Selling incompetence, Part II

I’ve written before about the method being used to draw us into a one-world-government by having our own governments be so “incompetent” that we cry out for better leadership, well, here is the new leader for the New Age… AI. And people actually want this. The insanity of it!

I quote: (Link)

“Fully one in four Europeans said they were “somewhat or totally in favor of letting an artificial intelligence make important decisions about the running of their country,” a number that climbed to one in three for the Netherlands, UK, and Germany, according to a survey by the Center for the Governance of Change, a tech-focused research group from IE University in Spain. The figures remained constant across education levels, gender, and political affiliation, indicating either Europeans are abnormally welcoming of their new robot overlords – or they’re sick of their human ones.

Spoiler alert: it’s likely the latter. While the survey uncovered high levels of technological anxiety across all demographics, even the fear of having one’s job stolen by robots doesn’t hold a candle to Europeans’ antipathy for their political masters…”

Perfect – what could be better than to have our societies run by a “higher power” – AI being superior to any human mind? Oh, we could have had our societies run by the Most High God – YHWH!

But we rejected Him, we wanted a King, and so He gave us a King, and even that wasn’t enough for us, so we created democracy – thinking we could do better running the place on a 51% – 49% mob rule.

That system has led to the creation of the media specifically to manipulate our actions and our votes. Now the idea is to move us towards a one-world man-made “utopia” (which will be communist, naturally) where we will be killed in droves.

It is interesting to see how a society, so in love with itself, the people so narcissistic, could consider giving all their power away to a computer. But God? Perhaps they won’t face the truth of His existence until the day of judgement – so keen are they on getting the perfect selfie for Instagram.

May the fear of the LORD bring you into all wisdom.

Lis

Advertisements

From 2020, you’re just spare parts under May’s murderous regime

When we think of evil, we recall the pictures of the holocaust, or images of the killing fields. We might think of those awful pictures of a man with a gun to his head, waiting to be shot, his body swiftly thrown into a ready-dug trench. Perhaps we recall earlier histories of barbarity, including the Spanish inquisition, and the human sacrifice of the savage and ignorant Aztecs.

We wouldn’t think of our own time, we wouldn’t think of our current government, because we wouldn’t – couldn’t – surely believe that our leaders were involved in hoodwinking the British public to be vivisected (dissected alive) for their organs. But that is indeed exactly what they have done since the organ “donor” register was created. Now, the government has passed a law which sets the default to “donor” for all people. Most won’t make a fuss, or opt out, because they don’t know the truth. Read more: Link

The lies about organ donation are required. Just as a mother who wants to believe, as she aborts her child in a state-sanctioned sacrifice (a sacrifice to her own life, her wants and her plans) that the child inside her is just a “blob of cells”, some “matter” to be removed, and that it (not he or she) feels no pain, the lies of organ donation are vital for the process to be continued.

If you knew that organs came from living people, not dead bodies, you’d be horrified. But the government lies to you, just as the abortionist comforts with lies a mother who doesn’t want the responsibility of her child. The family of the person who is deemed “brain dead” don’t know that that person is alive (and that life support does not keep the heart beating). If they knew that the organs would be removed without anaesthetic, and that their loved one was not dead in any way that they, or you, or I, understand, they would say NO!

But the necessary lies are there – the lie that the NHS will test you to make sure you’re dead. The lie that the organs are taken “after death” without explaining that the criteria for “death” aren’t death at all – the necessary lies for the most heinous and evil acts of murder, by a murderous regime – a regime who would sacrifice you in an instant.

Life is precious, and sacred. Death is the enemy. From next year you will have to OPT out of being vivisected – murdered – for your precious organs. Make sure you do.

For more (horrifying) facts, visit organfacts.net

Lis

Reader’s Digest

It’s been all quiet on the blog for a while – I’ve had more immediate and important things to contend with than words on a page. That, by the way, is a good thing.

But almost every day I contemplate writing a short piece about something, and then I don’t. Nothing is quite worth the time, when, well, haven’t I already said it? Haven’t I already shared a rant way back about these very subjects? They are only coming thicker and faster than ever now. I sometimes think I’ve run out of things to say when faced with the awfulness of our countries, and the way they are run.

So this post will be a reader’s digest (and viewer’s digest) of the last little while as a way of catching up with things with a little bit of comment throw in for good measure. Some of these stories I will share only though memes, and hopefully that will help it flow a little better.

We begin with Gillette. Disrespecting men (specifically white men) is coming more and more out in the open. When a brand used almost completely by men, disses men – the backlash is only to be expected.

gillette.PNG

 

Gillette spends their hard-earned profits killing babies:

abortion p g

And now, in New York, the leaders not only passed a bill allowing abortion up to the moment of birth, but gave its passing a standing ovation. Not content with that salute to Moloch, they then lit up the World Trade Centre in pink as a celebration of this momentous act of “reproductive justice” – their words.

meme

There have been calls for Governor Cuomo, a catholic, to be ex-communicated.

Moving on…

While we know the horrors going on in South Africa all too well, and the international silence about the genocide happening there, we see this top headline in the Daily Mail:

genocide.jpg

Yes, a single white man is possibly going to be charged with genocide, whilst in South Africa the murderous regime continues to kill whites daily:

But we must remember that countries like South Africa have been led to believe that communistic, or at least socialist policies are the answer. In South Africa “equality of outcome” has caused the destruction of the country. When you quota employment by skin colour, you cannot choose the best workers. But communists and socialists don’t think that way:

communism murder.jpg

And as such, there is new gun-control legislation being brought in in South Africa, just, presumably, in time for the “expropriation without compensation” (i.e. theft) of white’s properties.

gun control works

The figure there is too low, but never mind – the point is true. Only dictators who want to kill millions of people want an unarmed populace.

Finally, this video from Zachary Bauer is worth a watch. We really need to be ready, because trouble is coming. Lech lecha – get yourself out!

Zach’s comments about viewing the situation like a chess game, and trying to work out things several moves ahead is wise. There are many out there who will tell you a lot of doom and gloom, but the actual moves are more predictable. We can be sure that legislation will be used against us in the future, and that we need to be prepared to flee.

God Bless you

Lis

Tragic: Another man murdered for his organs – Bored Panda uses this for pro-donate propaganda

The family of Daniel Bassillo have recently shared their pride that their family member was vivisected for his organs, which are reputed to be helping other people. Their tragedy is now being used to further the cause of medical murder. Organ donation is firstly not a donation (because informed consent was not obtained), and secondly requires the victim to be alive when their organs are harvested – hence why it is medical murder.

I quote: (Link)

“We didn’t even hesitate when they asked us if we wanted to donate. I don’t even think we really had to talk about it,” Alexa told Bored Panda. “I pray that you don’t lose the most important person in your life but if you can at the very least take that and turn it into something good.. why wouldn’t you want to do that?” she added.

Why? Because if your brother had usable organs, he was still alive. Alive! He wasn’t dead when his organs were removed, and he may not even have been given an anaesthetic before he was cut open. Just horrifying!

The family showed online the letter they received, telling them how many people the doctors were able to help after they murdered her brother:

organs.jpg

I quote: (Link)

One cannot determine with certainty what organ donors feel, if anything, while being harvested. The logic of brain death goes like this: If the brain stem is dead, then the higher centers of the brain are also probably dead, and if the whole brain is 
dead, then everything beneath the brain stem is no longer relevant. Since in practice only the brain stem is routinely tested, the vast majority of the body, everything above the brain stem and everything below, no longer counts as human.

The reason for denying beating-heart cadavers anesthetic during the removal of their organs is hard to pin down. (Some experts say it is because anesthetic will harm the organs.) Nevertheless, administering anesthetics to BHCs during organ harvests is becoming more common in Europe, according to Robert Truog, professor of medical ethics, anesthesia, and pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. Despite their strong opposition to brain death, Truog and Shewmon both refuse to acknowledge the possibility that some donors may be in severe pain during organ harvests, even though they acknowledge that some donors did exhibit reactions similar to inadequately anesthetized surgical patients who afterward reported pain and consciousness. Shewmon said the donor reactions were simply “bodily reactions to noxious stimuli.” I asked if an experiment could be designed to answer the question of pain in donors. He said no.

Truog did not even want to discuss the possibility of pain in the organ donor. But when I suggested experiments along the lines suggested by other anesthesiologists—when BHCs show pain reactions during a harvest, administer anesthetic to see if the reactions subside—he surprised me by saying he had already done this. He has used two different kinds of anesthetics that do not harm organs to quell symptoms such as high blood pressure or heart rate. “Just because the symptoms come down, though,” he added, “does not mean the patient is in pain. Pain is a subjective thing.” As with Shewmon, I asked Truog if an experiment wasn’t called for. He said there was no experiment that could answer the question of pain in the donor.

Would Daniel have lived if he’d been kept on life support? Would he have recovered? We’ll never know. But we do know that this poor man was killed for his organs – that his heart was beating independently when he was being harvested. We know that this barbaric practice is shrowded in secrecy and that most people are ignorant of the truth of what organ “donation” entails.

Always say no to organ donation – do not “donate” or accept organs from murdered people for yourself or a family member. This secretive practice in which linguistic confabulation and misdirection is used to obtain “consent” for the abhorrent human sacrifice of one living person for other living people can only be stopped if we share that knowledge far and wide.

Your organs will not be taken AFTER your death, and Daniel Basillo’s organs were not, either.

I pray that he felt no pain.

May the fear of God bring you into all wisdom.

Lis

 

One Reality Ministry in terrible error

I watched a great video by this ministry recently. It was well put together, and I’ll even go so far as to share it here:

It’s pretty hard-hitting. I’ve watched it a couple of times, and a few other videos and enjoyed them. He quotes Matthew 7:23 and uses a translation which clearly states:

But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God’s laws.’

Which is from the NLT.

I thought the ministry might get added to my Resources page. Until today.

Collin Retkowski who is the face of the ministry, talks in the video below, which I watched today, about being sinless. Being a sinless Christian.

He cites several people in the bible who were righteous before God (Job and Noah being just two), but sadly he makes the fundamental error, in spite of using Matthew 7:23 in other videos, of saying that the “ceremonial laws and the Mosaic Law” are done away with.

Nowhere does Yeshua say this – in fact this ministry is preaching the most dangerous doctrine of all – faith, plus works = salvation – without defining what those works are to be.

When we try to follow Christ and be like Him without reference to the Law, we tangle ourselves up in legalism. We define and redefine sin without reference to the Law which lays out for us so clearly what is sin! That’s what legalism is – the constant redefining of the law to allow us to do, or to restrict, things we think are right or wrong.

To give you an example straight out of the world today, of what legalism is, consider the speed limit. The sign says that the limit is 30 miles per hour. If we were to apply that as it is, which would be fair, we would say that travelling at 31 miles per hour is clearly breaking the law, so why don’t we? Why don’t people get a speeding fine for going at 31 mph? Because lawyers got involved, and said that, as speedometers are not accurate enough, it wouldn’t be fair, and so mostly our authorities only apply the speed limit allowing a 10% margin for error. This is legalism. One law wasn’t enough, so another rule must be added.

What most Christians think is sin is vastly removed from what the bible says is sin. In fact, he’s right that many Christians believe that feeling tempted is sinful, rather than waiting until you have sinned to feel bad.

But the simple aim of every believer should be a close, righteous walk with God – obedience is the ONLY answer to sin, because it clarifies what sin is! We can’t keep changing our minds because when we do, we begin a dangerous game – Collin says that Jesus will say in that day ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God’s laws.’, but then rejects the very law God gave us to keep us from sinning.

Please pray for Collin, because right now he’s in a dangerous place. He believes himself to be sinless, yet rejects the law, and this is an impossible place to be (and teach others from).

transgression

lawlessness

May the fear of God bring you into all wisdom.

Lis

Presented with comment…

As long as we’ve got our priorities right, eh?

priorities.jpg

Link

We have money for bombs, and we have money for stupid fripperies like this item above, but we do not have money to support the poor and sick – no, they must suffer.

May the fear of God bring you into all wisdom

Lis

Leftist Academic agenda alive and well at Cambridge

Yesterday I sent a very silly article about a very silly man to a friend of mine, commenting that I could imagine what my father would have said about this “academic” – he would have called him a “Fathead!” and then said that he had been “educated beyond his intellectual capacity.” I don’t think anyone would disagree with that:

Cambridge 1.jpg

Link

I quote:

‘I would lower the voting age to six, not 16, and I’m serious about that,’ he said. ‘I would want people who vote to be able to read, so I would exclude reception.

‘The old thing about voting for people like you wouldn’t happen, 9-year-olds aren’t going to elect 9-year-olds to Parliament and even if they did they’d be outvoted.

‘What’s the worst that could happen? At least it would be exciting, it would make elections more fun. ‘

Prof Runciman said the system of only allowing voting at 18 but having no cut-off point at the other end left young people vastly outnumbered.

He did not suggest stripping older people of their votes but said including young children was necessary to correct the ‘structural imbalance’.

What a total balloon! But where is the outrage? Where are the calls amongst his fellow academics to “burn the witch”? No, there are none, because in the intellectual vacuum of Cambridge University controversy is fine as long as it suits the general agenda of the Left.

When it doesn’t, then the calls for “burn the witch” are as shrill as can be, as in the case of this poor unfortunate fellow who has discovered that there is a link between race and intellect as well as race and criminality. This is not new, but 200 of his fellow intellectuals from as far away as Princeton are determined to destroy him:

Cambridge 2.jpg

Link

The phrase “ethically suspect” is particularly amusing and pertinent – it tells me that it’s unethical, in their minds, to even look at the issue. It’s only ethical to ignore the issues caused by “diversity” and not address them scientifically. Because they don’t like it they label him a eugenicist, which he may or may no be, and call his work “pseudoscience” which it is not. This is a subject which has been studied over and over and the conclusion is that there is a definite difference in intelligence between races, on average. But we mustn’t say so, or we will fall foul of the thought police.

I quote:

They said that they are ‘deeply concerned that racist pseudoscience is being legitimised through association with the University of Cambridge.’

They added: ‘This fellowship was awarded to Carl despite his attendance at, and public defence of, the discredited ‘London Conference on Intelligence’, where racist and pseudoscientific work has been regularly presented.

‘Carl’s work has already been used by extremist and far-right media outlets with the aim of stoking xenophobic and anti-immigrant rhetoric…this kind of pseudoscientific racism runs the serious risk of being used to justify policies that directly harm vulnerable populations.’

Yes, because immigrants are vulnerable, but the populations they join are not. The immigrants must be allowed to enter and destroy our countries (because destroy them they will) because otherwise it’s racist.

Take a look at Ethiopia:

tragic ethiopia.jpg

When Africans make Africa great they will be far more welcome here. The men of Africa should be at home building up their countries, but that is not the plan. As we know the plan is the Kalergi Plan: Kalergi plan – advertised, yet ignored by the masses

Remember folks, it’s not the immigrants fault in all this – our leaders are to blame. Diversity is our destruction, and intellectual rigour will not be applied unless you want to lose your career.

Lis