News program. Moore's campaign for governor won't be a traditional race for statewide office. It is certain to become a national campaign, as his likely Democratic opponent in 2010 is Rep. Artur Davis, a friend of Obama from Harvard Law School who stands behind all of the president's most controversial policies. Moore, on the other hand, became a national hero to many conservatives and Christians for standing up for the acknowledgement of God while in public office – a position that cost him his elected office of chief justice.A previously unseen video clip of then-state Attorney General Bill Pryor grilling Moore about his refusal to stop acknowledging God while in office casts the Ten Commandments judge in a sympathetic new light for many who previously misunderstood the controversy in Alabama.Moore was picked as a likely winner in the state's 2010 governor's race in a February poll. Meanwhile, a poll conducted earlier this month by Davis shows him ahead of all likely Democratic challengers and all Republicans except Moore.A press release issued two weeks ago by the Davis camp said, The memo states that Davis has higher name identification than other announced or likely Democratic or Republican candidates with the exception of former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore.

Marines Train Civilians to Accept Coming Martial Law
Infowars June 1, 2009

Caption: U.S. Marines participate in a practice raid on Flushing Meadows Park with a CH-46 helicopter to demonstrate for civilians the tactics the U.S. Marine Corps uses while raiding an area in enemy territory, May 25, 2009. The Marines are assigned to the 6th Marine Regiment’s 2nd Battalion. The demonstration was part of Fleet Week 2009activities. U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Carl Payne.Marines invade Clove Lakes Park during a demonstration as part of Fleet Week last month. Note the civilians in the background who are being trained to accept martial law.On May 23, the Staten Island Real-Time News reported on mock raids at the public park to give civilians a feel for how soldiers operate in battle.Or maybe that should be mock raids to give civilians a taste of things to come and, of course, get them acclimated to the presence of uniformed and armed soldiers in their midst. It is interesting the Marines characterized Flushing Meadows Park as enemy territory.In fact, according to our rulers and their military functionaries, the entire United States is enemy territory in need of martial law.World Bank head honcho and globalist Robert Zoellick said as much last week when he warned that the banker contrived stimulus will not stem rising unemployment and forestall political unrest across the globe.Increasing poverty and the coming fire sale of corporations and infrastructure here in the former land of the free and brave will be a political combustible issue,according to Zoellick and the World Bank loan sharking operation.It’s a combustion that will need to be dealt with — and that’s why the Marines are landing CH-46 helicopters in public spaces.

STORMS HURRICANES-TORNADOES

LUKE 21:25-26
25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity;(MASS CONFUSION) the sea and the waves roaring;(FIERCE WINDS)
26 Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.

Atlantic tropical storm names for 2009 By The Associated Press – Sun May 31, 11:18 am ET

Here is a list of this year's names for Atlantic tropical storms and hurricanes:

Ana,Bill,Claudette,Danny,Erika,Fred,Grace,Henri,Ida,Joaquin,Kate,Larry,Mindy,Nicholas
Odette,Peter,Rose,Sam,Teresa,Victor,Wanda.

POISONED WATERS

REVELATION 8:8-11
8 And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood;
9 And the third part of the creatures which were in the sea, and had life, died; and the third part of the ships were destroyed.
10 And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters;
11 And the name of the star is called Wormwood:(bitter,Poisoned) and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter.(poisoned)

REVELATION 16:3-7
3 And the second angel poured out his vial upon the sea; and it became as the blood of a dead man: and every living soul died in the sea.(enviromentalists won't like this result)
4 And the third angel poured out his vial upon the rivers and fountains of waters; and they became blood.
5 And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus.
6 For they(False World Church and Dictator) have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy.

55 whales die after mass beaching in South Africa Sun May 31, 6:27 am ET

JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) – At least 55 whales stranded on a beach near Cape Town were put down or died after rescue teams failed to return them to the ocean, a sea rescue institute said on Sunday.Scientists shot 42 of the false killer whales on Saturday and 13 others perished, possibly from internal injuries, at Kommetjie Beach, the National Sea Rescue Institute (NSRI) said.We don't know if any of those we managed to get back to the water had survived ... one of them just washed up at the rocks around the Kommetjie lighthouse this morning and this could continue over the week, spokesman Craig Lambinon said.Marine scientists and volunteers worked all day to try to get the whales back into the water, but many were pushed back ashore by waves.

Rescuers had battled to keep the beached adults and calves wet and used earth-moving equipment to try to save them.Lambinon said it was unclear why the whales had come ashore early in the day and it was the first mass beaching of whales he knew of on the popular stretch of coast.He said tests would be carried out on samples from the carcasses to try to establish the reason for the beaching.Rescue teams had contemplated taking the whales to a nearby naval base and transporting them on boats to the deep sea, but the idea was abandoned because the animals' condition deteriorated rapidly.The NSRI first identified them as pilot whales, but said later they were false killer whales.Whale-watching off South Africa's coast is a popular attraction with tourists, who often line roads at strategic spots to catch a glimpse of the giants of the ocean.(Reporting by Agnieszka Flak; editing by Andrew Dobbie)

LAND FOR PEACE (THE FUTURE 7 YEARS OF HELL ON EARTH)

JOEL 3:2
2 I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land.

THE WEEK OF DANIEL 9:27 WE KNOW ITS 7 YRS

Heres the scripture 1 week = 7 yrs Genesis 29:27-29
27 Fulfil her week, and we will give thee this also for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet seven other years.
28 And Jacob did so, and fulfilled her week: and he gave him Rachel his daughter to wife also.
29 And Laban gave to Rachel his daughter Bilhah his handmaid to be her maid.

DANIEL 9:26-27
26 And after threescore and two weeks(62X7=434 YEARS+7X7=49 YEARS=TOTAL OF 69 WEEKS OR 483 YRS) shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;(ROMAN LEADERS DESTROYED THE 2ND TEMPLE) and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.(THERE HAS TO BE 70 WEEKS OR 490 YRS TO FUFILL THE VISION AND PROPHECY OF DAN 9:24).(THE NEXT VERSE IS THAT 7 YR WEEK OR (70TH FINAL WEEK).
27 And he( THE ROMAN,EU PRESIDENT) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:(1X7=7 YEARS) and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,(3 1/2 yrs in TEMPLE SACRIFICES STOPPED) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

ISAIAH 28:14-19 (THIS IS THE 7 YR TREATY COVENANT OF DANIEL 9:27)
14 Wherefore hear the word of the LORD, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem.
15 Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:
16 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
17 Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place.
18 And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.
19 From the time that it goeth forth it shall take you: for morning by morning shall it pass over, by day and by night: and it shall be a vexation only to understand the report.

Israeli Rejection of Settlement Freeze Spells Trouble for Obama's Cairo Outreach By TIM MCGIRK / JERUSALEM – Sun May 31, 1:50 am ET

If President Barack Obama thought he could deliver the promise of a few Israeli concessions during his upcoming Cairo speech to the Muslim world, he was sorely mistaken.Far more than his predecessor George W. Bush, Obama has been leaning hard on Israel to halt its expansion of Jewish settlements in the Palestinian territories and to declare its readiness to accept a two-state solution, meaning an Israeli and a Palestinian state living side by side. But the mood in Jerusalem is defensive. At a Sunday cabinet meeting, Israeli ministers openly defied the U.S. demands. Israeli Transport Minister Yisrael Katz told Army Radio, I want to make it clear that the current Israeli government will not accept in any way the freezing of legal settlement activity in Judea and Samaria (The West Bank).In response to Washington's pressure, the rightwing government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had thought it might earn a little breathing space with the Obama Administration by destroying a few illegal settlers' outposts. But even that has gone badly. No sooner did the army bulldozers plow under a few hilltop outposts - usually nothing more than a few trailers and shacks built on private Palestinian land - then the settlers were back with renewed zeal, along with nails and concrete to re-build their smashed homes. As one settler, Ariyeh Davis told the Israeli Internet news agency Ynet, Our answer is expansion against expulsion.He added:God willing, we'll build new places, and from 300,000 residents in Judea and Samaria (the Biblical name for the West Bank), we'll become 600,000.

Obama's Cairo speech is supposed to set a new course for U.S. policy in the turbulent Middle East; the key to its success is to promote the image that his Administration is taking a more even-handed approach to the Arab-Israeli conflict than did his predecessor. But this has not gone down well with Netanyahu's hawkish cabinet, which is grumbling in the Israeli press that Obama has gone too far the other way, supposedly granting concessions to Palestinians that are unfair to Israelis. The Israeli press made much of the fact that Obama's meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Washington last week seemed much more cordial than his strained encounter earlier with Netanyahu. A cartoon in the Hebrew daily Yedioth Ahronoth showed Obama and Abbas laughing chummily while throwing darts at Netanyahu's portrait.At the core of the dispute between the two allies is Washington's insistence that Israel honor its past accords and halt all construction within the West Bank settlements, whose expansion is seen as an obstacle to peace. The Palestinians say that the settlements, with their road networks and military security cordons, are chopping and dicing the territory into so many pieces that its own state could never be viable.The Israelis want Washington to permit the natural growth of the settlements - i.e., allow the children of existing settlers to build new homes - which U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton says she opposes. The Israelis also argue that while sacrifices are being asked of them, little is being demanded of the Palestinians. President Abbas, who, according to aides, came away from Washington convinced of Obama's seriousness in pushing Israel to remove settlements, says he refuses to hold peace talks with Netanyahu until he publicly backs the two-state solution, something the premier has been loathe to do. Meantime, the Palestinian leader is trying rather blatantly to show Washington that while he may have lost Gaza to the Islamic militants Hamas, his security forces are still capable of policing the West Bank. On Sunday, Abbas' forces raided a Hamas stronghold in the West Bank town of Qalqilya; six were killed in the resulting clash. This may be a way for Abbas to prove to Obama that he's fulfilling his security promises, but the shoot-out could wreck ongoing talks in Egypt between him and Hamas over forming a unity government that would bring the West Bank and Gaza under a single Palestinian leadership. As a Hamas official in Gaza told TIME: All this proves is that Abbas is carrying out the bidding of our enemy Israel.For now, all Abbas has to do is sit quietly while Netanyahu takes the heat from Washington - and from his own fractious coalition partners. The cabinet right-wingers want Netanyahu to stand firm against Obama's demands to halt the settlements, while Labor, in the words of Knesset Member Ophir Pines, wants Netanyahu to face his moment of truth.Says Labor's Pines,The government needs to decide whether it prefers good relations with the American administration or whether it prefers the illegal settlement in the territories. All of the talk about natural growth in the settlements is a bluff, and the Americans know that,said Pines. Obama may just call Netanyahu's bluff, which will undoubtedly complicate the friendship between the U.S. and its closest Middle Eastern partner. But the chances of reviving peace talks between Israelis and Arabs will be the better for it. - With reporting by Jamil Hamad / Bethlehem.

Israel throws out proposed loyalty law By STEVE WEIZMAN, Associated Press Writer MAY 31,09

JERUSALEM – The Israeli government on Sunday threw out a proposal aimed at minority Arabs to require an oath of loyalty to Israel as a Jewish state or risk losing their citizenship, dealing a blow to the country's ultranationalist foreign minister, who spearheaded the proposal.Avigdor Lieberman, a rising force in Israeli politics, made the proposal a central plank of his election campaign last February. The message, which sought to play on the perceived disloyalty of Israel's Arab citizens, helped propel his Yisrael Beitenu Party to a strong third place finish in the parliamentary vote.Lieberman's electoral success was seen as evidence of growing polarization between Israel's Jewish and Arab citizens. Many Israeli Arabs, once considering themselves bridges between Israel and the Arab world, have become alienated in the Jewish state and side openly with the Palestinians in their struggle against Israel.

Arabs make up about one-fifth of Israel's 7 million citizens.

The draft would have allowed the Interior Ministry to strip even native Israelis of their nationality if they refused to swear allegiance to the Jewish state and its symbols and values and profess their willingness to perform military service.Cabinet Secretary Tzvi Hauser said the proposal was rejected 8-3 by a ministerial committee on legislation. With the exception of Yisrael Beitenu, all parties in the government, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud, opposed the proposal. Netanyahu has not commented on the draft.Many Israelis have described the proposal as racist. It also met resistance from the ultra-Orthodox Shas Party because it could have affected ultra-Orthodox Jews, most of whom are currently exempt from military service on religious grounds and would not be eager to endorse the symbols and values of the state, which they consider too secular.Unlike Palestinians in the neighboring West Bank and Gaza Strip, Israel's Arabs hold full citizenship rights, but they have suffered from discrimination for decades and have little identification with a country that defines itself as Jewish.The most obvious difference between the two communities is military service. Jewish Israelis and Druse Arabs are required to perform three years in the military. Other Arabs are not, though small numbers volunteer.Approval of the bill could have been embarrassing at a time when Israel is under U.S. pressure to make conciliatory moves toward the Palestinians and renew peace efforts with the broader Arab and Muslim world.Arab lawmaker Jamal Zahalka praised Sunday's decision as a victory for the Arab public and for sanity.Yisrael Beitenu can still try to get it passed into law as an independent initiative, although it appears unlikely to garner majority support in the legislature.

Yisrael Beitenu will continue to act for Israel's basis as a Jewish, Zionist and democratic state and will fight against disloyalty and the negative exploitation of Israeli democracy,the party said after the vote.The party is also sponsoring a separate proposal making it illegal for Arabs to mourn the catastrophe — the term Palestinians use to describe their defeat and exile of hundreds of thousands in the war that surrounded Israel's founding.That bill has received preliminary approval to go ahead but still needs to pass repeated readings in parliament before becoming law.

It would mandate a three-year prison sentence for anyone who participates in public protests or commemorations mourning the establishment of the state of Israel. The legislation has been criticized as a blow to free speech.

Israel begins its biggest civil defense drill By STEVE WEIZMAN, Associated Press Writer – Sun May 31, 6:46 am ET

JERUSALEM – Israel began the biggest civil defense drill in its history on Sunday, putting soldiers, emergency crews and civilians through rehearsals for the possibility of war at a time of rising tensions with Iran.The five-day drill, code-named Turning Point III, will include simulated rocket and missile attacks on Israeli cities, including preparations for a nonconventional strike. Air-raid sirens are to sound across the country on Tuesday and for the first time, all Israeli civilians will be required to practice taking cover in shelters when the sirens go off.It's the third consecutive year that Israel is holding the exercise, a direct result of its inconclusive 2006 war against Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon. During the conflict, the Iranian-backed Hezbollah fired nearly 4,000 rockets into Israel, and civil defense authorities, bomb shelters and air raid alarms were found to be unprepared.

Iran's development of long-range missiles, along with international concerns that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, have added to Israeli jitters. While the international community has been seeking a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear issue, Israel has not ruled out military action.Israeli leaders played down any connection between those tensions and this week's exercise, and officials have been at pains to allay fears among Arab neighbors, such as Lebanon and Syria, that it could be a cover for a military strike.Speaking at the start of the weekly Cabinet meeting on Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described the drill as routine and said it was not connected to any specific event or to any intelligence warning.We are required to defend Israel, its cities, various installations, from the possibility of attacks by missiles, rockets or other weapons,he said.I think the fact that Israel is preparing more from exercise to exercise and is capable of better protecting its citizens decreases the chance that we'll have to use these tools.

During the exercise, police, fire and ambulance services, hospitals, military rescue units and local authorities will practice dealing with various attack scenarios, including by missiles carrying non-conventional warheads, the national emergency service said in a statement.It said the exercise would also include emergency sessions of the Cabinet to debate simulated events.Defense officials said the exercises were designed to implement lessons learned from Israel's 2006 war with Hezbollah. It also incorporates experience gleaned from barrages of rockets fired into southern Israel by Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip, Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai said.We are holding exercises to meet the threats as we have experienced them in the past few years and as we may face them in the future,Vilnai told the radio. It's the third time we've carried out this drill and I imagine that next year at this time there will be Turning Point IV.Similar rehearsals were conducted in 2007 and 2008, but the military said this year's exercise would be the largest and most comprehensive yet.Last year, sirens failed to function in parts of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.A state-of-the-art national civil defense control and command center will be inaugurated in this year's exercises.Vilnai would not comment on whether the drill was meant to send a specific message to Iran but said every display or preparedness carried an element of deterrence.Our enemies long ago showed they believe that the home front is our Achilles heel,he said.We are drilling there to prove that it is not.

REVELATION 6:9-11
9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain(BEHEADED) for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

REVELATION 20:4
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Saudi beheads and crucifies murder convict Sat May 30, 11:24 am ET

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia – Saudi authorities beheaded and crucified a man convicted of brutally slaying an 11-year-old boy and his father, the Interior Ministry announced.

According to the statement issued by the ministry Friday, shop owner Ahmed al-Anzi molested the boy and then strangled him with a length of rope. He then stabbed the boy's father to death when the man came looking for his son.He hid both the bodies in his shop, the statement said, adding that al-Anzi threatened police with a knife when they came to arrest him.Al-Anzi had previously been convicted of sodomy and owning pornographic films, a crime in conservative Saudi Arabia.Crucifying the headless body in a public place is a way to set an example, according to the kingdom's strict interpretation of Islam. Normally those convicted of rape, murder and drug trafficking in Saudi Arabia are just beheaded.London-based rights group Amnesty International criticized al-Anzi's execution and crucifixion.It is horrific that beheading and crucifixions still happen,said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui of Amnesty International in a statement Friday.King Abdullah should show true leadership and commute all death sentences if Saudi Arabia is to have any role to play as a global leader or member of the G20,said Sahraoui.According to an Associated Press count, Friday's execution brought the number to 35 beheading this year in the kingdom. In 2008, 102 people were beheaded.

MUSLIM NATIONS

EZEKIEL 38:1-12
1 And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
2 Son of man, set thy face against Gog,(RULER) the land of Magog,(RUSSIA) the chief prince of Meshech(MOSCOW)and Tubal,(TOBOLSK) and prophesy against him,
3 And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech(MOSCOW) and Tubal:
4 And I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws,(GOD FORCES THE RUSSIA-MUSLIMS TO MARCH) and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords:
5 Persia,(IRAN,IRAQ) Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet:
6 Gomer,(GERMANY) and all his bands; the house of Togarmah (TURKEY)of the north quarters, and all his bands:(SUDAN,AFRICA) and many people with thee.
7 Be thou prepared, and prepare for thyself, thou, and all thy company that are assembled unto thee, and be thou a guard unto them.
8 After many days thou shalt be visited: in the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, and is gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them.
9 Thou shalt ascend and come like a storm, thou shalt be like a cloud to cover the land, thou, and all thy bands, and many people with thee.(RUSSIA-EGYPT AND MUSLIMS)
10 Thus saith the Lord GOD; It shall also come to pass, that at the same time shall things come into thy mind, and thou shalt think an evil thought:
11 And thou shalt say, I will go up to the land of unwalled villages; I will go to them that are at rest, that dwell safely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates,
12 To take a spoil, and to take a prey; to turn thine hand upon the desolate places that are now inhabited, and upon the people that are gathered out of the nations, which have gotten cattle and goods, that dwell in the midst of the land.

ISAIAH 17:1
1 The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.

PSALMS 83:3-7
3 They (ARABS,MUSLIMS) have taken crafty counsel against thy people,(ISRAEL) and consulted against thy hidden ones.
4 They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance.
5 For they (MUSLIMS) have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee:(TREATIES)
6 The tabernacles of Edom,and the Ishmaelites;(ARABS) of Moab, and the Hagarenes;
7 Gebal, and Ammon,(JORDAN) and Amalek;(SYRIA) the Philistines (PALESTINIANS) with the inhabitants of Tyre;(LEBANON)

DANIEL 11:40-43
40 And at the time of the end shall the king of the south( EGYPT) push at him:(EU DICTATOR IN ISRAEL) and the king of the north (RUSSIA AND MUSLIM HORDES OF EZEK 38+39) shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.
41 He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon.(JORDAN)
42 He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape.
43 But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.

EZEKIEL 39:1-8
1 Therefore, thou son of man, prophesy against Gog,(LEADER OF RUSSIA) and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech (MOSCOW) and Tubal: (TUBOLSK)
2 And I will turn thee back, and leave but the sixth part of thee, and will cause thee to come up from the north parts,(RUSSIA) and will bring thee upon the mountains of Israel:
3 And I will smite thy bow out of thy left hand, and will cause thine arrows to fall out of thy right hand.
4 Thou shalt fall upon the mountains of Israel, thou, and all thy bands,( ARABS) and the people that is with thee: I will give thee unto the ravenous birds of every sort, and to the beasts of the field to be devoured.
5 Thou shalt fall upon the open field: for I have spoken it, saith the Lord GOD.
6 And I will send a fire on Magog,(NUCLEAR BOMB) and among them that dwell carelessly in the isles: and they shall know that I am the LORD.
7 So will I make my holy name known in the midst of my people Israel; and I will not let them pollute my holy name any more: and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel.
8 Behold, it is come, and it is done, saith the Lord GOD; this is the day whereof I have spoken.

JOEL 2:3,20,30-31
3 A fire(NUCLEAR BOMB) devoureth before them;(RUSSIA-ARABS) and behind them a flame burneth: the land is as the garden of Eden before them, and behind them a desolate wilderness; yea, and nothing shall escape them.
20 But I will remove far off from you the northern army,(RUSSIA,MUSLIMS) and will drive him into a land barren and desolate, with his face toward the east sea, and his hinder part toward the utmost sea, and his stink shall come up, and his ill savour shall come up, because he hath done great things.(SIBERIAN DESERT)
30 And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke.(NUCLEAR BOMB)
31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.

Sudan buries ex-president who imposed Islamic rule by Guillaume Lavallee – Sun May 31, 8:45 am ET

KHARTOUM (AFP) – Sudan on Sunday buried former president Gaafar al-Nimeiry, the man who imposed Islamic rule on Africa's largest nation, at a funeral attended by ordinary Sudanese, politicians and military officials.President Omar al-Beshir led the funeral procession as Nimeiry's body, wrapped in a Sudanese flag, was carried by military officials to his burial site in Omdurman, Khartoum's twin city.There is no God but Allah,chanted about 3,000 men dressed in traditional white robes, as well military officers, policemen and a handful of politicians gathered at a stadium in Omdurman.Nimeiry, who came to power in a coup in 1969 with the support of communist and socialist leaders, died in a military hospital on Saturday at the age of 79 after a long illness.Hundreds of his relatives and supporters gathered outside his home in Omdurman's Wad Nabawi neighbourhood on Saturday to recite prayers after news of his death.In 1972, he oversaw the end of a civil war that had plagued the country since 1955, pitting the north against the mainly Christian and animist south but an economic crisis in the late 70s and early 80s saw his grip on power weaken.In 1983, bowing to pressure from the Islamists, he introduced Islamic sharia law to Africa's largest nation but two years later, in 1985, he was ousted in another coup.Nimeiry was also a career officer who received military training in an academy in the United States in the 1960s.Beshir said in a statement that Nimeiry would be remembered as the man who brought Islamic law to Sudan, and which is still imposed in the north of the country.Nimeiry was a sincere man, a leader with a heart,said Abel Alier, who served as vice president under Nimeiry between 1971-1981. He achieved many good things but he also did things he should not have done.He signed peace with the south in 1972. Many people have forgotten that but (at the time) it was the good thing to do,he said.

Nimeiry's ouster from power in 1985 by General Sawar al-Dahab paved the way for democratic elections in Sudan which saw the head of the powerful Umma Party, Sadeq al-Mahdi, elected to the presidency.But Mahdi was overthrown by Beshir in 1989.Nimeiry lived 14 years in exile in Egypt after his ouster, returning to Sudan in 1999.

Muslims want tangible change on Mideast from Obama By HADEEL AL-SHALCHI and KARIN LAUB, Associated Press Writers MAY 31,09

CAIRO, Egypt – Respect for Islam, a prescription for Palestinian statehood and assurances of a speedy U.S. pullout from Iraq — that's what Muslims from Morocco to Malaysia say they want to hear from President Barack Obama this week when he addresses them from this Arab capital.His speech Thursday from Cairo University will try to soften the fury toward the United States among so many of the world's 1.5 billion Muslims, ignited by the U.S. occupation of Iraq and the hands-off attitude toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict of his predecessor George W. Bush.Obama's offer of a new beginning is seen as an attempt to stem the growing influence of extremists — particularly Iran, with its regional and nuclear ambitions — and to bolster moderate Muslim allies.It comes just days ahead of crucial elections in Lebanon and Iran — where the appeal of militancy will be put to the test — and amid worsening violence in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.The American leader's soaring oratory and Muslim roots have kindled hope among Muslims. But they will judge him by his actions, not his words, said 20-year-old Mohammed Wasel, sipping sugar cane juice with friends after mosque prayers in Cairo's Abbasiya neighborhood.There will be a lot of talk, but I seriously want to see something real coming out of this speech, something tangible,Wasel said, expressing a view shared by an Eritrean social worker in Rome, a retired teacher in Baghdad and a Palestinian mayor in the West Bank.

Obama has to walk the talk,said social activist Marina Mahathir, daughter of Malaysia's former prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad.But with rising hopes come the risk of disappointment. Obama isn't expected to present a detailed vision of a Mideast peace deal — potentially the most effective antidote to anti-Western sentiment — until later.And there is doubt the U.S. president can change entrenched foreign policy, particularly what is perceived in the Muslim world as Washington's pro-Israeli bias. What Muslims see as America's repeated failure to hold Israel to its international obligations is a sore point. A construction freeze in Israeli West Bank settlements — Obama wants it, Israel rejects it — is shaping up as a major test.

It's true that Obama's election created a new wave of hope,said Jordan-based political analyst Mouin Rabbani. But if he pulls the same tricks as his predecessor — making some nice statements and doing the opposite in practice — people will be disabused of their illusions quite quickly.Obama will also go to Saudi Arabia and meet King Abdullah on his Mideast trip. But he is not visiting Israel, though just a short flight away.The president's initial actions have earned him good will. He's reached out to Muslims in an interview with an Arab satellite TV station, in video message to Iranians on the Persian new year and in a speech to the Turkish parliament. He ordered Guantanamo prison closed within a year and said the U.S. would not engage in torture, reversing two Bush policies seen here as having targeted Muslims.After the Bush years, one of the darkest periods in U.S.-Muslim relations, there is now a chance for reconciliation, said Shibley Telhami, a Mideast scholar at the University of Maryland who conducts annual public opinion surveys around the Middle East.The most striking is the openness toward President Obama and the expressed hopefulness about American foreign policy, something profoundly new, given the last eight years,he said.In the latest survey, 73 percent of 4,087 respondents felt positive or neutral toward Obama. The poll had margins of error ranging from 3.6 to 4.5 percentage points, in the six Arab countries where it was conducted in April and May.The positive results for Obama seem remarkable for a region where four in five people still hold unfavorable views of the U.S., and Venezuela's stridently anti-American President Hugo Chavez was named most admired foreign leader.If Obama wants to rally Muslim support to rein in Iran, analysts say, he will have to prove his good intentions elsewhere. In particular, he needs to move to end Israel's occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, lands the Palestinians want for a state.If he wants to win the hearts of Muslims, then there must be peace for all of the Middle East,said M. Salim Abdullah, 78, a Muslim of Bosnian descent who heads an Islamic research library in Soest, Germany. A pullout of Iraqi troops according to schedule would also go a long way toward restoring Muslim confidence. But despite Obama's timetable — he plans to withdraw most U.S. troops by September 2010 and pull all out by the end of 2011 — many are upset by the ongoing violence and fear Iraq could one day disintegrate.

Obama's choice of Cairo as the venue for his speech highlights problems that have long fed militancy in the Arab world. Authoritarian rule, poverty and a lack of opportunity deprive many of the young of a say in their future. Youth unemployment in the Middle East and North Africa is the highest in the world, with one in four young Egyptians sitting idle, the U.N. says. Nearly 20 percent of Egypt's 79 million people live on less than $2 a day. Islamic militants from Egypt, including al Qaida's No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri, have exported their violent ideology. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, like other U.S. allies in the region, tolerates little opposition. Obama will have to strike a balance between raising human rights violations in Egypt and elsewhere in the region, while not sounding like he is trying to impose U.S. values. The Bush administration's pro-democracy campaign in the Middle East was widely seen as hypocritical, particularly after the U.S. refused to deal with the Islamic militant Hamas despite its 2006 election victory in the Palestinian territories. When someone talks to me with dignity and respect, then I will feel I could follow him, said 19-year-old Mustafa Ragab. He spoke after Friday prayers at a Cairo mosque, where the preacher promoted the idea of dialogue ahead of Obama's visit.I think Obama will be able to make the Arabs feel that way.Beyond shared concerns, different parts of the Muslim world have particular issues. While the U.S. draws down forces in Iraq, it is building them up in another Muslim country, Afghanistan, as part of its intensifying war on the Taliban. But the Afghan government says mounting civilian deaths are undermining support for the campaign. Kabul shopkeeper Abdul Wasi, 34, said sending more U.S. troops is futile. The experience of our three decades of war shows that in the end, it will not work,said Wasi, 34. Since Obama came in, nothing has changed for us.Iranians say they want Obama to ease economic sanctions, in place since 1995, and push for a resumption of ties. The sanctions the U.S has imposed so far have only damaged ordinary people in Iran,said Tehran mechanic Abbas Taghizadeh.

Millions of Muslims in Europe struggle to win acceptance and shed the stigma of extremism, without sacrificing their customs. They have fought for the right to build mosques and have girls wear headscarves in schools, a sign of religious observance. Obama may not have much to offer in their struggles. Still Obama gets some credit up front for just being himself. Many were inspired by his victory, emotionally connecting to his African and Muslim roots and his childhood in Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation. It's so exciting to have a black man run the entire world,said Awni Shatarat, 45, a clothing store owner in the Palestinian refugee camp of Baqaa in Jordan.Karin Laub reported from Ramallah, West Bank. AP reporters from across Europe, the Middle East and Asia contributed to this story.

NATO, partners wrap up Georgia military training By DAVID NOWAK, Associated Press Writer – Sun May 31, 12:34 pm ET

VAZIANI, Georgia – Georgian and Ukrainian troops neutralized simulated suicide bombers and a mock mob on a wind-swept hilltop military base near the Georgian capital Sunday as part of monthlong military exercises that have angered Russia.NATO is training soldiers from the two Westward-leaning former Soviet states, along with two other aspiring NATO members, at the Vaziani military base not far from the separatist South Ossetia province, where war between Russia and Georgia erupted nine months ago.Russia opposes NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine, and tension over Georgia's NATO aspirations was a catalyst for the war last summer. Following the conflict, Russia recognized South Ossetia's claim of independence and stationed thousands of troops there, adding to strains in Russia's relations with the West.At least 300 soldiers have been taking part in the military exercises. During Sunday's drills, troops from NATO nations as well as Georgia, Ukraine, Macedonia and Bosnia — members of the alliance's Partnership for Peace program — played out various scenarios, including an angry mob descending on a checkpoint.A NATO press officer, Spanish Lt. Col. Luis Aparicio, said the exercises would help prepare the participants for NATO membership, but added that it's not only for this purpose.

Aparicio stressed that the skills being taught — such as how to neutralize suicide bombers, capture important suspects alive and erect effective checkpoints — were also crucial for successful cooperation during NATO-led missions with partner countries.

It's for interoperability,he said.We are showing partner countries how NATO reacts in crisis-response. Otherwise it would be impossible to work together.During the simulated attack on a checkpoint, one person in the mob darted out as an officer detonated an explosive, simulating a suicide bomb. A Canadian officer then tried to light an incendiary device but was injured as it malfunctioned, turning a subsequent mock helicopter evacuation into a real one.

Aparicio said the officer's life was not in danger.

Russia has criticized NATO for the exercises. Russian officials contend they will encourage belligerence from Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili, whom they accuse of starting the war last summer. NATO says the exercises pose no threat to Russia, and that Russia has no say in the decisions Georgia makes.The war with Russia set back Georgia's NATO aspirations by strengthening Russian control over South Ossetia and another breakaway Georgia region, Abkhazia. It also underscoring Russia's opposition to Georgia's bid for NATO membership, which makes European members wary.

NATO has stressed that Russia has no veto on membership for Georgia or Ukraine, but the alliance has not granted either country a timetable. Public support is far higher in Georgia than in Ukraine, which has a large Russian-speaking population.Russia also accuses NATO of interfering in Georgia's internal politics, claiming it has supported Saakashvili's administration by holding the exercises while persistent street protests organized by opposition forces are demanding the president's resignation.
NATO says the maneuvers were scheduled long ago and have nothing to do with the protests, which began April 9.The field exercises ended Sunday, Aparicio said. The official end date for the training is June 3.

DOCTOR DOCTORIAN FROM ANGEL OF GOD
then the angel said, Financial crisis will come to Asia. I will shake the world.

JAMES 5:1-3
1 Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you.
2 Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are motheaten.
3 Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days.

REVELATION 18:10,17,19
10 Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.
17 For in one hour so great riches is come to nought. And every shipmaster, and all the company in ships, and sailors, and as many as trade by sea, stood afar off,
19 And they cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and wailing, saying, Alas, alas that great city, wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness! for in one hour is she made desolate.

EZEKIEL 7:19
19 They shall cast their silver in the streets, and their gold shall be removed: their silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them in the day of the wrath of the LORD: they shall not satisfy their souls, neither fill their bowels: because it is the stumblingblock of their iniquity.

REVELATION 13:16-18
16 And he(FALSE POPE) causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:(CHIP IMPLANT)
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.(6-6-6) A NUMBER SYSTEM

WORLD MARKET RESULTS
http://money.cnn.com/data/world_markets/

HALF HOUR DOW RESULTS MON JUNE 01,2009

09:30 AM +2.45
10:00 AM +143.77
10:30 AM +196.34
11:00 AM +206.69
11:30 AM +202.63
12:00 PM +218.32
12:30 PM +216.89
01:00 PM +211.15
01:30 PM +213.32
02:00 PM +243.49
02:30 PM +227.08
03:00 PM +231.70
03:30 PM +226.68
04:00 PM +221.11 8721.44

S&P 500 942.87 +23.73

NASDAQ 1828.68 +54.35

GOLD 976.80 -3.60

OIL 68.38 +2.07

TSE 300 10,604.06 +233.99

CDNX 1140.55 +16.47

S&P/TSX/60 646.67 +14.20

MORNING,NEWS,STATS

YEAR TO DATE PERFORMANCE
Dow -3.15%
S&P +1.76%
Nasdaq +12.51%
TSX Advances 1,025,declines 578,unchanged 241,Volume 2,856,374,953.
TSX Venture Exchange Advances 528,Declines 358,Unchanged 381,Volume 365,203,772.

Dow +110 points at 4 minutes of trading today.
Dow +-0.24 points at low today.
Dow +223 points at high today so far.
GOLD opens at $983.60.OIL opens at $67.50 today.

AFTERNOON,NEWS,STATS
Dow -o.24 points at low today so far.
Dow +243 points at high today so far.

DAY TODAY PERFORMANCE - 12:30PM STATS
NYSE Advances 3,145,declines 569,unchanged 66,New Highs 62,New Lows 83.
Volume 3,610,852,196.
NASDAQ Advances 2,031,declines 639,unchanged 98,New highs 56,New Lows 9.
Volume 1,259,947,149.
TSX Advances 998,declines 417,unchanged 241,Volume 1,541,637,696.
TSX Venture Exchange Advances 372,Declines 370,Unchanged 289,Volume 209,458,778.

WRAPUP,NEWS,STATS
Dow -o.24 points at low today.
Dow +259 points at high today.
Dow +2.60% today Volume 354,833,758.
Nasdaq +3.06% today Volume -.
S&P 500 +2.58% today Volume N/A

SPAIN #11 PLAYS A LEADING ROLE IN THE NEW WORLD ORDER THE BIBLE SAYS.WELL IT WAS SPAIN IN POWER WHEN THE EURO WAS BROUGHT IN IN 2002.

Spain takes over the EU flag, pledges more Europe
DANIELA SPINANT 31.12.2001 @ 09:42 CET

The leaders of Belgium on Sunday passed symbolically the flag of the European Union to the leaders of Spain, during a ceremony in Brussels marking both the taking over of the Presidency of the EU by Madrid and the countdown of the last 2002 minutes before the introduction of the Euro notes and coins, on January 1.The Belgian prime minister Guy Verhofstadt and the king Albert II handed the EU flag to the Spanish premier Jose Maria Aznar and the king Juan Carlos, at the Royal Palace in Brussels. The Spanish prime minister pledged that the third Spanish Presidency of the EU in the history of the Union would be ambitious, under the motto more Europe: more Europe for citizens, more Europe in the world, and more Europe due to the Euro. The priorities of the Spanish presidency of the EU, between January 1 and June 31, are the fight against terrorism, the modernisation of the EU economy, a successful changeover to the Euro, and enlargement.The four leaders also officially started the countdown of the last 2002 minutes before the introduction of the Euro notes and coins. Expressing his confidence in the future of the single European currency, Belgian prime minister Guy Verhofstadt commented that in less than two days, more than 300 million persons would use the single currency creating thus the third monetary zone in the world, after China and India, and the currency the most respected after the US dollar.12 EU countries adopt the single currency, while three states (the UK, Denmark and Sweden) chose to keep their national currencies.

Obama's plan to save GM: bankruptcy, $30 billion By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent JUNE 1,09

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama pushed a humbled General Motors Corp. into bankruptcy on Monday and said the federal government will act as reluctant shareholder when it assumes a 60 percent ownership of the smaller carmaker that emerges.The president said he hopes GM — once a proud symbol of American capitalism — would emerge quickly from bankruptcy court, and pledged up to $30 billion in additional federal assistance to help it get on its feet.The government's partial stake in GM comes on top of a far smaller ownership of Chrysler LLC, as well as significant federal equity in banks, the AIG insurance giant and two mortgage industry titans — all victims of an economic crisis unrivaled since the Great Depression.Republicans lobbed questions in Obama's direction even before he finished speaking.The only thing it makes clear is that the government is firmly in the business of running companies using taxpayer dollars,said House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio.Does anyone really believe that politicians and bureaucrats in Washington can successfully steer a multinational corporation to economic viability? It's time for the administration to fully explain what the exit strategy is to get the U.S. government out of the board room once and for all,Boehner said.But the president said the actions were part of a viable, achievable plan that will give this iconic company a chance to rise again.Speaking at the White House, where he was flanked by Cabinet secretaries and top economic advisers, he added, What I am not doing, what I have no interest in doing, is running GM.The president said auto executives will call the shots and make the decisions about turning this company around.He said the government would refrain from playing a management role in all but the most critical areas.Our goal is to help GM get back on its feet ... and get out quickly,he said of the federal government.

Obama spoke as GM entered bankruptcy court at the same time Chrysler was looking to emerge after a two-month reorganization. Over the weekend, a bankruptcy judge gave the No. 3 automaker approval to sell most of its assets to Italy's Fiat, part of a plan under which the U.S. government will own somewhat less than 10 percent of the firm.Ford Motor Co., the other large U.S. automaker, has said it can weather the current economic and industry crises on its own.Obama said the coming restructuring will take a painful toll on many Americans.GM announced during the day that it would permanently close nine more plants and idle three others, steps affecting as many as 20,000 workers.Obama cited Chrysler's experience in bankruptcy court as a model of how GM could fare.Some said a quick bankruptcy was impossible ... they were wrong,he said.He added that unnamed critics predicted car sales would fall off a cliff,and added,they were wrong.Chrysler sold more cars in May than it did in April.The outcome, he said, is dramatically better than the one we found when we began.Looking ahead, he said, GM will be prodded at every juncture by the administration's top officials.The announcement marked the latest step in a series of measures Obama has taken since he became president to salvage an industry that has been part of the American landscape for a century.Earlier in the year, he rejected a restructuring plan submitted by GM's ownership, and ordered its leaders to try again. They did, under the direction of administration officials, and the result is a blueprint in which hundreds of dealerships will be closed and familiar model names jettisoned. Officials have estimated the new GM should be profitable when Americans are buying about 10 million vehicles a year. The company that entered bankruptcy court needed U.S. auto sales to stay at an estimated 16 million units a year to make a profit.

Obama stressed that GM's workers and its investors had both made sacrifices. The United Autoworkers Union agreed in recent days to numerous concessions, and a majority of investors agreed to accept less than the paper value of their holdings. The administration, sensitive to charges that it favored the UAW, said the terms accepted by the unions were harsher than what had been proposed by the Bush administration.Obama's assurances about a temporary federal ownership were seconded by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who said the president's decision to take a short-term stake in General Motors is driven by our nation's shared interest in ensuring the American auto industry can survive.Interest in Congress was intense, though, and the Senate Commerce Committee announced it was summoning top executives from GM and Chrysler to a hearing on Wednesday into their firms' plans to close hundreds of dealerships as part of an industry restructuring. Chrysler has said it will close nearly 800 dealerships. GM has disclosed plans to shutter about 1,100.

GM files for bankruptcy, Chrysler sale cleared By Kevin Krolicki and John Crawley JUNE 1,09

DETROIT/WASHINGTON (Reuters) – General Motors Corp filed for bankruptcy on Monday, forcing the 100-year-old automaker once seen as a symbol of American economic might and dynamism into a new and uncertain era of government ownership.The bankruptcy filing is the third-largest in U.S. history and the largest ever in U.S. manufacturing.The decision to push GM into a fast-track bankruptcy and provide $30 billion of additional taxpayer funds to restructure the automaker is a huge gamble for the Obama administration.But in a sign of progress in the government's high-stakes effort, a bankruptcy judge approved the sale of substantially all of U.S. automaker Chrysler's assets to a group led by Italy's Fiat SpA in an opinion filed late on Sunday.Following the bankruptcy filing, GM shares were removed from the Dow Jones industrial average and delisted by the New York Stock Exchange as no longer suitable for listing.Chrysler's bankruptcy, also financed by the U.S. Treasury, has been widely seen as a test run for the much bigger and more complex reorganization of GM.President Barack Obama said that concessions by labor and creditors achieved a viable and achievable plan for GM to complete its restructuring and have a chance to succeed.I am absolutely confident that if well-managed, a new GM will emerge that can ... out-compete automakers around the world and that can once again be an integral part of America's economic future, Obama said.The administration's ambitious plan for GM is for a quick sale process that would allow a much smaller company to emerge from court protection in as little as 60 to 90 days.In bankruptcy, GM will divide in two: a leaner New GM and Old GM -- which will include the parts of GM that will eventually be liquidated. GM said the split would be accomplished through what is called a Section 363 sale. The new GM assets would transfer to an entity owned by the U.S. and Canadian governments, the UAW and GM's unsecured creditors.GM said in court documents that the 363 sale has to be quick as the U.S. Treasury has made clear it will finance New GM only if the sale transaction is approved by July 10.Now the hard part begins, which is making GM and Chrysler competitive. If they don't do that, then we'll be doing this all over again in a few years,said Christopher Richter, an auto analyst at CLSA Asia-Pacific Markets in Tokyo.The immediate implication is that the companies are going to get smaller and so market share is up for grabs, which means that rivals like Toyota, Honda, Nissan and Hyundai are going to gain share.

Indeed, one of GM's major challenges will be to create a streamlined offering of vehicles that are affordable, stylish and fuel-efficient.People forget that very high oil prices were one of the triggers for this recession,Daniel Yergin, chairman of Cambridge Energy Research Associates, said at the Reuters Global Energy Summit on Monday.General Motors was thrown on its back by what happened at the gasoline pump.

GOVERNMENT LIFELINE

Since the start of the year, GM has been kept alive by U.S. government funding as a White House-appointed task force vetted plans for a sweeping reorganization that will be undertaken with $50 billion in federal financing.By taking a 60 percent stake in a reorganized GM, the Obama administration is gambling that the automaker can compete with the likes of Toyota after its debt is cut by half and its labor costs are slashed under a new contract with the United Auto Workers union. The federal government of Canada as well as the province of Ontario agreed to provide another $9.5billion to GM in a late addition to the plans for the bankruptcy. GM plans to close 11U.S. facilities and idle another three plants. It has not provided an updated target for job cuts but had been looking to cut 21,000 factory jobs from the 54,000 UAW workers it now employs in the United States.

The GM plant closings will affect 18,000 to 20,000 UAW workers in the United States.

The GM that many of you knew, the GM that that let too many of you down, is history, said CEO Fritz Henderson at a news conference.Today marks the beginning of what will be a new company, a new GM dedicated to building the very best cars and trucks, highly fuel-efficient, world-class quality, green technology development.The UAW would have a 17.5 percent stake in the New GM. The Canadian government would own 12 percent and GM bondholders would receive 10 percent. In its filing, GM also provided an updated list of its major trade creditors including Starcom Mediavest Group and Delphi Corp.

RELUCTANT INVESTOR

Officials involved in the planning for GM said the White House was a reluctant investor in GM, but had to prevent a liquidation that analysts say would have cost tens of thousands of jobs at a time when the economy is mired in recession. GM alone employs 92,000 in the United States and is indirectly responsible for 500,000 retirees.We want a quick, clean exit (from bankruptcy) as soon as conditions permit, U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told students at Peking University in Beijing.We're very optimistic these firms will emerge without further government assistance.U.S. officials said there was no plan to provide any further funding for GM and insisted that all of the Detroit Three could survive. Ford Motor Co has not sought emergency federal aid. In the case of GM, the goal of restructuring is to allow it to return to profitability if U.S. industrywide auto sales recover even slightly to near 10 million units annually. Until now, to stop losing money, GM had counted on a recovery to the 16 million mark the industry last saw in 2007, officials said.

CAREFULLY ORCHESTRATED FAILURE

GM's bankruptcy, which was approved by the automaker's board after a weekend of deliberations, is the most carefully orchestrated Chapter 11 filing in the history of American business.The automaker's final descent started with an emergency aid announcement by the administration of President George W. Bush on December 19. It accelerated in late March when the new Obama government gave the company 60 days to restructure.While New GM is expected to emerge quickly from court protection, its shuttered plants, stranded equipment and other spurned assets would be left to liquidation in bankruptcy.Al Koch, a managing director at advisory firm AlixPartners LLP, will be appointed chief restructuring officer in charge of liquidating those GM assets.A veteran restructuring adviser, Koch has had prominent roles in Kmart Corp's restructuring and other turnarounds.Over the weekend, GM won support for the government's plan from investors representing 54 percent of the company's $27 billion in bondholder debt.Bondholders could take up to 25 percent of GM if it recovers to be worth what it was in 2004.Founded in 1908, GM rose to dominate the U.S. and global auto industries under the stewardship of pioneering Chief Executive Alfred Sloan, who famously pledged that the automaker would deliver a car for every purse and purpose.

By the mid-1950s, at the peak of its success, GM had some 514,000 employees. It accounted for about half of U.S. car production and its sales were twice as large as the No. 2 corporation, Standard Oil.Technology bellwether Cisco Systems will replace GM on the Dow. Insurer Travelers Co will replace Citigroup Inc. Dow Jones said the changes will be effective as of June 8. GM's stock fell to a low of 48 cents on Monday, a level last seen during the Great Depression. The bankruptcy case is In re: General Motors Corp, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, No. 09-50026.(Additional reporting by David Bailey, Soyoung Kim, David Lawder, John Crawley, Leah Schnurr, Poornima Gupta, Walden Siew and Tom Hals; Editing by Patrick Fitzgibbons, Maureen Bavdek and Matthew Lewis)

Geithner: US will curb deficits, back bigger China role By Glenn Somerville - MAY 31,09

BEIJING (Reuters) – U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Monday said the United States and China must change strategies for boosting growth as U.S. consumer demand wanes, and he offered strong backing for a bigger Chinese role in setting global economic policy.China is already too important to the global economy not to have a full seat at the international table, Geithner said in prepared remarks for delivery to students at Peking University. He said global recession was easing but still powerful and dangerous in much of the world.Geithner, on his first trip to China as U.S. Treasury chief, is holding two days of talks with top Chinese officials but opened his trip at Peking University, where he studied Chinese as a student in the 1980s.He renewed pledges that the Obama administration will cut its huge fiscal deficits -- a source of worry for China as the top buyer of U.S. Treasury debt -- and promised very disciplined future spending, possibly including reintroduction of pay-as-you-go budget rules instead of nonstop borrowing.As Geithner's visit opened, the Beijing-based Global Times published a survey of Chinese economists who called big holdings of U.S. debt risky.China's concerns center around the risk that rising U.S. debt levels could push U.S. interest rates up and weaken the value of U.S.-dollar denominated debt.Geithner briefly touched on the sensitive issue of China's managed exchange rate for its yuan, urging Beijing to let market forces more freely set its rate against other currencies.Geithner said there were signs of improvement in the global economy but not enough to change an International Monetary Fund prediction that it will shrink this year for the first time in 60 years.The global recession seems to be losing force, he said, adding that the U.S. financial system also was healing and that it now seems assured that the world will avoid financial collapse and global deflation.But he made a pitch for Beijing to alter its export-oriented growth model.

China was in an enviably strong position,Geithner said, But in most economies, the recession is still powerful and dangerous.Credit is likely to be tight for some time and banks and investors may be afraid to take necessary risks even after recovery begins.Geithner, striking a familiar theme, said the United States and China especially needed to shift their approach to running their economies, a recognition of China's rising might.Purchases of U.S. consumers cannot be as dominant a driver of growth as they have been in the past,he said.In China...growth that is sustainable will require a very substantial shift from external to domestic demand, from an investment and export-intensive growth to growth led by consumption.Geithner said a more flexible exchange-rate regime for China's yuan, which would almost certainly see its value rise against the dollar, was particularly important because it would hasten a shift toward more Chinese demand. A strengthening yuan would make imports cheaper for China and Chinese exports more costly for foreign buyers.He offered U.S. backing for a higher-profile role for China in running global institutions including the IMF -- an offer likely to draw resistance from Europe since it raises the sensitive issue of adjusting the voting shares in the global lender.The United States will fully support having China play a role in the principal cooperative arrangements that help shape the international system, a role that is commensurate with China's importance in the global economy,Geithner said.In words clearly intended to soothe Chinese concerns that its vibrant export economy might be targeted by U.S. lawmakers who are feeling pressure from soaring American joblessness, Geithner said the Obama administration will resist any such moves.As we go through the severe stresses of this crisis, we must not turn our backs on open trade and investment, he said, noting that China has benefited hugely from trade. In return, we expect increased opportunities to export to and invest in the Chinese economy.Geithner raised the issue of U.S. corporate restructurings, but he did not specifically mention General Motors or Chrysler.The plant closures and company restructurings that the recession is causing are painful, and this process is not yet over,Geithner said. The fallout from these events has been brutally indiscriminate, affecting those with little or no responsibility for the events that now affect them, as well as some who played key roles in bringing about our troubles.Geithner was set to meet Vice Premier Wang Qishan and on Tuesday will meet Premier Wen Jiabao and President Hu Jintao for talks, some of which will touch on plans for a meeting of a restructured U.S.-China strategic and economic dialogue later this summer in Washington. (Reporting by Glenn Somerville; Editing by Ken Wills)

Brown says won't quit as poll predicts Euro election rout by Katherine Haddon – Sun May 31, 4:57 pm ET

LONDON (AFP) – Prime Minister Gordon Brown insisted Sunday he would not quit despite a scandal over MPs expenses and dire poll ratings for his ruling Labour Party before crunch European and local elections.He said the expenses furore, which has shown how lawmakers claimed from the public purse for everything from moat cleaning to a duck island, was appalling and offends everything that I believe in.Every member of parliament would be forced to account for all their expenses from the last four years, he promised.Some 13 lawmakers from Labour and the main opposition Conservatives have said they will resign since the Daily Telegraph newspaper began publishing the leaked claims three weeks ago.A new Sunday Telegraph/ICM poll suggested the revelations would hit Brown hard at the European and local elections, in which Britons vote Thursday.It suggested Labour would come third in the elections for the European Parliament with just 17 percent, behind David Cameron's Conservatives and the smaller centrist Liberal Democrats.Even more damagingly, it suggested Labour would also come third in a general election with just 22 percent of the vote -- the worst Brown's party has done in an opinion poll since 1987.Some 54 percent of those polled thought Labour had been worst affected by the expenses scandal, compared to 13 percent for the Conservatives.But Brown, who must call a general election by the middle of next year, dismissed suggestions he could step down to make way for a more popular leader.Things go up and down, he said in an interview with BBC television.We're going through the most difficult economic circumstances the country has faced.People are angry rightly because they are worried when they see taxpayers' money wasted on their MPs and they're finding it very difficult... in a difficult economic situation,he added, referring to Britain's recession.

He also said he wanted to introduce a constitutional renewal bill and was looking at reforms including the case for a written constitution, lowering the voting age to 16 and reform of the unelected upper chamber, the House of Lords.Cameron, meanwhile, renewed his calls for a snap general election, telling the BBC the public wanted to sit in judgement on MPs.Public anger over expenses is widespread and in a sermon Sunday, the leader of the Scottish Catholic church expressed concern at the fall from grace of many people in politics, saying money (was) at the root of many difficulties.

Cardinal Keith O'Brien called on those in public service of whatever kind who have failed us to reclaim the high standards which we expect of them.Turnout at European elections in Britain is usually low, due partly to widespread Eurosceptic sentiment, and in 2004 turnout was just 38 percent.This time, fringe parties such as the anti-EU UK Independence Party and the far-right British National Party are expected to benefit. Commentators say the BNP could even win its first seat at the European Parliament.An Economist magazine/YouGov poll last week found that only 31 percent of Britons think its membership of the European Union is a good thing, compared to 37 percent who think it is bad.ICM interviewed 1,013 adults by telephone May 27-28 for the Sunday Telegraph poll, while YouGov questioned 2,322 adults in Britain May 22-26.

Zimbabwe PM party says central bank chief must go Sun May 31, 11:31 am ET

HARARE (AFP) – Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai's party bemoaned the slow pace of change in Zimbabwe's fledgling coalition on Sunday, calling for the central bank chief and attorney general to quit immediately.In resolutions at the end of its annual conference, the Movement for Democratic Change also called for a regional summit to resolve differences dogging the unity government between Tsvangirai and President Robert Mugabe.The MDC has long criticised Mugabe's decision to retain central bank chief Gideon Gono and attorney-general Johannes Tomana but Tsvangirai tried to take the heat out of the issue last week when he said their future should be decided by the Southern African Development Community (SADC), a regional bloc.

However in the resolutions, the MDC said both men should go immediately.

Aware of the conflict and divisive effect of the issues ... conference calls that in the national interest Johannes Tomana and Gideon Gono resign forthwith,the MDC said in resolutions read by secretary-general Tendai Biti, who is also Zimbabwe's finance minister.Tsvangirai encountered tough resistance within the MDC about entering a power-sharing deal with Mugabe in February and the resolution made clear the party is unhappy about what it sees as a lack of reform and continued intimidation of its supporters by pro-Mugabe militias.The government must address the slow pace of media reforms, slow implementation of the government 100-day plan, continued deployment of the military in villages and the existence of militia and ghost workers on the government payroll,it said.The MDC is particularly keen to see the back of Gono, who has been widely criticised for failing to stop the Zimbabwean economy's freefall and slide into world record inflation.Tomana is also accused of having overseen politically-inspired prosecutions in the aftermath of last year's disputed presidential election.Tsvangirai won the first round of voting in March last year but pulled out of a run-off after scores of MDC were killed in attacks the party blamed on Mugabe's followers.The conference also called on the inclusive government to support victims of political violence.Concerned with the plight of victims of political violence ... conference resolves that the inclusive government vigilantly addresses the issue of the welfare of victims,the party said.

Zoellick Warns Stimulus Sugar High Won’t Stem Unemployment
By Timothy R. Homan

May 30 (Bloomberg) -- World Bank President Robert Zoellick warned policy makers that fiscal-stimulus plans are insufficient to turn around the real economy and rising joblessness threatens to set off political unrest across the globe. While the stimulus has given an impulse, it’s like a sugar high unless you eventually get the credit system working,Zoellick said in an interview yesterday with Bloomberg Television’s Political Capital with Al Hunt.When unemployment increases, that’s probably the most political combustible issue.Zoellick’s caution is a contrast with private economists, who are raising their outlooks for growth from India to China as stimulus measures take effect. The biggest developed and emerging nations have committed spending increases and tax cuts totaling 2 percent of their combined economies, a level the International Monetary Fund recommended to end the recession.

The World Bank is monitoring private companies’ abilities to roll over a lot of debt in the developing world, Zoellick said. At the same time, he played down risks to the global recovery posed by rising U.S. Treasury yields, saying that in terms of absolute levels, rates are still pretty low for most players.Zoellick also said that the dollar will remain the world’s main currency for a long time,and noted that investors flocked to the dollar as a haven during the worst parts of the financial crisis.

Reagan, Bush Terms

Zoellick, 55, took the helm of the World Bank in 2007, and served as U.S. deputy secretary of state and chief trade negotiator in the Bush administration, and in positions at the Treasury Department under President Ronald Reagan. At State, he played a central role in formulating policy toward China, before departing government for a stint at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Chinese officials’ comments calling for a new international currency have been over-read and may be more of an indication of the nation’s desire to free up its capital flows, Zoellick said. He added that China’s stimulus has helped stoke growth in the nation that may even beat expectations a little bit.China this year approved a $585 billion (4 trillion yuan) stimulus plan, and the U.S. is now implementing a $787 billion package of tax cuts and spending that President Barack Obama signed in February. Right now, the international system appears to have a sufficient amount of stimulus,Zoellick said.The danger is if you spend too much government money, you create a different problem.

Yields Climb

Benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury yields have climbed about 1.25 percentage point so far this year to 3.46 percent, reflecting in part some investors’ concerns at faster inflation and record budget deficits. Rates on 30-year fixed mortgages exceeded 5 percent. Still, Zoellick noted that in recent days there’s been unwinding of some of investors’ concerns. In terms of financial markets, I think people have broken the fall,Zoellick said. What’s needed now is to focus on how to recapitalize banks and deal with the bad assets -- that’s a story that’s still going forward.In the U.S., Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner aims to use money from the $700 billion financial-rescue fund to help kick-start a $1 trillion effort to remove devalued loans and securities from banks’ balance sheets. The first transactions for mortgage securities aren’t expected to start for months.Eastern Europe is one region in particular danger of a further economic decline, the World Bank president said.

Eastern Europe

The nature of integration over the past 20 years has been unwound somewhat,Zoellick said. He warned about “the danger of unemployment leading to protectionism as politicians sort of feel they run out of different levers.Eastern European nations have received more than $90 billion in international aid since September to prevent the countries shaken by the financial crisis from defaulting. Nations that have received bailouts include Romania, Hungary, Belarus, Serbia, Latvia and Ukraine. Credit ratings companies have downgraded the outlooks for banks in the Czech Republic, Ukraine and Kazakhstan. Foreign lenders in Romania and Hungary pledged this month to keep doing business there to help the economies weather the economic turbulence. Romanian banks, about 90 percent foreign- owned, agreed to boost their capital by a total of 1 billion euros ($1.4 billion) by March 2010 as overdue debt rises, the IMF said on May 22.

Protectionist Threat

Another threat is trade protectionism, which nations may resort to in order to protect their industries from the global slump, Zoellick said. The real danger is that you get into a cycle of retaliation,he said. He estimated that 17 of the Group of 20 emerging and developing nations are considering or imposing restrictions on trade, breaking a pledge they made during an April 2 summit in London. The World Trade Organization in March predicted a 9 percent drop in global commerce this year.

China and Brazil are researching how they can conduct trade in the yuan and real, in a signal they’re seeking to reduce their reliance on the dollar. You could -- and you’ve already seen this over the past 20 years -- have multiple currencies used in the global system, Zoellick said. You will see China and India playing a larger role, including in financial markets.Still, he added that I just don’t believe it’s going to supplant the U.S. as a reserve currency.To contact the reporter on this story: Matthew Benjamin in Washington at mbenjamin2@bloomberg.net.

WW3 THE 3 WAVES THAT MARCH TO ISRAEL

DANIEL 11:40-45
40 And at the time of the end shall the king of the south( EGYPT) push at him:(EU DICTATOR IN ISRAEL) and the king of the north (RUSSIA AND MUSLIM HORDES OF EZEK 38+39) shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.
41 He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon.(JORDAN)
42 He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape.
43 But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.
44 But tidings out of the east(CHINA 2ND WAVE OF WW3) and out of the north(RUSSIA, MUSLIMS WHATS LEFT FROM WAVE 1) shall trouble him:(EU DICTATOR IN ISRAEL) therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many.( 1/3RD OF EARTHS POPULATION)
45 And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.

REVELATION 14:18-20
18 And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe.
19 And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.
20 And the winepress was trodden without the city,(JERUSALEM) and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.(200 MILES) (THE SIZE OF ISRAEL)

The Third and Final Wave of WW3 is when all Nations march to Jerusalem, but JESUS bodily returns to earth and destroys them,sets up his KINGDOM OF RULE FOR 1000 YEARS THEN FOREVER.

2ND WAVE CHINA AND KINGS OF THE EAST MARCH TO ISRAEL

REVELATION 16:12
12 And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared.(THIS IS THE ATATURK DAM IN TURKEY,THEY CROSS OVER).

DANIEL 11:44 (2ND WAVE OF WW3)
44 But tidings out of the east(CHINA) and out of the north(RUSSIA, MUSLIMS WHATS LEFT FROM WAVE 1) shall trouble him:(EU DICTATOR IN ISRAEL) therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many.( 1/3RD OF EARTHS POPULATION)

REVELATION 9:12-18
12 One woe is past; and, behold, there come two woes more hereafter.
13 And the sixth angel sounded, and I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which is before God,
14 Saying to the sixth angel which had the trumpet, Loose the four angels which are bound in the great river Euphrates.(IRAQ-SYRIA)
15 And the four angels were loosed, which were prepared for an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year, for to slay the third part of men.(1/3 Earths Population die in WW 3 2ND WAVE)
16 And the number of the army of the horsemen were two hundred thousand thousand:(200 MILLION MAN ARMY FROM CHINA AND THE KINGS OF THE EAST) and I heard the number of them.
17 And thus I saw the horses in the vision, and them that sat on them, having breastplates of fire, and of jacinth, and brimstone: and the heads of the horses were as the heads of lions; and out of their mouths issued fire and smoke and brimstone.(NUCLEAR BOMBS)
18 By these three was the third part of men killed, by the fire, and by the smoke, and by the brimstone, which issued out of their mouths.(NUCLEAR BOMBS)

WARS AND RUMURS OF WARS.

MATTHEW 24:6
6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.

MARK 13:7
7 And when ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars, be ye not troubled: for such things must needs be; but the end shall not be yet.

NKorean missile arrives at launch base: reports MAY 31,09

SEOUL (AFP) – A North Korean long-range missile has arrived at a launch base in the northwest of the country, reports said, amid signs Pyongyang is preparing to defy international pressure with another test.A train carried the missile from a factory near Pyongyang to Dongchang-ri in the northwestern county of Cheolsan over the weekend, the JoongAng Ilbo newspaper reported, quoting an unnamed intelligence official.The Dong-A Ilbo newspaper reported the same information.Tensions have been running high for the past week after Kim Jong-Il's regime tested a nuclear bomb for the second time, launched a series of short-range missiles and threatened possible attacks on South Korea.South Korea's Yonhap news agency reported on Saturday that North Korea was preparing to launch a long-range missile that may be a modified version of a Taepodong-2, which the North tested in 2006 and in April and which is theoretically capable of reaching Alaska.

A View from the Outfield by Peter Sain ley Berry EUobserver

Sherlock Holmes had it right when he referred his faithful colleague Watson to the curious incident of the dog in the night-time. But the dog did nothing in the night-time, says Watson.That, replies Sherlock Holmes, is the curious incident.I am reminded of this exchange whenever I see or read something that seems, on the surface at least, to be unexceptional, all in order. Perfectly sound, we might say - what’s wrong with that? Yet often it is what people don’t say that rings the loudest bell. What they say may be unexceptional: it is what they don’t say that is remarkable.We don’t always notice what is missing: like the dog that didn’t bark in the night. It hadn’t occurred to Watson to look for something that didn’t happen. But upon what didn’t happen turned the solution to the mystery of the disappearance of Silver Blaze.Anyhow, there I was yesterday home from holiday and watching the President of the European Commission, Mr Barroso, presenting a two-minute video designed to encourage people to vote in next month’s European Parliamentary elections. (Such videos convince me that the intelligent evolution of the human race has peaked and that now we all de-evolving backwards. Soon we shall only ever be able to communicate ideas small enough to be fitted into a two minute video).Mr Barroso says he has been following what citizens are saying about the elections on the ‘Debate Europe’ pages of the Europe website and thought he’d drop in, as it were, with a contribution of his own, explaining the role of the European Parliament and suggesting that if people cared about any of a number of issues - including climate change and world poverty - then they should make sure they voted.

While the Commission would continue to bring forward political proposals, he said, it was up to the Parliament and Member State governments to turn them into law. your choice will help shape the EU’s course of action for the next five years.There’s a little bit (some would say a lot) of wishful thinking here - but in the main the message is unexceptional. Commendable even. Apart, that is, from one, monumental, omission.Which is, of course, that many people - perhaps as many as half of the electorate - believe, rightly or wrongly - and here I am stating fact rather than trying to make a party political point - that the EU’s course of action over the next five years might be shaped better without Mr Barroso at the helm of the Commission.

Indeed so great an ogre has he become in the eyes of many (though not all) of those on the left that his name figures on socialist European election posters in France coupled with that of Mr Sarkozy, another demon figure in the socialists’ rogues gallery, as jointly responsible for Europe’s current economic chaos.They blame Mr Barroso for concentrating his political proposals on growth and economic issues, rather than social ones.Mr Barroso is therefore himself a controversial figure and if the European elections are to mean anything at all - and if Europe’s 375 million voters are to be tempted into a diversion from their normal activities between 4 and 7 June in order to go to the polls - then surely the best thing that Mr Barroso could have done would have been to have put his own record on the line and invited electors to confirm his position for a further five years as head of the next Commission, or to throw him out.This, of course, is something that electors are supposed to have the power to do, if only someone would actually tell them that they have it. But there seems a general conspiracy of silence on this point not helped, of course by the fact that the left does not have an agreed alternative candidate to recommend to member states to replace Mr Barroso.For when it comes to shaping the EU’s future over the next five years, the Commission President does have rather a lot of clout - especially one like Mr Barroso, who runs his college of European Commissioners very much in a presidential style.Do the majority of European electors know that if they vote for parties of the centre-right then Mr Barroso will, virtually certainly, be appointed for a second five year term? Do they know that if they vote other than centre-right they may get someone else? The rules say that member states will choose the President of the Commission after taking into account the results of the European Parliament elections. But no-one seems to be wanting to tell the electors - and certainly Mr Barroso doesn’t in his video.

The centre-right naturally want Mr Barroso to continue; he is their preferred candidate - but as yet he is the only candidate. And it is hard to have a meaningful election with only one candidate and with a conspiracy of silence to avoid telling the electors that their vote might just actually count when it comes to the little matter of the political colour of the President of the European Commission.And here is the only candidate encouraging voters to go and vote to shape the future of Europe without so much as acknowledging the role that he himself has had in shaping Europe these past five years and defending his position.His silence on his party label while trying to encourage voters is indeed curious. Another case of the dog not barking in the night. In fact it is more than curious. It is shameful. The Commission President is the preferred candidate of the centre-right. He should acknowledge this openly and invite voters to back him or sack him.

TORAH PORTION FROM MAY 31 - JUNE 6 2009

SINCE WHAT ISRAEL READS WILL BE FULFILLED IN THAT WEEK I WILL BE PUTTING THE WEEKLY TORAH PORTION ON FOR ALL OF US TO KEEP TRACK OF ISRAEL HAPPENINGS.

TORAH PORTION FROM MAY 31 2009 6PM - JUNE 06 6PM 2009

NUMBERS 4:21 - 7:89
21 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
22 Take also the sum of the sons of Gershon, throughout the houses of their fathers, by their families;
23 From thirty years old and upward until fifty years old shalt thou number them; all that enter in to perform the service, to do the work in the tabernacle of the congregation.
24 This is the service of the families of the Gershonites, to serve, and for burdens:
25 And they shall bear the curtains of the tabernacle, and the tabernacle of the congregation, his covering, and the covering of the badgers' skins that is above upon it, and the hanging for the door of the tabernacle of the congregation,
26 And the hangings of the court, and the hanging for the door of the gate of the court, which is by the tabernacle and by the altar round about, and their cords, and all the instruments of their service, and all that is made for them: so shall they serve.
27 At the appointment of Aaron and his sons shall be all the service of the sons of the Gershonites, in all their burdens, and in all their service: and ye shall appoint unto them in charge all their burdens.
28 This is the service of the families of the sons of Gershon in the tabernacle of the congregation: and their charge shall be under the hand of Ithamar the son of Aaron the priest.
29 As for the sons of Merari, thou shalt number them after their families, by the house of their fathers;
30 From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old shalt thou number them, every one that entereth into the service, to do the work of the tabernacle of the congregation.
31 And this is the charge of their burden, according to all their service in the tabernacle of the congregation; the boards of the tabernacle, and the bars thereof, and the pillars thereof, and sockets thereof,
32 And the pillars of the court round about, and their sockets, and their pins, and their cords, with all their instruments, and with all their service: and by name ye shall reckon the instruments of the charge of their burden.
33 This is the service of the families of the sons of Merari, according to all their service, in the tabernacle of the congregation, under the hand of Ithamar the son of Aaron the priest.
34 And Moses and Aaron and the chief of the congregation numbered the sons of the Kohathites after their families, and after the house of their fathers,
35 From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old, every one that entereth into the service, for the work in the tabernacle of the congregation:
36 And those that were numbered of them by their families were two thousand seven hundred and fifty.
37 These were they that were numbered of the families of the Kohathites, all that might do service in the tabernacle of the congregation, which Moses and Aaron did number according to the commandment of the LORD by the hand of Moses.
38 And those that were numbered of the sons of Gershon, throughout their families, and by the house of their fathers,
39 From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old, every one that entereth into the service, for the work in the tabernacle of the congregation,
40 Even those that were numbered of them, throughout their families, by the house of their fathers, were two thousand and six hundred and thirty.
41 These are they that were numbered of the families of the sons of Gershon, of all that might do service in the tabernacle of the congregation, whom Moses and Aaron did number according to the commandment of the LORD.
42 And those that were numbered of the families of the sons of Merari, throughout their families, by the house of their fathers,
43 From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old, every one that entereth into the service, for the work in the tabernacle of the congregation,
44 Even those that were numbered of them after their families, were three thousand and two hundred.
45 These be those that were numbered of the families of the sons of Merari, whom Moses and Aaron numbered according to the word of the LORD by the hand of Moses.
46 All those that were numbered of the Levites, whom Moses and Aaron and the chief of Israel numbered, after their families, and after the house of their fathers,
47 From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old, every one that came to do the service of the ministry, and the service of the burden in the tabernacle of the congregation,
48 Even those that were numbered of them, were eight thousand and five hundred and fourscore.
49 According to the commandment of the LORD they were numbered by the hand of Moses, every one according to his service, and according to his burden: thus were they numbered of him, as the LORD commanded Moses.

NUMBERS 5:1-31
1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
2 Command the children of Israel, that they put out of the camp every leper, and every one that hath an issue, and whosoever is defiled by the dead:
3 Both male and female shall ye put out, without the camp shall ye put them; that they defile not their camps, in the midst whereof I dwell.
4 And the children of Israel did so, and put them out without the camp: as the LORD spake unto Moses, so did the children of Israel.
5 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
6 Speak unto the children of Israel, When a man or woman shall commit any sin that men commit, to do a trespass against the LORD, and that person be guilty;
7 Then they shall confess their sin which they have done: and he shall recompense his trespass with the principal thereof, and add unto it the fifth part thereof, and give it unto him against whom he hath trespassed.
8 But if the man have no kinsman to recompense the trespass unto, let the trespass be recompensed unto the LORD, even to the priest; beside the ram of the atonement, whereby an atonement shall be made for him.
9 And every offering of all the holy things of the children of Israel, which they bring unto the priest, shall be his.
10 And every man's hallowed things shall be his: whatsoever any man giveth the priest, it shall be his.
11 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
12 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man's wife go aside, and commit a trespass against him,
13 And a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, and be kept close, and she be defiled, and there be no witness against her, neither she be taken with the manner;
14 And the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be defiled: or if the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be not defiled:
15 Then shall the man bring his wife unto the priest, and he shall bring her offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put frankincense thereon; for it is an offering of jealousy, an offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance.
16 And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before the LORD:
17 And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is in the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water:
18 And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse:
19 And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse:
20 But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband:
21 Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell;
22 And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And the woman shall say, Amen, amen.
23 And the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall blot them out with the bitter water:
24 And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter water that causeth the curse: and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter.
25 Then the priest shall take the jealousy offering out of the woman's hand, and shall wave the offering before the LORD, and offer it upon the altar:
26 And the priest shall take an handful of the offering, even the memorial thereof, and burn it upon the altar, and afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water.
27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.
28 And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed.
29 This is the law of jealousies, when a wife goeth aside to another instead of her husband, and is defiled;
30 Or when the spirit of jealousy cometh upon him, and he be jealous over his wife, and shall set the woman before the LORD, and the priest shall execute upon her all this law.
31 Then shall the man be guiltless from iniquity, and this woman shall bear her iniquity.

NUMBERS 6:1-27
1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When either man or woman shall separate themselves to vow a vow of a Nazarite, to separate themselves unto the LORD:
3 He shall separate himself from wine and strong drink, and shall drink no vinegar of wine, or vinegar of strong drink, neither shall he drink any liquor of grapes, nor eat moist grapes, or dried.
4 All the days of his separation shall he eat nothing that is made of the vine tree, from the kernels even to the husk.
5 All the days of the vow of his separation there shall no razor come upon his head: until the days be fulfilled, in the which he separateth himself unto the LORD, he shall be holy, and shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow.
6 All the days that he separateth himself unto the LORD he shall come at no dead body.
7 He shall not make himself unclean for his father, or for his mother, for his brother, or for his sister, when they die: because the consecration of his God is upon his head.
8 All the days of his separation he is holy unto the LORD.
9 And if any man die very suddenly by him, and he hath defiled the head of his consecration; then he shall shave his head in the day of his cleansing, on the seventh day shall he shave it.
10 And on the eighth day he shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons, to the priest, to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation:
11 And the priest shall offer the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering, and make an atonement for him, for that he sinned by the dead, and shall hallow his head that same day.
12 And he shall consecrate unto the LORD the days of his separation, and shall bring a lamb of the first year for a trespass offering: but the days that were before shall be lost, because his separation was defiled.
13 And this is the law of the Nazarite, when the days of his separation are fulfilled: he shall be brought unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation:
14 And he shall offer his offering unto the LORD, one he lamb of the first year without blemish for a burnt offering, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish for a sin offering, and one ram without blemish for peace offerings,
15 And a basket of unleavened bread, cakes of fine flour mingled with oil, and wafers of unleavened bread anointed with oil, and their meat offering, and their drink offerings.
16 And the priest shall bring them before the LORD, and shall offer his sin offering, and his burnt offering:
17 And he shall offer the ram for a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the LORD, with the basket of unleavened bread: the priest shall offer also his meat offering, and his drink offering.
18 And the Nazarite shall shave the head of his separation at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall take the hair of the head of his separation, and put it in the fire which is under the sacrifice of the peace offerings.
19 And the priest shall take the sodden shoulder of the ram, and one unleavened cake out of the basket, and one unleavened wafer, and shall put them upon the hands of the Nazarite, after the hair of his separation is shaven:
20 And the priest shall wave them for a wave offering before the LORD: this is holy for the priest, with the wave breast and heave shoulder: and after that the Nazarite may drink wine.
21 This is the law of the Nazarite who hath vowed, and of his offering unto the LORD for his separation, beside that that his hand shall get: according to the vow which he vowed, so he must do after the law of his separation.
22 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
23 Speak unto Aaron and unto his sons, saying, On this wise ye shall bless the children of Israel, saying unto them,
24 The LORD bless thee, and keep thee:
25 The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee:
26 The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.
27 And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them.

NUMBER 7:1-89
1 And it came to pass on the day that Moses had fully set up the tabernacle, and had anointed it, and sanctified it, and all the instruments thereof, both the altar and all the vessels thereof, and had anointed them, and sanctified them;
2 That the princes of Israel, heads of the house of their fathers, who were the princes of the tribes, and were over them that were numbered, offered:
3 And they brought their offering before the LORD, six covered wagons, and twelve oxen; a wagon for two of the princes, and for each one an ox: and they brought them before the tabernacle.
4 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
5 Take it of them, that they may be to do the service of the tabernacle of the congregation; and thou shalt give them unto the Levites, to every man according to his service.
6 And Moses took the wagons and the oxen, and gave them unto the Levites.
7 Two wagons and four oxen he gave unto the sons of Gershon, according to their service:
8 And four wagons and eight oxen he gave unto the sons of Merari, according unto their service, under the hand of Ithamar the son of Aaron the priest.
9 But unto the sons of Kohath he gave none: because the service of the sanctuary belonging unto them was that they should bear upon their shoulders.
10 And the princes offered for dedicating of the altar in the day that it was anointed, even the princes offered their offering before the altar.
11 And the LORD said unto Moses, They shall offer their offering, each prince on his day, for the dedicating of the altar.
12 And he that offered his offering the first day was Nahshon the son of Amminadab, of the tribe of Judah:
13 And his offering was one silver charger, the weight thereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver bowl of seventy shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary; both of them were full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering:
14 One spoon of ten shekels of gold, full of incense:
15 One young bullock, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for a burnt offering:
16 One kid of the goats for a sin offering:
17 And for a sacrifice of peace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs of the first year: this was the offering of Nahshon the son of Amminadab.
18 On the second day Nethaneel the son of Zuar, prince of Issachar, did offer:
19 He offered for his offering one silver charger, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver bowl of seventy shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary; both of them full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering:
20 One spoon of gold of ten shekels, full of incense:
21 One young bullock, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for a burnt offering:
22 One kid of the goats for a sin offering:
23 And for a sacrifice of peace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs of the first year: this was the offering of Nethaneel the son of Zuar.
24 On the third day Eliab the son of Helon, prince of the children of Zebulun, did offer:
25 His offering was one silver charger, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver bowl of seventy shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary; both of them full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering:
26 One golden spoon of ten shekels, full of incense:
27 One young bullock, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for a burnt offering:
28 One kid of the goats for a sin offering:
29 And for a sacrifice of peace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs of the first year: this was the offering of Eliab the son of Helon.
30 On the fourth day Elizur the son of Shedeur, prince of the children of Reuben, did offer:
31 His offering was one silver charger of the weight of an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver bowl of seventy shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary; both of them full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering:
32 One golden spoon of ten shekels, full of incense:
33 One young bullock, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for a burnt offering:
34 One kid of the goats for a sin offering:
35 And for a sacrifice of peace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs of the first year: this was the offering of Elizur the son of Shedeur.
36 On the fifth day Shelumiel the son of Zurishaddai, prince of the children of Simeon, did offer:
37 His offering was one silver charger, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver bowl of seventy shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary; both of them full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering:
38 One golden spoon of ten shekels, full of incense:
39 One young bullock, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for a burnt offering:
40 One kid of the goats for a sin offering:
41 And for a sacrifice of peace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs of the first year: this was the offering of Shelumiel the son of Zurishaddai.
42 On the sixth day Eliasaph the son of Deuel, prince of the children of Gad, offered:
43 His offering was one silver charger of the weight of an hundred and thirty shekels, a silver bowl of seventy shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary; both of them full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering:
44 One golden spoon of ten shekels, full of incense:
45 One young bullock, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for a burnt offering:
46 One kid of the goats for a sin offering:
47 And for a sacrifice of peace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs of the first year: this was the offering of Eliasaph the son of Deuel.
48 On the seventh day Elishama the son of Ammihud, prince of the children of Ephraim, offered:
49 His offering was one silver charger, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver bowl of seventy shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary; both of them full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering:
50 One golden spoon of ten shekels, full of incense:
51 One young bullock, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for a burnt offering:
52 One kid of the goats for a sin offering:
53 And for a sacrifice of peace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs of the first year: this was the offering of Elishama the son of Ammihud.
54 On the eighth day offered Gamaliel the son of Pedahzur, prince of the children of Manasseh:
55 His offering was one silver charger of the weight of an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver bowl of seventy shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary; both of them full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering:
56 One golden spoon of ten shekels, full of incense:
57 One young bullock, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for a burnt offering:
58 One kid of the goats for a sin offering:
59 And for a sacrifice of peace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs of the first year: this was the offering of Gamaliel the son of Pedahzur.
60 On the ninth day Abidan the son of Gideoni, prince of the children of Benjamin, offered:
61 His offering was one silver charger, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver bowl of seventy shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary; both of them full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering:
62 One golden spoon of ten shekels, full of incense:
63 One young bullock, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for a burnt offering:
64 One kid of the goats for a sin offering:
65 And for a sacrifice of peace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs of the first year: this was the offering of Abidan the son of Gideoni.
66 On the tenth day Ahiezer the son of Ammishaddai, prince of the children of Dan, offered:
67 His offering was one silver charger, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver bowl of seventy shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary; both of them full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering:
68 One golden spoon of ten shekels, full of incense:
69 One young bullock, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for a burnt offering:
70 One kid of the goats for a sin offering:
71 And for a sacrifice of peace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs of the first year: this was the offering of Ahiezer the son of Ammishaddai.
72 On the eleventh day Pagiel the son of Ocran, prince of the children of Asher, offered:
73 His offering was one silver charger, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver bowl of seventy shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary; both of them full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering:
74 One golden spoon of ten shekels, full of incense:
75 One young bullock, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for a burnt offering:
76 One kid of the goats for a sin offering:
77 And for a sacrifice of peace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs of the first year: this was the offering of Pagiel the son of Ocran.
78 On the twelfth day Ahira the son of Enan, prince of the children of Naphtali, offered:
79 His offering was one silver charger, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver bowl of seventy shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary; both of them full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering:
80 One golden spoon of ten shekels, full of incense:
81 One young bullock, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for a burnt offering:
82 One kid of the goats for a sin offering:
83 And for a sacrifice of peace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs of the first year: this was the offering of Ahira the son of Enan.
84 This was the dedication of the altar, in the day when it was anointed, by the princes of Israel: twelve chargers of silver, twelve silver bowls, twelve spoons of gold:
85 Each charger of silver weighing an hundred and thirty shekels, each bowl seventy: all the silver vessels weighed two thousand and four hundred shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary:
86 The golden spoons were twelve, full of incense, weighing ten shekels apiece, after the shekel of the sanctuary: all the gold of the spoons was an hundred and twenty shekels.
87 All the oxen for the burnt offering were twelve bullocks, the rams twelve, the lambs of the first year twelve, with their meat offering: and the kids of the goats for sin offering twelve.
88 And all the oxen for the sacrifice of the peace offerings were twenty and four bullocks, the rams sixty, the he goats sixty, the lambs of the first year sixty. This was the dedication of the altar, after that it was anointed.
89 And when Moses was gone into the tabernacle of the congregation to speak with him, then he heard the voice of one speaking unto him from off the mercy seat that was upon the ark of testimony, from between the two cherubims: and he spake unto him.

PROPHETS PORTION

JUDGES 13:2-25
2 And there was a certain man of Zorah, of the family of the Danites, whose name was Manoah; and his wife was barren, and bare not.
3 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto the woman, and said unto her, Behold now, thou art barren, and bearest not: but thou shalt conceive, and bear a son.
4 Now therefore beware, I pray thee, and drink not wine nor strong drink, and eat not any unclean thing:
5 For, lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no razor shall come on his head: for the child shall be a Nazarite unto God from the womb: and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines.
6 Then the woman came and told her husband, saying, A man of God came unto me, and his countenance was like the countenance of an angel of God, very terrible: but I asked him not whence he was, neither told he me his name:
7 But he said unto me, Behold, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and now drink no wine nor strong drink, neither eat any unclean thing: for the child shall be a Nazarite to God from the womb to the day of his death.
8 Then Manoah intreated the LORD, and said, O my Lord, let the man of God which thou didst send come again unto us, and teach us what we shall do unto the child that shall be born.
9 And God hearkened to the voice of Manoah; and the angel of God came again unto the woman as she sat in the field: but Manoah her husband was not with her.
10 And the woman made haste, and ran, and shewed her husband, and said unto him, Behold, the man hath appeared unto me, that came unto me the other day.
11 And Manoah arose, and went after his wife, and came to the man, and said unto him, Art thou the man that spakest unto the woman? And he said, I am.
12 And Manoah said, Now let thy words come to pass. How shall we order the child, and how shall we do unto him?
13 And the angel of the LORD said unto Manoah, Of all that I said unto the woman let her beware.
14 She may not eat of any thing that cometh of the vine, neither let her drink wine or strong drink, nor eat any unclean thing: all that I commanded her let her observe.
15 And Manoah said unto the angel of the LORD, I pray thee, let us detain thee, until we shall have made ready a kid for thee.
16 And the angel of the LORD said unto Manoah, Though thou detain me, I will not eat of thy bread: and if thou wilt offer a burnt offering, thou must offer it unto the LORD. For Manoah knew not that he was an angel of the LORD.
17 And Manoah said unto the angel of the LORD, What is thy name, that when thy sayings come to pass we may do thee honour?
18 And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Why askest thou thus after my name, seeing it is secret?
19 So Manoah took a kid with a meat offering, and offered it upon a rock unto the LORD: and the angel did wondrously; and Manoah and his wife looked on.
20 For it came to pass, when the flame went up toward heaven from off the altar, that the angel of the LORD ascended in the flame of the altar. And Manoah and his wife looked on it, and fell on their faces to the ground.
21 But the angel of the LORD did no more appear to Manoah and to his wife. Then Manoah knew that he was an angel of the LORD.
22 And Manoah said unto his wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen God.
23 But his wife said unto him, If the LORD were pleased to kill us, he would not have received a burnt offering and a meat offering at our hands, neither would he have shewed us all these things, nor would as at this time have told us such things as these.
24 And the woman bare a son, and called his name Samson: and the child grew, and the LORD blessed him.
25 And the Spirit of the LORD began to move him at times in the camp of Dan between Zorah and Eshtaol.

NEW TESTAMENT PORTION

JOHN 7:53-8:11
53 And every man went unto his own house.
1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

ACTS 21:17-32
17 And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.
18 And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.
19 And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry.
20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:
21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.
22 What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come.
23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them;
24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.
25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.
26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them.
27 And when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews which were of Asia, when they saw him in the temple, stirred up all the people, and laid hands on him,
28 Crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teacheth all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place.
29 (For they had seen before with him in the city Trophimus an Ephesian, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.)
30 And all the city was moved, and the people ran together: and they took Paul, and drew him out of the temple: and forthwith the doors were shut.
31 And as they went about to kill him, tidings came unto the chief captain of the band, that all Jerusalem was in an uproar.
32 Who immediately took soldiers and centurions, and ran down unto them: and when they saw the chief captain and the soldiers, they left beating of Paul.

CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN

INTERNATIONAL TREATISE OVERTAKE THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION SO IF THIS TREATY IS EVER MADE INTO LAW KISS THE AMERICAN LAW AND CONSTITUTION GOODBYE AND SAME WITH US TO IN CANADA SO BE PREPARED.WELL ACTUALLY SINCE CANADA,USA AND MEXICO ARE IN AGREEMENTS IF ONE COUNTRY SIGNS THE OTHER 2 WILL BE FORCED TO SIGN SINCE WE ARE A 3 IN 1 NORTH AMERICAN UNION.

IF THIS CAME TO PASS CHRISTIANS CAN KISS HOME SCHOOLING GOODBYE,ARTICLE 29 STATES IF THIS TREATY IS RATIFIED NO TEACHING JESUS IS THE ONLY WAY TO SALVATION IN SUNDAY SCHOOLS OR ANY OTHER PLACE,CHRISTIANS THIS IS DANGEROUS AND IF THIS TREATY EVER COMES UP WE MUST BLOCK IT AT ALL COSTS.THE U.N. WOULD BE TELLING US WITH THEIR CHILDRENS SURVICE WHAT HAPPENS TO YOUR CHILD.

JOHN LOEFFLER INTERVIEWS
http://britanniaradio.blogspot.com/2009/05/john-loeffler-steel-on-steel-worse-than.html#links

CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN U.N OFFICIAL TEXT
http://www.parentalrights.org/vertical/Sites/{C49108C5-0630-467E-9B9B-B1FA31A72320}/uploads/{D55811D1-F884-44EE-892C-793B36FBA5D9}.PDF

PARENTALRIGHTS
http://parentalrights.org/index.asp?Type=NONE&SEC={520635A0-D52D-4DA9-8AE7-CA574A3228F0}

UNCRC ARTICLE BY ARTICLE
http://www.parentalrights.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={B0633504-7A58-4D6E-941B-774A180CE258}

20 THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE UN CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD MAY 31.09

Ten things you need to know about the structure of the CRC:

It is a treaty which creates binding rules of law.It is no mere statement of altruism.1.Its effect would be binding on American families, courts, and policy-makers.2.
Children of other nations would not be impacted or helped in any direct way by our ratification.3.The CRC would automatically override almost all American laws on children and families because of the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause in Article VI.4.The CRC has some elements that are self-executing, while others would require implementing legislation. Federal courts would have the power to determine which provisions were self-executing.5.The courts would have the power to directly enforce the provisions that are self-executing.6.Congress would have the power to directly legislate on all subjects necessary to comply with the treaty.This would constitute the most massive shift of power from the states to the federal government in American history.7.A committee of 18 experts from other nations, sitting in Geneva, has the authority to issue official interpretations of the treaty which are entitled to binding weight in American courts and legislatures. This effectively transfers ultimate authority for all policies in this area to this foreign committee.8.
Under international law, the treaty overrides even our Constitution.9.Reservations, declarations, or understandings intended to modify our duty to comply with this treaty will be void if they are determined to be inconsistent with the object and purpose of the treaty.10.

Ten things you need to know about the substance of the CRC:

Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.11.A murderer aged 17 years and 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.12.Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.13.The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent’s decision.14.A child’s right to be heard would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.15.According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare.16.Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.17.Christian schools that refuse to teach alternative worldviews and teach that Christianity is the only true religion fly in the face of article 29 of the treaty.18.Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.19.Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.20.

NOTES:
-Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Article 26 Pacta sunt servanda:Every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith.
United States Constitution, Article VI: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
UNICEF Convention on the Rights of the Child says: the Convention is a universally agreed set of non-negotiable standards and obligations.Available at http://www.unicef.org/crc/ on 12/2/2008.
-Vienna Convention Article 26 (supra);
United States Supreme Court, Whitney v. Robertson, 124 U.S. 190 (1888): By the Constitution of the United States, a treaty and a statute are placed on the same footing, and if the two are inconsistent, the one last in date will control, provided the stipulation of the treaty on the subject is self-executing.
-Vienna Convention (supra) and Article 2 (g):party means a State which has consented to be bound by the treaty and for which the treaty is in force
-United States Constitution, Article VI (supra, Note 1)
-Arlene Bowers Andrews, Implementing the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, 171 (Greenwood Publishing Group 1999): The Convention is generally regarded as having two classes of rights for the purposes of self-execution, one class that is self-executing and one that is not self-executing.
-United States Supreme Court, Medellin v. Texas, 552 U.S. ___ (2008), at 170 L.Ed. 2d 190, 219,And whether the treaties underlying a judgment are self-executing so that the judgment is directly enforceable as domestic law in our courts is, of course, a matter for this Court to decide.
-Inter-Agency Standing Committee Reference Group on Humanitarian Action and Human Rights, Frequently Asked Questions on International Humanitarian, Human Rights, and Refugee Law, (2002), available at http://www.icva.ch/doc00001023.html#24:
Human rights law also contains provisions obliging states to implement its rules, whether immediately or progressively. States must adopt a variety of legislative, administrative, judicial and other measures that may be necessary to give effect to the rights provided for in the various treaties. This includes providing for a remedy before domestic courts for violations of specific rights and ensuring that the remedy is effective. The fact that a state has a federal or devolved system of government does not affect a state's obligation to implement human rights law.
United States Supreme Court, Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957):To the extent that the United States can validly make treaties, the people and the States have delegated their power to the National Government and the Tenth Amendment is no barrier.
-United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Articles 43 (amended) and 44. Available at http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/k2crc.htm.
-Vienna Convention, Article 27:A party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.
-Vienna Convention, Article 19, available at available at http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/un.law.of.treaties.convention.1969/19.html; also
Louis Henkin, U.S. Ratification of Human Rights Conventions: The Ghost of Senator Bricker, The American Journal of International Law, Vol 89 No 2, 343-344 (Apr. 1995):
Reservations designed to reject any obligation to rise above existing law and practice are of dubious propriety: if states generally entered such reservations, the convention would be futile. The object and purpose of the human rights conventions, it would seem, are to promote respect for human rights by having countries—mutually—assume legal obligations to respect and ensure recognized rights in accordance with international standards. Even friends of the United States have objected that its reservations are incompatible with that object and purpose and are therefore invalid.
…By adhering to human rights conventions subject to these reservations, the United States, it is charged, is pretending to assume international obligations but in fact is undertaking nothing.
-United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 37(a):
No child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age.
United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 8 (2006): The right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment (arts. 19; 28, para. 2; and 37, inter alia), CRC/C/GC/8, (2006):
The Committee is issuing this general comment to highlight the obligation of all State parties to move quickly to prohibit and eliminate all corporal punishment…. Addressing the widespread acceptance or tolerance of corporal punishment of children and eliminating it, in the family, schools and other settings, is … an obligation of State parties under the Convention.
-United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 37(a), (supra)
-The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child: A Guide for Children and Young People (April 2008), available at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/04/01081649/1:You have the right to choose your own religion and beliefs. Your parents should help you think about this.
Geraldine Van Bueren, International Rights of the Child, Section B, University of London, 29-30 (2006):
Unlike earlier treaties, the Convention on the Rights of the Child does not include a provision providing for parents to have their children educated in conformity with their parents’ beliefs. In addition, the child’s right to freedom of expression and the right of the parents to initially give direction and later only guidance, strengthens the argument that children are entitled to participate in decisions so that their education conforms to their own convictions.... The second question is whether a child has the right to choose a religion.
Under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, parents do have the right to provide direction to the child. Such parental power, however, is subject to two restraints:
• First, such direction should take into account the evolving capacities of the child, as expressly required by the Convention.
• Second, the direction should not be so unyielding that it equals coercion.
It can also be argued that the right to freedom of religion in the Convention on the Rights of the Child ought to be read together with article 12 which gives the child the right to express his own views in the matter of choice of religion.
-United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 3(1): In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.
Geraldine Van Bueren, International Rights of the Child, Section D, University of London, 46 (2006):
Best interests provides decision and policy makers with the authority to substitute their own decisions for either the child's or the parents', providing it is based on considerations of the best interests of the child. Thus, the Convention challenges the concept that family life is always in the best interests of children and that parents are always capable of deciding what is best for children.
-United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 12(1): State parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child.
Inter-Agency Standing Committee Reference Group: Human rights law also contains provisions obliging states to implement its rules, whether immediately or progressively. States must adopt a variety of legislative, administrative, judicial and other measures that may be necessary to give effect to the rights provided for in the various treaties. This includes providing for a remedy before domestic courts for violations of specific rights and ensuring that the remedy is effective.
Geraldine Van Bueren, International Rights of the Child, Section D, 137: State parties are obliged to assure to children who are capable of forming views the rights to express those views in all matter affecting the child and to give those views due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child.By incorporating a reference to all matters affecting the child there is no longer a traditional area of exclusive parental or family decision making.
-ibid., at 36:[T]he United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, criticized Egypt and Indonesia on the proportion of their budget spent on defence, as compared to the proportion spent on children’s social expenditure.
The Committee also criticized Austria, Australia, Denmark, the United Kingdom, and others failing to spend enough tax dollars on social welfare for children:
Paragraph 46, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: Austria, Committee on the Rights of the Child, 38th sess., U.N. Doc. CRC/C/15/Add.251 (2005).
Paragraph 17 and 18, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: Australia, Committee on the Rights of the Child, 40th sess., U.N. Doc. CRC/C/15/Add.268 (2005).
Paragraphs 18 and 19, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: Denmark, Committee on the Rights of the Child, 40th sess., U.N. Doc. CRC/C/DNK/CO/3 (2005).
Paragraph 10, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Committee on the Rights of the Child, 31st sess., U.N. Doc. CRC/C/15/Add.188(2002).
-United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 31(1): States Parties recognize the right of the child to rest and leisure, to engage in play and recreational activities appropriate to the age of the child and to participate freely in cultural life and the arts.
-American Bar Association, Center on Children and the Law: Children's Rights in America: UN Convention on the Rights of the Child Compared with United States Law, p. 182.
-Paragraph 52, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: Ireland, Committee on the Rights of the Child, 43rd sess., U.N. Doc. CRC/C/IRL/CO/2 (2006):
While noting that social, personal and health education is incorporated into the curricula of secondary schools, the Committee is concerned that adolescents have insufficient access to necessary information on reproductive health. The education is optional and parents can exempt their children.
Paragraph 14, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Committee on the Rights of the Child, 8th sess., U.N. Doc. CRC/C/15/Add.34 (1995).
-Katie Hatziavramidis, Parental Involvement Laws for Abortion in the United States and the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child: Can International Law Secure the Right to Choose for Minors?, 16 Tex. J. Women & L. 185, 202-203 (Spring 2007):
The unmistakable trend in the United States is to consistently increase anti-choice legislation, particularly with respect to minors. Ratification of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child by the United States holds a strong possibility of assisting minors who seek abortions without parental interference. [203] The Convention may offer the best hope for securing adolescent reproductive freedoms on a global level. If enough diplomatic pressure were exerted on the United States to compel it to ratify the treaty, the CRC could provide significant improvements in the outlook for reproductive freedom for minors.
Paragraph 3, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: Columbia, Committee on the Rights of the Child, 42nd sess., U.N. Doc. CRC/C/COL/CO/3 (2006):The Committee notes with appreciation…decisions of the Constitutional Court on…the partial decriminalization of abortion.
Paragraph 55, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: Chile, Committee on the Rights of the Child, 44th sess., U.N. Doc. CRC/C/CHL/CO/3 (2007):The Committee…is concerned over the high rate of teenage pregnancies, the criminalization of the termination of pregnancies in all circumstances….

SOME ARTICLES OF THE TREATY

Article 3: The Best Interest Principle
It’s usually looked upon as a positive means of holding countries accountable to protect children. But the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) is so much more than that.When the UNCRC was brought up for ratification in 1995, the core group of Senators in opposition concluded that this treaty marked a significant departure from the originally constituted relationship between state and child. They found, in fact, that it was literally incompatible with the right of parents to raise their children as well as a wholesale giveaway of U.S. sovereignty.

But why?

Widespread concerns about the UNCRC stem from the treaty’s repeated emphasis on one key principle used to guide all decisions affecting children: consideration of the best interests of the child.This principle underlies all of the rights found in the Convention. Article 3 of the CRC provides that in all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.In other words, policies affecting children at all levels of society and government should have the child’s best interest as the primary concern.The trouble occurs when this principle appears as a guiding principle for parents in article 18(1), which states that Parents or, as the case may be, legal guardians, have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of the child. The best interests of the child will be their basic concern.

Who knows best?

The Convention’s emphasis on the best interests principle is a sharp break from American law.In the 1993 case of Reno v. Flores, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the best interests of the child is not the legal standard that governs parents or guardians exercise of their custody. In the 2000 case of Troxel v. Granville, the Court struck down a grandparent visitation statute because decisions about the child were made solely on the judge’s determination of the child’s best interests, without regard to the wishes of the parent.The Court’s decisions in Reno and Troxel reflect a fundamental tenet of American family law, which recognizes that parents typically act in the best interests of their children. Indeed, United States case law is replete with examples of parents fighting for the best interests of their children, ranging from a child’s right to an education to the right of personal injury compensation. Except in cases where a parent has been proven to be unfit, American law presumes that the parent is acting in the best interests of the child, and defers to that parent’s decision.

The UNCRC’s Brave New World

But the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child changes all of that. The treaty supplants this traditional presumption in favor of parents with a new presumption in favor of the state.According to Geraldine van Bueren, an international scholar who assisted in the drafting of the CRC, the language of best interests provides decision and policy makers with the authority to substitute their own decisions for either the child’s or the parents’, providing it is based on considerations of the best interests of the child.So instead of placing the burden of proof on the government to prove that a parent is unfit, the Convention places the burden of proof on – yes, parents. Any parent who claims that other interests might just be more important than the state’s characterization of the best interest of the child could end up battling the state to protect their rights as a parent.

Where do we go from here?

There is a solution to this dilemma. The strongest, most effective way of protecting children and parents from an alarming state-based agenda is to amend the Constitution to protect parental rights. This can only take place through the concerted efforts of millions of dedicated parents across the United States.

Two immediate action items

Maybe you’ve already signed the petition to protect parental rights. If so, we encourage you to take the next step of telling your friends about this important issue. And if you haven’t yet joined the campaign, consider joining today. Article written for ParentalRights.org by Peter Kamakawiwoole, Feb. 12, 2008.

Article 9: A Child's Right to a Family -- Almost
Last week, we began our series on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) by looking at the Convention’s central focus on the best interests of the child,which allows the government to substitute its will for that of the parents. This principle is significant as we turn our attention to one of the first rights that the CRC grants to children: the right to remain in their family.

THE RIGHT TO A FAMILY… ALMOST

At first glance, Article 9 of the CRC may appear harmless and even idyllic: a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will, except when competent authorities subject to judicial review determine, in accordance with applicable law and procedures, that such separation is necessary for the best interests of the child. But despite references to competent authorities and judicial review,a closer examination quickly reveals that the emphasis on the child’s best interests grants the government broad latitude to intervene in the family.There are many broad and diverse opinions when it comes to what makes a good parent. Parents may read a popular parenting book, attend a parenting class, or turn to their own parents or a trusted mentor for advice. Likewise, there is also a broad range of opinions when it comes to when a child should be removed from the home. Clearly a child who is being sexually or physically abused should be saved from that circumstance, but what about more complex issues? Should children be separated from their parents if they are spanked? What about parents who are disabled or have a physical handicap? What about families who are too poor to provide the best quality of living for their children? There are many answers that could be given about what is in the best interests of the child,depending on the person who is being asked.

This is why the Supreme Court ruled in 1993 that the best interests test could only be applied when a family is broken, such as in divorce proceedings when the dispute is between two parents. When the family is intact, however, courts are required to prove that a parent is unfit to raise the children, which requires a state to satisfy a much higher burden of proof. Article 9 destroys this distinction and uses the same test for families that are broken and families that are intact. By analogy, the best interests standard treats the government as if it were the other parent in a divorce-proceeding, placed on the same footing as the child’s natural parents in a battle for custody of the child.

TRAMPLING ON PARENTAL RIGHTS

In 1980, the Supreme Court of Washington heard the case of a fifteen-year-old girl who had enlisted state social workers in her quest to live separately from her parents. The girl had resisted her parents’ efforts to discipline her through grounding, and claimed that there was conflict within her home,though when asked by a judge about the nature of this conflict, the girl simply replied: I just feel that there’s a communication gap there.In an imposing display of judicial power, the court ruled that the conflict between the parents and the child was so severe that it justified the child being placed under the custody of the state, even though the parents were fit and their behavioral standards were not unreasonable.Twenty-eight years later, families in the United States are still at risk of losing their children if the government believes it can do a better job. In 2004, a social worker hastily accused the parents of one-year-old Julia of child abuse after learning that she had suffered fifteen bone fractures in a period of five months. The parents had no previous record of abuse, the government never presented evidence that they had ever harmed their daughter, and several medical experts testified that the little girl had a brittle bone disease that was responsible for the fractures. But despite the evidence, the family court took little Julia away from her family and placed her in a foster home, citing her best interests.Julia remained in foster care until this past December, when her family finally won her back. She is now four-years-old, and has spent the last three years living with strangers in a foster home, but her family is overjoyed to finally welcome her home.More recently an autistic boy was forcibly removed from his home despite the evidence being clear that the parents have always stood by and tried to help their son.Read about this tragic story on our blog here.

WHO DECIDES?

Julia’s happy ending was three long years in the coming - all because of government officials who claimed to act in the best interests of the child, without bothering to prove that Julia’s parents were unfit to raise her. Her story is a warning of the insidious sub-plot that runs through Article 9 of the CRC, which grants the government a dangerous power over the lives of its citizens.But Julila’s story is more than just a warning. It is also a reminder that the battle for parental rights is more than just a battle to change the Constitution: it is a battle to protect real people, to save young lives that are in no danger, except from the government that claims to protect them. Innocent children and loving parents deserve far better than justice that comes three years too late.Please forward this message onto your friends and urge them to sign the Petition to Protect Parental Rights.Article written by Peter Kamakawiwoole, Feb.25, 2008.

Sources

In Re Sumey, 94 Wash. 2d 757 (Wash. S.C. 1980)
UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/k2crc.htm
Family wins custody battle in court
http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=647184&category=REGION&newsdate=12/14/2007 Autistic Boy Removed from his Home Because the Government Disagreed with the Parents.

Article 13, part 1: Homeschooling Illegal?
This week, we continue our series on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child by considering Article 13, which states that the child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child’s choice.The crux of this article is the child’s right to information.Children access information through what they are taught and what they discover on their own. This week, we will consider the Convention’s implications on what children are taught.

Homeschooling

Article 13 is far more sweeping than any right articulated by our Constitution or Supreme Court, guaranteeing all children the right to seek information of all kinds. International author and commentator Marian Koren explains that although the state should generally refrain from interfering in the family,the State also has a positive obligation in supporting the possibilities for children to seek information or to express their views.Ultimately,it is the duty of the State to respect the rights of the child and his freedom to thought, conscience, belief, expression and opinion. (emphasis in original)Although the United States has not yet ratified the CRC, there is a growing sentiment that the state should bear the responsibility for ensuring that children are properly educated, instead of parents. A striking example occurred this past February, when a California court declared in In Re Rachel L. that parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children,unless they are certified by the state to teach. In so ruling, the court declined to follow the Supreme Court’s 1972 decision in Wisconsin v. Yoder and its 2000 ruling in Troxel v. Granville, which guarantee parents the fundamental right to direct the upbringing and education of their children.

Whose Responsibility?

Rachel L., like Article 13, presumes that it is ultimately the state’s duty to ensure that the child’s right to information is respected. The California court quoted repeatedly from an earlier California decision in 1952, which concluded that children must be educated in traditional public or private schools, subject to state standards and regulations: anything less would take from the state all-efficient authority to regulate the education of the prospective voting population.(emphasis added)The language of all-efficient authority is not the language of liberty. According to Dr. Martin Guggenheim, Professor of Law at New York University,our future as a democracy depends on nurturing diversity of minds. The legal system’s insistence on private ordering of familial life ultimately guards against state control of its citizens. There may be questions over the best way to educate children, but according to Guggenheim, the American answer is that unless the answers are so clear that there is no room to disagree, parents are free to decide for themselves what they believe will best serve their children.Thankfully, the public outcry to this decision led California courts to decide to rehear the Rachel L. decision this summer, allowing parents - at least for the moment - to continue teaching their children at home. But only time will tell whether the California courts will have a change of heart, or whether the damaging decision will simply be repeated. The strong words of the first Rachel L. decision suggest that this is a real possibility.America’s legal heritage has consistently held that parents, not the state, have the right to decide whether their children would best benefit from public schooling, a private school, or even learning at home, but this recent decision from California highlights just how tenuous this freedom can be. If we wish to secure these freedoms, we must act now to place parental rights beyond the reach of judges by protecting them within the Constitution.Article written for ParentalRights.org by Peter Kamakawiwoole, April 21, 2008.

Sources

Marian Koren, The Right to Information: Too Vague to Be True? in Monitoring Children’s Rights, Eugeen Verhellen, ed. (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1996): 675.In Re Rachel L., 73 Cal.Rptr.3d 77 (Ca.App. 2008)(VACATED)Martin Guggenheim, What’s Wrong with Children’s Rights (2005): 24-27, 43.

Article 14: Religion Is Child Abuse?
This week, we continue our series on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child with Article 14, which says that the government shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion,and shall also respect the rights and duties of the parents and, when applicable, legal guardians, to provide direction to the child in the exercise of his or her right in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child.Proponents of the CRC, such as law professor Jonathan Todres, has commented that Article 14 provides for the role of parents in teaching religion to their children, while ensuring that the government does not impose restrictions on any child’s right to freedom of religion. Nevertheless, a deeper understanding of this provision reveals that the purportedly pro-parent language is really another avenue for government power, not a shield to protect parental rights.

How much direction is too much direction?

On its face, this article may seem to support the role of parents, but such a position is merely wishful thinking. The Convention merely recognizes the parents’ primary role to provide direction to the child, and there is considerable disagreement on what this direction should entail. For example, according to Faulkner University law professor John Garman, Article 14 is one of the few clauses in the CRC that actually brings the parents into play to provide direction to the child.But another CRC proponent, law professor Cynthia Price Cohen, disagrees. According to Cohen, one of the earliest drafts of Article 14 included two paragraphs that protected the right of parents to guide the exercise of this right and to respect the liberty of the child and his parents with regard to the child’s religious education. When the final text was adopted, however, all language protecting the rights of parents to ensure the religious and moral education of the child was omitted. This omission makes no sense if the purpose of Article 14 was to protect the rights of parents to instruct their children.

Religious indoctrination as abuse?

The danger to parents is compounded by a growing movement among American and international academics to prevent parents from indoctrinating their children with religious beliefs. For example, British scientist and bestselling author Richard Dawkins recently described religious indoctrination of young children as a form of child abuse.Odious as the physical abuse of children by priests undoubtedly is, Dawkins writes,I suspect that it may do them less lasting damage than the mental abuse of bringing them up Catholic in the first place.Dawkins is not alone in his analysis. In 1998, bestselling author and professor of psychology Nicholas Humphrey, teaching at New York University at the time, argued for censorship of parents, who have no right to limit the horizons of their children’s knowledge, to bring them up in an atmosphere of dogma and superstition, or to insist they follow the straight and narrow paths of their own faith.Both authors advocate an outside solution to protect children from indoctrination: intervention by the government. In The God Delusion, Dawkins quotes from Humphrey, who writes that children have a right not to have their minds addled by nonsense, and we as a society have a duty to protect them from it. Humphrey bluntly adds that parents rights have no status in ethics and should have none in law – parenting is a privilege that operates within parameters set by society to protect the child’s fundamental rights to self determination.If parents step beyond these boundaries by indoctrinating their children,the contract lapses – and it is then the duty of those who granted the privilege to intervene.(emphasis added)

Some have called for international talks on whether children should be involved in religion. Innaiah Narisetti of the Center for Inquiry (a U.N. NGO) said, The time has come to debate the participation of children in religious institutions,continues Narisetti.While some might see it as a matter better left to parents, the negative influence of religion and its subsequent contribution to child abuse from religious beliefs and practices requires us to ask whether organized religion is an institution that needs limits set on how early it should have access to children.Narisetti also said that The UN must then take a clear stand on the issue of the forced involvement of children in religious practices; it must speak up for the rights of children and not the automatic right of parents and societies to pass on religious beliefs, and it must reexamine whether an organization like the Vatican should belong to the UN.

The fundamental interest of parents

This aggressive censorship of parents captures the true spirit of Article 14. According to law professor Bruce Hafen, the language of Article 14 views parents as trustees of the state who have only such authority and discretion as the state may grant in order to protect the child’s independent rights,and is consistent with what the state deems as the child’s evolving capacities.Such a calloused view of parents stands in stark contrast to our own legal tradition, which has long upheld the fundamental interest of parents, as contrasted with that of the State, to guide the religious future and education of their children.America’s legal heritage has consistently held that parents have a fundamental right to teach their children about religion, shielded from well-intentioned but intrusive interference from the state. The danger of Article 14 is that it disrupts this crucial balance, tipping the scales in favor of the government and those who claim to know better in our society. If we wish to secure these freedoms, we must act now to place parental rights into the text of our Constitution.Please forward this message onto your friends and urge them to sign the Petition to Protect Parental Rights.Article written by Peter Kamakawiwoole, May 5, 2008.

Sources

Jonathan Todres,Analyzing the Opposition to the U.S. Ratification of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child,in The U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (2006): 24.Cynthia Price Cohen, Role of the United States in Drafting the Convention on the Rights of the Child,Loyola Poverty Law Journal (1998): 30-31.
Bruce Hafen, Abandoning Children to their Autonomy, Harvard International Law Journal (1996): 470.Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 232 (1972).

Article 18, Part 1: Government-Supervised Parenting
During our series on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, most of the articles we have considered have focused on the relationship between the state and the child. Article 18 is therefore unique in its emphasis on the responsibilities of parents, and the supervised relationship that these parents have with the state.

Article 18 is also one of the more complex articles in the Convention, divided into three sections that address distinct facets of the relationship between parents and the state. This week, we will focus on the first section, which says that States Parties shall use their best efforts to ensure recognition of the principle that both parents have common responsibilities for the upbringing and development of the child, and that parents are primarily responsible for their children. As parents,the best interests of the child will be their basic concern.The danger of Article 18 is that it places an enforceable responsibility upon parents to make child-rearing decisions based on the best interests of the child, subjecting parental decisions to second-guessing at the discretion of government agents.

Obligations on Parents?

Article 18 stands out because it affects not only the relationship between the UN and the nation that ratifies the Convention, but also the relationship between private individuals and their government: a relationship that is usually changed through legislation at a local level. In fact, the UN’s Implementation Handbook for the CRC explains that when article 18 was being drafted, the delegate from the United States of America commented that it was rather strange to set down responsibilities for private individuals, since the Convention could only be binding on ratifying governments.But instead of paying heed to this objection, the drafters of the CRC rejected it, making the Convention enforceable against private individuals and requiring that parental rights be translated into principles of parental responsibilities. The Handbook itself notes that if the actions of parents could be shown to impair the child’s physical, psychological, or intellectual development, the parents – not the state – can be found to be failing in their responsibilities. (emphasis added).The end result is parental involvement under state supervision. According to Chris Revaz, Article 18 recognizes that parents and legal guardians have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of the child, with the best interest of the child as their basic concern, but also invests in the state a secondary responsibility to provide appropriate assistance to parents and legal guardians in meeting their responsibilities.Roger Levesque opines that such supervision attempts to regulate the relationship between child and state, essentially relegating the role of parental and familial involvement to a position of secondary importance.

Enforcing the Best Interest Standard

As a previous article in our series has already discussed, the best interests of the child is a significant theme in the Convention, providing decision and policy makers with the authority to substitute their own decisions for either the child’s or the parents’.The inevitable result, according to Levesque, is that by placing the burden on the State to take affirmative steps toward ensuring the fulfillment of children’s rights, the Convention assumes responsibility and invokes the State as the ensurer and protector of rights.This point is echoed by Law Professor Bruce Hafen, who warns that the Convention’s emphasis on the best interests of the child creates an arguably new standard for state intervention in intact families.According to Hafen, legal authors in Australia have already suggested that under the CRC, parental childrearing rights are subject to external scrutiny and may be overridden when the parents are not acting in the best interests of the child.Hafen warns that this conclusion – though inapposite to America’s cultural and legal heritage – is consistent with the CRC’s apparent intent to place children and parents on the same plane as co-autonomous persons in their relationship with the state.This is a far cry from America’s legal heritage, which has long held that parents have a fundamental right to oversee the upbringing and education of their children, free from government control. Article 18 makes it plain, however, that under the Convention, it is the state that is ultimately responsible for the fate of its children, and has authority to supervise its parents.Article written for ParentalRights.org by Peter Kamakawiwoole, June 24, 2008.

Sources

UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/k2crc.htm.Cris Revaz,An Introduction to the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child,in The U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child: An Analysis of Treaty Provisions and Implications on U.S. Ratification (2006): 10-11.Roger Levesque, International Children’s Rights Grow Up: Implications for American Jurisprudence and Domestic Policy (1994): 214.Bruce and Jonathan Hafen, Abandoning Children to their Autonomy (1996): 461-462, 464.United Nations Children’s Fund, Implementation Handbook for the Convention on the Rights of the Child (2002): 245-246, 46, 246.

Giving the State a Grasp on Your Kids.Part II of an in-depth look at Article 18 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

When Kevin and Peggy Lewis volunteered their child for special education services, they never dreamed they would need a lawyer if they wanted to change their minds.
After their son developed several learning issues, including an inability to focus in class and difficulty processing and understanding oral and written communication, the Lewis's turned to the Cohasset Middle School in Massachusetts for help.1 But after a year in the school's special education program, their son was not improving academically, and felt harassed by school officials who were closely monitoring and reporting on his behavior - everything from chewing gum in class to forgetting his pencil.2 Initially, the Lewis's requested that the school pay for private tutoring, but as their relationship with the administration continued to decline, the exasperated parents finally decided to withdraw their son from the school's program and to pay for private tutoring out of their own pockets.3 Apparently, that option wasn't good enough for the school.In December 2007, Cohasset hauled Kevin and Peggy into court, claiming that the parents were interfering with their son's constitutional right to a free and appropriate education.4 After a day-and-a-half of argument, the judge sided with the school in an unwritten opinion.5 This is truly devastating to all parents who have children on an IEP,Peggy said, referring to the individual education plans for special education students.What it means in fact when you sign an IEP for your child, you sign away your parental rights. . . . Now Cohasset has their grasp on my kid.6

Help for Parents

At first glance, it seems odd that a school would take parents to court to compel them to accept state services. After all, as observers of the case commented, schools usually objects when parents demand more aid for their children, not when the parents try to withdraw their child from the program.7 But according to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child ,once parents have asked the state for assistance in raising their children, the state has both the responsibility and the authority to see the job through - even if the parents no longer support the state's solution.In addition to imposing legally-enforceable responsibilities on parents, Article 18 of the Convention also requires states to render appropriate assistance to parents and legal guardians in the performance of their child-rearing responsibilities, and to establish institutions, facilities and services for the care of children.8 At first glance, the offer of assistance to parents may appear harmless, and even generous, but appearances are often deceiving. While the government may claim to offer services to parents on a purely voluntary basis, parents soon discover that government assistance isn't always free.

When voluntary doesn't mean voluntary

For examples of this dangerous trend, one need look no further than the nation of Sweden, the first western nation to ratify the Convention.In addition to mandatory sex-education, free child care for working parents, and a national ban on corporal punishment, Sweden's local municipalities are also required by law to offer parents a broad array of voluntary services that promote the favourable development of children and young persons.9 Unfortunately, according to Swedish attorney and activist Ruby Harrold-Claesson, voluntary care in no way is voluntary since the social workers threaten the parents to either give up their child voluntarily or the child will be taken into compulsory care.10 If the state determines at a later date that the voluntary services are not helping, the municipality has both the responsibility and the authority to physically take a child into care and place him in a foster home, a children's home or another suitable institution.11 According to Harrold-Claesson, since the emergence of such programs,children are being taken from their parents on a more routine basis.12 Unfortunately, these disturbing trends are not confined to Sweden. Even here in the United States, voluntary services for parents are often the first step toward state control of families.

Holding Children Hostage

As a young mother of three,Katianne H.faced tremendous difficulties in making ends meet.13 Although she was never unemployed, Katianne had difficulty putting her job ahead of the needs of her young family. So when her three-month-old son Xavier developed severe allergies to milk and soy protein, her pediatrician recommended that she relieve some of the pressure placed upon her by requesting that her son be placed in temporary out-of-home care.14 Thinking such a placement was truly voluntary, Katianne agreed.Within a few months, Xavier was weaned from the feeding tube to a bottle, but when Katianne sought to bring him home, the state refused.It would take more than two-and-a-half years - and a decision from the Nebraska Supreme Court - before Katianne would win her baby boy back.15 In a unanimous ruling, the court said the child should have been returned to his mother as soon as his medical condition was resolved. Instead, state authorities drew up a detailed plan requiring the mother to maintain steady employment, attend therapy and parenting classes, pay her bills on time, keep her house clean, improve her time management, and be cooperative with social workers. When she failed to fully comply with all these obligations within fifteen months, her parental rights were terminated.16 The Court condemned the state for keeping Xavier out of the home once the reasons for his removal had been resolved,and warned that a child should never be held hostage to compel a parent's compliance with a case plan when the child could safely be returned home.17

A familiar pattern

According to studies, scholars, lawyers, and advocates, voluntary placement in the United States - like voluntary placement in Sweden - is often the first step toward the state getting a grasp on children. Here are just a few examples from within our own borders:
·A 1994 study in New Jersey found that parents often report signing placement agreements under the threat that court action against them will be taken if they do not sign,particularly parents who have language or other barriers making it difficult or impossible for them to read and understand the agreement they were signing.18 There are also no clear legal standards to protect a family once it has entered the system,even if it enters voluntarily: existing legislation grants judges and caseworkers virtually unrestricted dispositional authority.19
·In 1998, Melville D. Miller, President and General Counsel of Legal Services of New Jersey, warned that when parents sign voluntary placement agreements, parents give the state custody of their children without any decision by the court that they have abused or neglected them.20 In addition, voluntary placement often waives a family's opportunity for free legal representation in court, leaving families - particularly poor families - with no assistance in advocating for what they need when disputes with the state arise.21
·In 1999, Dr. Frank J. Dyer, author and member of the American Board of Professional Psychology, warned that parents can be intimidated into voluntarily signing placement agreements out of a fear that they will lose their children,and that in his professional counseling experience, birth parents frequently complain that if they had known from the outset that the document that they were signing for temporary placement of their children into foster care gave the state such enormous power over them, they would have refused to sign and would have sought to resist the placement legally.22
·The Child Welfare League of America, in its 2004 Family's Guide to the Child Welfare System, reassures parents that the state do[es] not have to pursue termination of parental rights,as long as the state feels that there is a compelling reason why terminating parental rights would not be in the best interest of the child.23 If parents and social workers disagree about the fate of a child in voluntary placement, the CWLA simply states that if you decide to bring your child home, and the agency believes that this would interfere with your child's safety, it has the right to ask the court to intervene. You also have the right to explain to the court why your child's safety would not be in jeopardy if he came home.24
·The National Crittenton Foundation, in a web booklet published for young, expectant mothers who are currently in the foster care system, warns in large, bold print that by signing a voluntary placement agreement,you will most likely lose all custody of your baby, even if you want to regain custody of your baby after you turn 18.25

Never Too Late

If one can learn anything from the stories of the Lewises, Katianne, and the plight of Swedish parents, it is that the government wields incredible power over parents who have voluntarily accepted its aid when caring for their children. These parents are often poor, struggling, and searching for the means to keep their families together, but instead of helping them, the open hand of the state can easily become a clenched fist, either bullying parents into submission or forcibly taking their children from them.Thankfully, it is not too late to protect children and their families by protecting the fundamental right of parents to raise their children, and to reject government programs that are unneeded or unwanted. The state should only interfere with the family for the most compelling reasons - not because loving parents were misled about the true nature of voluntary care.Please consider sending this message to your friends and urging them to sign the Petition to Protect Parental Rights.This article was written for ParentalRights.org by Peter Kamakawiwoole, Jan. 29, 2009.

Notes
1. James Vazniz,Cohasset schools win case v. parents,The Boston Herald (December 15, 2007) (accessed January 28, 2009).
2. James Vazniz, Parents want son out of special ed, The Boston Herald (December 13, 2007) (accessed January 28, 2009).
3. Vazniz, Cohasset schools win case v. parents.
4. Vazniz, Parents want son out of special ed.
5. Vazniz, Cohasset schools win case v. parents.
6. Vazniz, Cohasset schools win case v. parents.
7. Vazniz, Cohasset schools win case v. parents.
8. UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 18.2.
9. Ruby Harrold-Claesson, Confiscating Children: When Parents Become Victims,The Nordic Committee on Human Rights (2005) (accessed January 17, 2009)
10. Harrold-Claesson, Confiscating Children: When Parents Become Victims.
11. Harrold-Claesson, Confiscating Children: When Parents Become Victims.
12. Harrold-Claesson, Confiscating Children: When Parents Become Victims.
13. Katianne is the name given to the mother by the Nebraska Supreme Court, which decided her case in In Re Xavier H., 740 N.W.2d 13 (Neb. 2007).
14. In re Xavier H., 740 N.W.2d at 21.
15. Nebraska Supreme Court returns boy to mother,Omaha World Herald (October 19, 2007) (accessed January 29, 2009).
16. Nebraska Supreme Court returns boy to mother.
17. In re Xavier H., 740 N.W.2d at 26.
18. Emerich Thoma,If you lived here, you'd be home now: The business of foster care, Issues in Child Abuse Accusations, Vol. 10 (1998) (accessed January 27, 2009).
19. Thoma, If you lived here, you'd be home now.
20. Melville D. Miller, You and the Law in New Jersey (Rutgers University Press, 1998): 200.
21. Miller, You and the Law in New Jersey,200.
22. Frank J. Dyer, Psychological Consultation in Parental Rights Cases(The Guilford Press, 1999): 26.
23. Child Welfare League of America (CWLA),Placements to Obtain Treatment and Services for Children,A Family's Guide to the Child Welfare System (2004): 5 (accessed January 27, 2009).
24. CWLA, Placements to Obtain Treatment and Services for Children,p. 5.
25. The National Crittenton Foundation, Crittenton Booklet for Web,pp. 11-12. (accessed January 28, 2009)