Exposing anti-religious sects

[blackyblue]

I testify that all information is true, all information is supported by links and credible sources, and no anti-religious fanatics where harmed during the making of this thread.

Also a misconception is that religions are at war with eachother, however most religious hate crimes are commited by anti religious people targeting religious people with Jews being the most common targets

Religious extremists are actually if truth be told, anti religious extremists

[blackyblue]

Photos of anti-religious extremists that where brought to justice
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/


They even call for members of all faiths to unite against this new breed of extremism and harrasment, Satanists and scientologists included






One result of this campaign has been an increase in acts of harassment and violence perpetrated against Scientologists. Scientology churches have been vandalized and individual Scientologists have been harassed, physically attacked and threatened with death. When oppressive government agencies in France and Germany sought support for their discriminatory policies against minority religions, the same group of people who began this chain of violence traveled to Europe to spread their lies.

Other faiths also have been the targets of anti-religious violence. Extremists in the United States have fire-bombed Baptist churches and have defaced Jewish synagogues.

In Europe, right-wing nationalists have openly attacked members of other faiths and have staged violent hate rallies. And in the East, being a member of a "disfavored" religion has proven to be fatal. The issue affects everyone.

Thus, people of all faiths must unite in common support of not merely members of their own religion, but of all religionists. We must be vigilant in protecting the cherished right to freedom of worship and in exposing the extremists who spread hatred and violence.

Freedom of speech is a fundamental liberty; it is one of the hallmarks of a free society. It is not, however, a license to incite acts of violence through lies. And when it is abused by people whose only intentions are to harm and destroy it is incumbent upon honest citizens to speak out.

This section of the web site exposes the truth about these instigators so that no one else will succumb to their lies.

[blackyblue]

LONDON, November 21, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A leading international anti-religion crusader and supporter of Darwinian theory, Dr. Richard Dawkins, has said that the pseudo-science of eugenics that drove the Nazi regime’s genocidal project “may not be bad.”

Since the end of the second world war, the name of eugenics, the social philosophy that the human species or particular races ought to be improved by selective breeding or other forms of genetic manipulation, is one that conjures instant images of the Nazi death camps and “racial hygiene” programs.

In a letter to the editor of Scotland’s Sunday Herald, Dawkins argues that the time has come to lay this spectre to rest. Dawkins writes that though no one wants to be seen to be in agreement with Hitler on any particular, “if you can breed cattle for milk yield, horses for running speed, and dogs for herding skill, why on Earth should it be impossible to breed humans for mathematical, musical or athletic ability?”

Dawkins holds the Charles Simonyi Chair in the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University, but is best known as one of the world’s most outspoken current opponents of religious belief, giving lectures and interviews and writing articles in which “fundamentalist” Christianity is among his favourite targets.

“I wonder whether, some 60 years after Hitler’s death, we might at least venture to ask what the moral difference is between breeding for musical ability and forcing a child to take music lessons. Or why it is acceptable to train fast runners and high jumpers but not to breed them,” Dawkins wrote Sunday.

Dawkins’ campaign against religion has led him to publish a book, “The God Delusion”, in September this year and he is one of the instigators of the notion, popular with journalists, that the Catholic Church’s opposition to artificial contraception will result in mass starvation.

Dawkins is also a leader of the movement to gain legal “human” rights for great apes, arguing that since there is no such thing as a soul, there is no moral difference between apes and humans.

The atheistic philosophy of utilitarianism, that led in the 1930’s to the Nazi eugenics program, is now a respectable stream of thought in much of the contemporary academic world.

Ardent advocates of eugenics and utilitarianism, including Darwinism, can be found today among Nobel Prize winners and many of the leading lights of academia who hold extreme atheistic opinions like those of Richard Dawkins. Such people argue that the genetic improvement of the human species grows logically from the desire to use genetic manipulation to eliminate diseases.

Dr. Peter Singer is the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Ivy League Princeton University and is a leading advocate of utilitarian bioethics and a promoter of infanticide and euthanasia. Common to many utilitarians, Singer is also an ardent animal rights activist and is often called the “father” of the modern animal rights movement.

James Watson, the Nobel Prize winning discoverer of DNA and the first director of the Human Genome Project, promotes the idea of “improving” the human race by "inheritable genetic modification," most often referred to as "germline genetic engineering" at the embryonic stage. Such genetic re-engineering of the human race, once the stuff of science fiction, has become a legal reality in many countries that allow genetic screening in IVF facilities.

Watson, though not as outspokenly anti-religious as Dawkins, has ridiculed the notion of an overarching value to human beings. Speaking at a conference at UCLA in 1998, he said, “I think it’s complete nonsense ... saying we’re sacred and should not be changed…to say we’ve got a perfect genome and there’s some sanctity? I’d like to know where that idea comes from because it’s utter silliness”

“If we could make better human beings by knowing how to add genes, why shouldn’t we do it? What’s wrong with it? Who is telling us not to [do] it?”

Many modern eugenics enthusiasts advocate sterilization, abortion and infanticide as well as genetic modification of people at the embryonic stage. Nobel Prize-winning molecular biologist, John Sulston, who also worked on the Human Genome project implicitly advocated the extermination of the disabled when he said, “I don’t think one ought to bring a clearly disabled child into the world.”

Professor Robert Edwards, the IVF pioneer who helped bring to birth Louise Brown, often called the “world’s first test-tube baby, outraged disabled rights groups when he said, “Soon it will be a sin for parents to have a child which carries the heavy burden of genetic disease”.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/ant...cates-eugenics

[blackyblue]

HHS has drawn conscience protections so narrowly that Catholic colleges, universities and hospitals — any Catholic institution that employs and serves non-Catholics — will be required to offer health coverage that includes contraception and drugs that cause abortion. In global health grants, new language is appearing that requires the integration of family planning and “reproductive health” services, effectively barring the participation of Catholic institutions. Archbishop Timothy Dolan, president of the USCCB, calls these policies an “assault which now appears to grow at an ever-accelerating pace in ways that most of us could never have imagined.”
The main victims of this assault are not bishops but the poor and vulnerable. USCCB-sponsored human trafficking programs, for example, provide employment assistance, legal services, child care and medical screening. But because case managers won’t refer for abortions, HHS would rather see these programs shut down in favor of less effective alternatives. This form of anti-religious extremism counts casualties.

http://www.theamericanconservative.c...lic-extremism/

[zegzy]

The corrupt wealthy political/corporate elite globalists (aka 'Black Nobility') must be becoming concerned about the real possibility of their creations disintegrating, knowing that their Number 1 'divide and rule' tools, R E L I G I O N S are the only entities preventing a Global Uprising from occurring.

[blackyblue]

Nearly every year, I write about the FBI’s annual hate crimes statistics. And every year, the biggest victims by far–in terms of religious discrimination–are Jews, NOT Muslims (see my reports on the 2008 and 2007 stats). That’s despite the Muslim victimhood and oppression merchants’ annoying whines about “backlash.” If anything, there is forelash–we bend over, they insert. And in the same forelash vein, also this year–like every other year–the FBI declines to identify the perpetrators of the hate crimes by religion. If that happened, as I’ve noted before, we’d probably see that a good deal of the perpetrators of anti-Jewish hate crimes are Muslims. Below are the just-released FBI 2009 Hate Crimes Statistics. As you’ll note, the only thing that has changed is that the percentage of hate crimes against Jewish hate crimes has increased from 67% to 72% of all religion-based hate-crimes.

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/29601...slims-victims/

[blackyblue]

The FBI says the number of reported hate crimes dropped significantly in 2009 from the previous year, to their lowest point in more than 15 years, despite the deepening recession and growing social tensions. Anti-religious crimes also declined, although attacks against Jewish targets continued to far outstrip incidents aimed at Muslims and Islamic sites.

Whether that downward trend -- and the proportionally low number of anti-Muslim incidents -- continued into 2010 will only come to light in next year's report. Given the supercharged political atmosphere that marked this election year, and flashpoints like the so-called ground zero mosque controversy and the Koran-burning threats that sparked numerous attacks on Muslims, the numbers could spike.

But for now, religious groups are giving thanks for the decline, even if they have no clear explanations for the drop.

The FBI report shows that there were 6,598 single-bias incidents in 2009, with nearly half motivated by racial bias. The second-highest total was the 1,303 incidents motivated by religious bias, accounting for just under 20 percent of all hate crimes. Overall, the numbers represent a drop of 15 percent in all hate crimes to the lowest number reported since 1994, outstripping the 5.5 percent decline in violent crime in 2009 and the 4.9 percent drop in property crimes.

"Working with our coalition allies and law enforcement, we will do everything possible to ensure that this is not just a temporary downturn, but a sustainable trend," leaders of the Anti-Defamation League, a leading Jewish advocacy group, said in a statement. "However, violent bigotry is still disturbingly prevalent in America."

Studies have found no clear correlation between economic downturns and hate crimes, as many tend to believe should be the case. But social and political strife can stoke resentments that lead to attacks or to intimidating rhetoric and vandalism that can rise to the level of harassment and an entry in the FBI hate crimes roster. So establishing cause and effect is difficult, as is predicting whether today's tensions will lead to changes in next year's report one way or the other.

Attacks against Jews and Jewish sites accounted for more than 70 percent of the 2009 incidents against religious targets, while Muslims were targeted in just over 9 percent of the incidents. Both groups have relatively small communities, a few million in each case, as opposed to the nation's more than 65 million Roman Catholics, for example. The FBI tallied 51 anti-Catholic incidents in total in 2009, 38 against Protestants, and 10 against atheists and agnostics.

The ADL and others lamented that hate-crime reporting by local law enforcement agencies remains inconsistent, as more than 60 cities nationwide with over 100,000 residents "either did not participate in the data collection effort or reported figures that appear not credible," the ADL said.

"A victim of hate violence is much less likely to report the crime to a police department if he or she does not believe the crime will be treated with the seriousness it merits," the group said. "American communities have learned the hard way that failure to address bias crimes can cause an isolated incident to fester and result in widespread tension."

Brian Levin, head of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, noted that the number of agencies agreeing to data collection increased in 2009, but the number of agencies actually sending in hate crime reports to the FBI declined.

"A 2005 victimization study estimated that there are 191,000 hate crimes nationally, with most going unreported to police," Levin wrote in The Huffington Post. "While there may have been a downward trend, as suggested by those states with consistent reporting, today's report is undermined by a continued lack of reporting by various states, including some of the largest that had previously participated more actively in the past."

Some advocates hope that the passage last October of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act will improve reporting in coming years because it includes provisions aimed at spurring greater cooperation from state and local law enforcement agencies.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/11...lined-in-2009/

[blackyblue]

t













In the Uniform Crime Reporting Program, the victim of a hate crime may be an individual, a business, an institution, or society as a whole. In 2009, the Nation’s law enforcement agencies reported that there were 8,336 victims of hate crimes. Of these victims, 14 were victimized in 6 separate multiple-bias incidents.

By bias motivation
An analysis of data for victims of single-bias hate crime incidents showed that:

48.8 percent of the victims were targeted because of the offender’s bias against a race.
18.9 percent were victimized because of a bias against a religious belief.
17.8 percent were targeted because of a bias against a particular sexual orientation.
13.3 percent were victimized because of a bias against an ethnicity/national origin.
1.2 percent were targeted because of a bias against a disability. (Based on Table 1.)
Racial bias

Among the single-bias hate crime incidents in 2009, there were 4,057 victims of racially motivated hate crimes.

71.5 percent were victims because of an offender’s anti-black bias.
16.5 percent were victims because of an anti-white bias.
3.7 percent were victims because of an anti-Asian/Pacific Islander bias.
2.1 percent were victims because of an anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native bias.
6.2 percent were victims because of a bias against a group of individuals in which more than one race was represented (anti-multiple races, group). (Based on Table 1.)
Religious bias

Of the 1,575 victims of an anti-religious hate crime:

71.9 percent were victims because of an offender’s anti-Jewish bias.
8.4 percent were victims because of an anti-Islamic bias.
3.7 percent were victims because of an anti-Catholic bias.
2.7 percent were victims because of an anti-Protestant bias.
0.7 percent were victims because of an anti-Atheist/Agnostic bias.
8.3 percent were victims because of a bias against other religions (anti-other religion).
4.3 percent were victims because of a bias against groups of individuals of varying religions (anti-multiple religions, group). (Based on Table 1.)
Sexual-orientation bias

Of the 1,482 victims targeted due to a sexual-orientation bias:

55.1 percent were victims because of an offender’s anti-male homosexual bias.
26.4 percent were victims because of an anti-homosexual bias.
15.3 percent were victims because of an anti-female homosexual bias.
1.8 percent were victims because of an anti-bisexual bias.
1.4 percent were victims because of an anti-heterosexual bias. (Based on Table 1.)
Ethnicity/national origin bias

Hate crimes motivated by the offender’s bias toward a particular ethnicity/national origin were directed at 1,109 victims. Of these victims:

62.4 percent were targeted because of an anti-Hispanic bias.
37.6 percent were victimized because of a bias against other ethnicities/national origins. (Based on Table 1.)
Disability bias

Of the 99 victims of a hate crime due to the offender’s bias against a disability:

74 were targets because of an anti-mental disability bias.
25 were victims because of an anti-physical disability bias. (See Table 1.)
By crime category
Of the 8,336 victims of a hate crime, 57.5 percent were victims of crimes against persons, and 42.2 percent were victims of crimes against property. The remaining percentage were victims of crimes against society. (Based on Table 2.)

By offense type
Crimes against persons

In 2009, 4,793 victims of hate crimes were victims of crimes against persons. Regarding these victims and the crimes committed against them:

8 persons were murdered, and 9 were forcibly raped.
45.0 percent of the victims were intimidated.
35.3 percent were victims of simple assault.
19.1 percent were victims of aggravated assault.
Less than one percent (0.3) were victims of other types of offenses, which are collected only in the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). (Based on Table 2.)
Crimes against property

In 2009, 3,517 victims of hate crimes were victims of crimes against property. Of these:

83.7 percent were victims of destruction/damage/vandalism.
4.9 percent were victims of larceny-theft.
4.5 percent were victims of burglary.
4.0 percent were victims of robbery.
1.7 percent were victims of arson.
0.3 percent were victims of motor vehicle theft.
0.8 percent were victims of other types of hate crime offenses, which are collected only in the




http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2009/victims.html

[blackyblue]

http://www.cafepress.co.uk/antireligion/639044

[blackyblue]

FBI Hate Crimes StatsShow Few Anti-Christian Crimes, Many Anti-Gay

Posted by: Bridgette P. LaVictoire on November 15, 2011.

The FBI has released the 2010 Hate Crimes Statistics. There is something startling within those statistics, that is if you actually believe the rot pushed out by the Roman Catholic Church. Of the incidents of hate crimes, the top three- in order- are racist, anti-regligious, homophobic.

What they found was that:

47.3 percent were racially motivated.
20.0 percent were motivated by religious bias.
19.3 percent resulted from sexual-orientation bias.
12.8 percent stemmed from ethnicity/national origin bias.
0.6 percent were prompted by disability bias.
With regards to the anti-religious hate crimes, the breakdown follows:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc
What that means is that 4.3% of 20% were anti-Catholic. In fact, taking it as a whole, only 7.6% of 20% are anti-Christian. So, roughly 1.5% of all hate crimes in the United States in 2010 were against Christians while 19% were against gays. That means that lesbians, gays, and bisexuals were more than twelve times likely to be the victim of a hate crime than a Christian. This, basically, means that the Christians are not being persecuted in any way.

To further breakdown the numbers, the bulk of the anti-gay crimes were against gay men:

57.9 percent were classified as anti-male homosexual bias.
27.4 percent were reported as anti-homosexual bias.
11.4 percent were prompted by an anti-female homosexual bias.
1.4 percent were the result of an anti-heterosexual bias.
1.9 percent were classified as anti-bisexual bias.
And finally, among the racially motivated crimes, the largest numbers were against Blacks:

69.8 percent were motivated by anti-black bias.
18.2 percent stemmed from anti-white bias.
5.7 percent were a result of bias against groups of individuals consisting of more than one race (anti-multiple races, group).
5.1 percent resulted from anti-Asian/Pacific Islander bias.
1.2 percent were motivated by anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native bias.
Approximately 32% of all hate crimes were against Blacks.

What this data shows is that the supposed oppression or suppression of Christians is not occurring. Instead, it is rather clear that the people who are bearing the brunt of the battle between the LGBT Community and the Christians is the LGBT Community.

http://lezgetreal.com/2011/11/fbi-ha...many-anti-gay/

[blackyblue]

"The airport is named after one of my heroes and his view on religion was pretty much the same as mine. I thought it was an insult to his memory to have a prayer room in his airport." That was part of the evidence given in court by the self-styled "militant atheist" campaigner Harry Taylor, 59, to explain why he left anti-religious materials in the multi-faith Prayer Room of Liverpool's John Lennon Airport (pictured).

The jury of ten women and two men, at Liverpool Crown Court wasn't having it. It took them just 15 minutes to find Mr Taylor guilt of "religiously aggravated intentional harassment, alarm or distress" after viewing the "grossly abusive and insulting" images in court. The cartoons -- which had been cut from newspapers, magazines and other mainstream publications -- included one showing a smiling Christ on the cross next to an advert for a brand of "no nails" glue. In another, the Pope is shown wearing a condom on his finger. Others featured Islamic suicide bombers at the gates of paradise who are told, "Stop, stop, we've run out of virgins."

The airport's chaplain, Nicky Lees, told the court she "was insulted, deeply offended and . . . alarmed" when she found the images, and contacted the police.

Harry Taylor admitted leaving the images in the Prayer Room, but argued that he had a right to challenge the view of others and to try to persuade people of faith to convert to atheism, just as people of faith had a right in law to evangelize him. He also cited childhood mistreatment at the hands of Christian Brothers, while growing up in Dublin, as the reason why he had become so "strongly anti-religious".

Harry Taylor is now on bail awaiting sentencing on 23 April. Religiously aggravated offences carry a potential seven-year prison term.

The National Secular Society have supported Mr Taylor. They claim that new laws dealing with "religiously aggravated offences" amount to a blasphemy law in another guise.

Terry Sanderson, president of the society, said: "This is a disgraceful verdict, but an inevitable one under this pernicious law. It seems incredible in the 21st Century that you might be sent to prison because someone is 'offended' by your views on their religion . . . Mr Taylor struck me as slightly eccentric and he acted in a provocative way, challenging the necessity for the prayer room. He didn't cause any damage and he didn't harm anything, nor was he threatening or abusive. Yet he might still end up behind bars because some Christian has decided they are offended. In a multicultural society, none of us should have the legal right not to be offended. This law needs to be re-examined urgently."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ni/2010/0...d_guilt_o.html

[blackyblue]

ACT....





when our zionist Westminster elite tell you they are going to act re peadophilia etc…you can be sure thats’ all they will do, ACT!!

Guess Who’s Behind The
‘Pedophile Protection Act’?

By Rev. Ted Pike
5-11-9

Federal hate crimes bill S. 909 has now passed the House of Representatives and is in the Senate Judiciary Committee. As we anticipate Tuesday morning’s probable Senate Judiciary hearing on this bill, we should ask, “Who is behind this unthinkable, pedophile-protecting bill?”

Leaders of the Christian conservative right quickly respond, “Liberals and the homosexual lobby!”

Yes, these two groups lead a list as long as your arm of hate bill supporters. They inhabit the perverted legislative whore-house called “hate crimes law.” Yet they did not design and build the house. To know who did, visit www.adl.org, the website of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith. There, ADL proudly boasts of their “model anti-hate law” and persuading 45 US states to adopt it.

ADL’s orchestration of hate laws in over 55 Western nations, in addition to the US, is a long, dark story. This article presents a brief chronology of their conspiracy to steal freedom of speech. That attempt is now reaching a momentous climax, for good or evil, in the US Senate.

What is ADL?

B’nai B’rith (Sons of the Covenant) is an international Jewish religious, fraternal and educational, liberal activist organization. It describes itself as the heart and soul of organized world Jewry. It was founded in New York City in the mid-nineteenth century to further Jewish interests and community in America. In 1913, their Anti-Defamation League was created, ostensibly to combat emerging anti-Semitism.

ADL/B’nai B’rith does not represent the thinking of all Jews. Most American Jews are liberal (AP reported 81% voted for House Democrats in 2009); but a minority vehemently oppose ADL’s secularist agenda and bullying tactics. Rabbi Daniel Lapin warns that ADL (which he calls secular Judaism) is “in relentless attack” on evangelical Christians. His website has even listed a toll-free number for Christians and conservatives to call and report harassment and accusations of “anti-Semitism” from ADL. (1)

Today, there are roughly 200,000 members of B’nai B’rith International (with chapters and lodges in 55 Western nations). Many are Jewish activists who work behind the scenes in governments to pass hate crimes legislation and run hate crimes bureaucracies. ADL efforts have been spectacularly successful. Whether in California, Canada, Iceland, England or Australia-ADL’s terminology, twisted definitions and pretexts for hate crime indictments are identical. ADL phrases such as “bias-motivated hate crime,” “gender identity,” “actual or perceived sexual orientation,” etc., are enshrined in the hate crime laws of most Western industrialized nations today. If a yellow plastic arch rises from an urban horizon in Beijing, you know it comes from McDonald’s in America. So, too, we recognize ADL when pastors in Holland or Australia are indicted for “hate speech,” slapped with severe penalties and physically and financially exhausted in endless attempts to get free from hate crime indictment. ADL of America and Canada, ADL Europe, and ADL Australia are the super-powerful architects and enforcers of hate laws on three continents.

How powerful is ADL? Congressman John Rarrick (in the Congressional Record December 6, 1971) quoted Senator Jack Tenney of California: “The FBI and CIA are tinker toys compared to ADL.”

A History of Hate for Christian Values

Let’s trace ADL/B’nai B’rith creation of hate laws over the past 38 years.

1971. After ten years lobbying, B’nai B’rith Canada and the Canadian Jewish Congress persuaded Ottawa to enact their federal “anti-hate” law, the Canadian Human Rights Act. Its Sec. 319 and subsequent provincial hate laws criminalize any speech even “likely” to cause hatred or contempt against specially federally protected groups-especially homosexuals, Jews, Muslims, immigrants, but never Christians.

1985. ADL began massive programs to end “bias,” “hate,” and Christian “homophobia” in American businesses, local governments and schools. Since its inception, ADL’s World of Difference program has instructed, according to ADL, “more than 375,000 elementary and secondary school teachers, responsible for nearly 12 million students” toward “tolerance” of homosexuality.(2)

1988. ADL sponsored a nationwide competition open to all law students in America, to craft a “model” anti-hate law for the US. Jewish law student Joseph Ribikoff won first prize with his proposal to criminalize all Christian/conservative leaders who criticize homosexuality as well as all loyal members. (3) Through the 1990s, ADL persuaded roughly 45 states to adopt some version of its refined model hate law. Visit www.adl.org for detailed charts about states’ implementation. During this time ADL also established hate law bureaucracies throughout Europe.

1990. ADL was convicted in a California court of violating the civil rights of more than 10,000 conservatives, pro-lifers, members of the political right and Muslims on whom ADL had spied over the years, keeping secret surveillance files. (4) My father and I were listed in these files gathered in cooperation with West coast police departments.

1990. Congress passed ADL’s Hate Crimes Statistics Act. It mixed synagogue with state, making ADL the hate laws teacher to the US Justice Department, FBI and every police precinct in America. Since then, ADL’s twisted definitions, hate law enforcement methods, and criteria for statistics reporting inform the thinking and reflexes of the US law enforcement system. (5)

1998. ADL introduced its Hate Crimes Prevention Act to Congress, confident of easy passage. Republican leaders in the House and Senate instructed everyone to vote for it. Yet independent-thinking Republicans, dominating Conference between the House and Senate, examined the bill closely. Aghast at its sinister intentions, they stripped it out. Since then, ADL’s federal hate bill has been reintroduced and defeated by Republicans in every session of Congress. Today, with a Democrat-dominated government, ADL eagerly anticipates victory: an ADL-dominated hate crimes bureaucracy in America, ending free speech and persecuting Christians from a hate crimes command center in Washington.

2004. Acting on authority of ADL’s Pennsylvania hate law, ADL national executive board member and Philadelphia DA Lynne Abraham arrested and imprisoned for 21 hours 11 Christians for the “hate crime” of peacefully witnessing to homosexuals. Penalty if convicted of the seven charges would be 47 years in prison and $90,000 fines each. After 3 months they were acquitted.

2004. ADL introduced their No Place for Hate program, which boldly encourages American families to embrace homosexuality, same-sex marriage, etc. No Place for Hate literature is promoted in Barnes and Noble bookstores and at local chapters across the nation. One piece encourages families with young children to invite a homosexual couple for an evening of dinner, fun and fellowship. This, ADL says, will help destroy any “homophobic” attitudes developing in their young minds.

2004. ADL Europe and B’nai B’rith International set up a 56-member hate law bureaucracy in Europe, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). They also persuaded the European Union and Council of Europe to promote the ADL hate law agenda. As part of OSCE, ADL created the International Network Against Cyber-Hate (INACH) dedicated to ending online “hate speech” (really, free speech, such as criticism of homosexuality and Israel). (6)

2006. ADL persuaded Congress to create its Global Office of Anti-Semitism in the US State Department. Every year this ADL front reports on an “epidemic” of anti-Semitism gleaned from ADL statistics gathered worldwide. In last year’s report to Congress, it accused Christians who believe the New Testament account that Jewish leaders had Christ crucified of being “classic anti-Semites”-as was Adolf Hitler. (7) In Canada, any public statement that Jewish leaders killed Christ is considered the hate crime of anti-Semitism, punishable by a minimum $5,000 fine and prison if repeated.

2007. The ADL-inspired Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Act was introduced into Congress. It would set up a federal commission to study and make legislative recommendations to Congress on how to end Christian, conservative, and far right “hate speech” that streams the internet, possibly inciting violent hate crimes. It was unanimously passed by the House. (8)

2008. ADL, through Jewish lesbian activist and state Rep. Sheila Kuehl helped pass California’s SB777, banning criticism of homosexuality in public schools. If any child now criticizes sodomy, he will be expelled. If a teacher or administrator does, they are fired. (9) At the same time, ADL submitted an extensive amicus brief to the California Supreme Court in favor of same-sex marriage. (10) It undoubtedly influenced the Court’s pro-homosexual decision.

2009. With another Jewish activist group, the Southern Poverty Law Center, ADL directed Missouri state police to consider white Christian conservatives, Ron Paul supporters, tax and immigration protestors, pro-lifers, etc., as possible domestic terrorists. (11) Soon after, Janet Nepolitano, who recently delivered an extensive and flattering speech to an ADL convention, issued a very similar directive from the Department of Homeland security, warning America of this threat from the Christian conservative right. (12)

2009. ADL’s federal hate crimes bill passed the House of Representatives 249-175. (13) The Senate version will probably be considered in the Senate Judiciary Tuesday, May 12 at 10am EDT. (14)

ADL Hate Laws Target Christians

Get the picture? Do you see the trajectory of ADL’s hate law agenda? It means persecution of Christians and other free thinkers.

ADL is a cesspool of anti-Christian, anti-freedom social “civil rights” initiatives. For decades its pipeline of legislative sewage has flowed directly and interminably into Congress. If Americans defeat one ADL-inspired bill, ADL has lined up six more. But unlike most evangelical Christians, ADL will never, never give up-until it has created an “anti-hate” bureaucracy in America, like Canada’s, ending free speech.

What is ADL’s ultimate objective? National director Abraham H. Foxman, author of Never Again? The Threat of the New Anti-Semitism, is a devout Orthodox Jew. In 1991, he angrily vacated his seat in the Orthodox synagogue of Teaneck, New Jersey, because he felt its members and leadership were not praying for Israel as passionately as they should! (15) Foxman says he earnestly looks forward to Israel’s Biblically prophesied “messiah.” Christians know this is not Jesus Christ but that prophesied “man of sin” (John 5:43) whom Jesus said Jews would someday accept in place of Himself. Contemporary Jewish activists, like Foxman, think “the messiah is the Jewish people”- i.e., when Jewish power finally ascends over Christians and Gentiles, Jewish power by itself will make “messiah” happen.

Why does Foxman promote homosexuality, same-sex marriage, pornography (he gave pornographers Hugh and Christy Hefner special “free speech” awards)? (16) Why do ADL and other Jewish “civil liberties” groups, such as the ACLU (17), Southern Poverty Law Center, People for the American Way, etc., do all they can to tear down our crosses, Ten Commandments, manger scenes, Christian symbols (18) and passionately support the killing of 50 million babies through abortion? For that matter, why did the Jewish forefathers of these Jewish supremacists invent and facilitate Communism and socialism (liberalism)-dedicated to breaking down the capitalist free enterprise system? (19) Why does Jewish-dominated media (20) relentlessly corrupt our morals and those of our children, casting aspersions (as in the Da Vinci Code) on the deity and legitimacy of Christ? (21)

Simple.

The Jewish supremacists of ADL/B’nai B’rith know that if Christian nations remain strong, virtuous and industrious, they will never realize their messiah in sovereignty over the nations, ruling the world from Jerusalem. (22)

Even if Christian or conservative leaders know of such demonic aspirations, they will never say it. ADL has them convinced they will be ruined if they do-smeared as “anti-Semites” and abandoned by Israel-first followers who have been conditioned to loathe any hint of criticism of “God’s chosen people.”

If America is to survive, this must change. ADL has brought us the very brink of slavery-intending to herd America into a one-world, international police state. A great abyss of darkness lies just before us.

But it’s we who should push ADL back into this abyss of its own making. Everyone, leaders and followers, should speak out against ADL now! When we collectively identify ADL as the greatest threat to freedom in our history, it will be ADL, not us, who will be ruined.

How can we stop ADL? Begin by defeating its federal hate crimes bill S. 909, now entering a probable first hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Tuesday May 12 at 10am EDT.

Call your senators and the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. If you have time, call all the senators. Their names are listed on the Action page here at www.truthtellers.org. Call 1-877-851-6437 toll-free or 1-202-225-3121 toll. Tell them, “If the senator votes for the pedophile-protecting hate bill, I and all my friends will never, never forgive or forget!”





http://centurean2.wordpress.com/2011...rotection-act/

[blackyblue]

Originally Posted by zegzy

The corrupt wealthy political/corporate elite must be getting worried about the real possibility of their creations disintegrating, knowing that their number 1 'divide and rule' tools...R E L I G I O N S...are the only entities preventing a Global Uprising.

Those corrupt and wealthy elites are the same anti-religious fanatics that are behind peadophile protection

The masses of anti-religious fanatics below the elite corrupt ones, are having their strings pulled by peadophile protectors

[blackyblue]

http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=202824

[that one guy]

Originally Posted by blackyblue

What this data shows is that the supposed oppression or suppression of Christians is not occurring. Instead, it is rather clear that the people who are bearing the brunt of the battle between the LGBT Community and the Christians is the LGBT Community.

I suppose it's good to hear that is finally settled.

[blackyblue]

There’s a new YouTube video out called “Why I Hate Religion, But Love Jesus.” It was released January 10th, and as I write this on the morning of January 14th, it’s already racked up nearly 10 million hits, so it’s definitely gone viral.

I’ve had a bunch of requests for a response, so here goes.

The video is quite painful to watch. Check it out for yourself . . .



The video is painful to watch for a number of reasons. For one, the creator–Jefferson Bethke of Tacoma, Washington–is not that great a poet. He uses weak assonance when he should use rhyme. He has non sequiturs, so his thoughts don’t flow from one another. And he can be unclear in what he is trying to say.

I’m not so interested in critiquing what he has to say on an artistic level, however. The main thing is the painful content.

He starts by asking, dramatically, “What if I told you Jesus came to abolish religion?”

This is preposterous, of course. It creates an immediate reaction of incredulity, and it causes anyone who is religious to wince. Here we go with another self-righteous, religion-bashing session.

You often hear religion dissed by people who say they are “spiritual” rather than “religious,” which implies that they are on a higher plane. Being “spiritual” is set up as a good thing, in contrast to being “religious” which is either bad or inferior by comparison. For those of us who are religious, that comes off as an insult.

This kind of claim is often made by people who don’t explicitly identify as Christians. It’s something that the unchurched or people in the New Age movement say.

Mr. Bethke does not fall into either of those categories. He’s working the “religion = bad” concept from a different angle. I don’t know that Mr. Brethke identifies himself with the “Emerging Church” movement, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he does. His whole manner of presentation suggests it, and within that context, it wouldn’t be surprising to find this kind of “Jesus vs. religion” schtick. There have been elements of that before in certain Protestant circles.

Mr. Bethke’s poem goes down a number of rabbit trails that we won’t dwell on in detail. The first occurs in the second two lines of his poem, where he takes swipes at Christians who are also Republicans. He repeats the politically liberal cliche that they identify Christianity with Republicanism. While it’s certainly true that people have a tendency to identify their political affiliation with their religious affiliation (that’s a human temptation that has been around since the days of Pharaoh or Caesar, to name just two recent god-kings), his poem really isn’t the place to go into that.

A couple of sneer-filled lines doesn’t do the subject justice, but that’s all he gives it since he immediately ditches the political discussion in favor of his anti-religion rant.

He repeats the cliche that religion starts lots of wars, which is nonsense. Religion is a powerful motivator, and thus is often invoked in wartime, but the real reasons most wars have been fought have nothing to do with it. Instead, they have to do with political control–either allowing certain political leaders to gain or remain in power (e.g., who is the rightful heir to the throne) or they have to do with gaining political control of resources (e.g., land, money, food supplies, transportation and trade routes) or they have to do with a particular leader’s ambitions (i.e., being remembered as a great man, or not being remembered as a weak man). When leaders aren’t being totally naked about those things, they dress them up with national pride or religion, but ultimately they are not at the root.

The reason political leaders invoke religion when going to war is that religion is a powerful motivator that is built into human nature, which is why religion appears in all human societies. It’s a human universal, and religion in that sense is not something Jesus came to abolish. He didn’t come to root the religious impulse out of mankind but to shape it and channel it properly (e.g., “Blessed are the peacemakers”).

Bethke’s slam on religion as the cause of war is thus a shallow, sneering cliche that fails to get to the root of the issue.

He then asks why religion builds great churches but doesn’t feed the poor.

Excuse me?

Historically speaking, the Christian Church has been the greatest, most effective charitable institution in world history! It has fed more hungry, clothed more naked, and cared for more sick than any other institution!

And if you know your Bible, as Mr. Bethke seems to, given that his speech (including in other videos) is littered with insider Christian lingo, including numerous terms and phrases from the Bible, then you know that honoring God through architecture is important as well. God has some rather particular instructions regarding the construction of the Tabernacle and the Temple. Honoring God in this way is also built in to human nature.

It reflects the love of God, just as helping the poor reflects love of man. These two goals are not at odds with one another. The Church must pursue both.

Then Bethke says “religion” tells single mothers that God doesn’t love them if they’ve ever had a divorce.

HUH???

I’d like to hear Mr. Bethke name one person who has done that. I bet he can’t. And I’m quite sure that he can’t show the existence of enough people to warrant making this a general slam on the religious community, which–to the contrary–has been instrumental in setting up crisis pregnancy centers, creating homes for unwed mothers, providing assistance to single mothers, and extending care and compassion to countless individuals who have had broken marriages–and reassuring them of God’s love!

It is unfortunate, but Mr. Bethke has chosen to repeat uninformed cliches as a way of adopting the pose of a prophet. He comes across as a spiritual poser who does not know what he is talking about as he sneers and looks down on others.

There are simply too many things in Bethke’s rant that call for a response to give them each an individual treatment, so let us look at the big picture.

What we have here is a rap-battle-inspired slam on the concept of religion in favor of what Bethke considers to be the truth, the authentic cause of Jesus.

Unfortunately, the sneering, self-important, self-righteous tone of a rap battle does not lend itself well to this purpose (not that he’s actually rapping, but that’s what he’s aping).

It’s true that Jesus did have some stinging things to say about the hypocrites of his day. St. Paul was similarly harsh with his opponents. But it’s all too easy to justify our own self-righteousness and arrogance by appealing to these passages. One is playing with fire when one goes in this direction.

Mr. Bethke’s rant against the judgmental who put on an artificial show of piety is filled with both judgment and affected piety. There’s a moment in the video where he says, “Now I ain’t judging, I’m just saying quit putting on a fake look.”

Bethke, let’s be honest. You are so totally judging.

Your whole video is filled with scorn and sneer. Each line drips venom on other people.

And as for “putting on a fake look” (a clumsy set-up for a rhyme on the word “Facebook”), your whole schtick–the rap-battle insults, the disjointed poetry, the awkward assonance, the attitude of the earnest, hip nonconformist–the whole thing is as artificial or “put on” as one could wish.

This isn’t who you really are. Not at your core. This is you giving a performance.

And it’s a performance that, just coincidentally, shows how pious and “real” you are compared to your religious peers.

Who is putting on pious show here? You’ve got some mighty wide phylacteries, Mr. Bethke.

But let’s move past that and get to what really sets people off about your video: The dissing of religion.

What is religion?

Bottom line: Religion is a set of beliefs about the divine and/or the afterlife. All religions (atheism included) make some kind of claim about one of those two subjects. Most make claims about both.

But Jesus didn’t come to abolish beliefs regarding the divine and the afterlife. He came to proclaim them.

In another sense, religion is the life and the actions that flow from those beliefs. So what did Jesus think of religion in that sense?

Well, according to the Bible (James 1:26-27),

26 If any one thinks he is religious, and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this man’s religion is vain. 27 Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.

Notice that here religion is spoken of as something positive, as something to aspire to, and something that can be pure and undefiled before God.

And it requires things of us. Bridling our tongues. Visiting orphans and widows. Keeping ourselves unstained from the world.

We needn’t quibble about these points, and we all fail in all of them, but they are things we are supposed to undertake, by God’s grace, in order to please God.

Jesus did not come to abolish these things.

And because he didn’t, the word “religion” has become part of the Christian heritage. It is something that has become part of how we as Christians identify ourselves–something that goes to the core of who we are.

We Christians have a religion. We Christians are a religion. We Christians practice religion.

So if you are a Christian, Mr. Bethke, if you love the Bible and the Church the way you say you do in your video, then who are you to overturn 2,000 years of Christian history and start ranting about how Jesus came to abolish religion and that religion and Jesus are contrary to one another.

What arrogance!

And what ignorance of the Christian heritage that has been bequeathed to you!

Now, I can’t blame you for some of that. If your YouTube username–bball1989–is any indication, you are 22 or at most 23 years old.

You haven’t been alive long enough to get a broad perspective on history, and you may well not have been exposed to or encouraged to read broadly in the history of Christianity.

Being angsty and wanting to rant against the religious hypocrisy you perceive around you is also often part of being 22. I mean, a lot of us have been there.

And many of us look back on that time in our lives with a bit of embarrassment. I know I do. As I’ve gotten older, I continually realize all the more just how much I don’t know, and how I need to be more careful in what I say and what I claim.

You are also likely to look back with embarrassment on this, only on a larger scale since you now have almost 10,000,000 hits–and undoubtedly will have far more than that by the time your video’s popularity is played out.

Things may seem awesome now. For example, you have a recent Facebook post saying:

My buddy just called me and said he was driving 60mph down the freeway and a car came up along side him and on the entire back window in shoe polish was written “YouTube the video ‘Why I Hate Religion, but Love Jesus” LOL God is good! Man. It’s a craze right now but He is faithful and He is my judge! It’s all Grace!

But already you are seeing some of the harm that your video can result in, as you quickly followed up with a post saying:

If you are using my video to bash “the church” be careful. I was in no way intending to do that. My heart came from trying to highlight and expose legalism and hypocrisy. The Church is Jesus’ bride so be careful how you speak of His wife. If a normal dude has right to get pissed when you bash His wife, it makes me tremble to think how great the weight is when we do it to Jesus’ wife. The church is His vehicle to reach a lost word. A hospital for sinners. Saying you love Jesus but hate the Church, is like a fiancé saying he loves his future bride, but hates her kids. We are all under grace. Look to Him.

Just as you can’t separate the Church from Jesus, you can’t separate religion from Christ and his Church.

It can’t be done, and it’s foolish to try.

If you want to rant against legalism and hypocrisy then call them by their names. Don’t go on a futile quest to get people to start using the term “religion” in an unfamiliar way that is, frankly, contrary to the way it’s used in the Bible.

Religion is something very, very important to people, and telling them that Jesus opposed religion is not only preposterous, it’s offensive–particularly the way the claim is presented in your video.

So ditch the sneer, ditch the mocking, self-righteous attitude toward your fellow believers, and show some consideration for them and for their feelings regarding the word “religion”–feelings which are, frankly, more attuned to the way Scripture uses the word than yours apparently are.

[welling]

I know that you are pretty much the only person posting on this thread, but I thought I'd point out that you main link to 'Religous Freedom Watch' is a Scientology website.


Therefore it is not to be believed, trusted or read.

[zegzy]

Originally Posted by blackyblue

Photos of anti-religious extremists that where brought to justice http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/ They even call for members of all faiths to unite against this new breed of extremism and harrasment, Satanists and scientologists included...

Originally Posted by welling

I know that you are pretty much the only person posting on this thread, but I thought I'd point out that you main link to 'Religous Freedom Watch' is a Scientology website. Therefore it is not to be believed, trusted or read.

@ 'blackyblue'...and anyone who has wasted their time reading through each of his posts on this thread...