Friday, October 19, 2012

Analysis Of JESUS photo



 __________________________________________________
THE MAIL: ANALYSIS OF PHOTOGRAPH, PAINTING DEEPENS MYSTERY OF 'MIRACULOUS' IMAGE
420965_1The other day, we had an item concerning a reputedly "miraculous" photo of Jesus and Apostles (primarily "Peter" and, behind Jesus, young "John") or other followers: a black-and-white photo that, we are told, rang such a chord with famous mystic and seer Maria Esperanza of Venezuela (currently up for beatification) that she kept it in a frame in her bedroom.
This meant something to us, for Maria not only had remarkable intuition but also allegedly saw the Blessed Mother, other saints, and on occasion the Lord Himself, meaning that the photo must have resembled what she herself "saw." The story, handed down through a priest who is close to the family, was that a woman they had known who had prayed earnestly to know what Jesus actually looked like felt led while visiting the Holy Land (in the 1950s) to have a companion take a photo in the direction of the Jordan River (where of course Christ was baptized, and where He doubtless was on other occasions as well).The photo[above,left] is certainly unique, with a real feeling attendant to it.
It soon came to our attention, however, that there is a painting by a German artist named Johannes Raphael Wehle that is strikingly, even startlingly, similar [versions to the right, as well as below] to the reputed photo. The painting was done around 1900, and one can imagine that a black-and-white photo of it might turn out like the "miraculous" one -- albeit with smudges, blurs, and shadows which would cause slight differences with the actual artwork, of which there are various duplications. That wouldn't mean the photo isn't anointed but would mean it isn't "miraculous" in the common use of the word (that is, something that simply appeared on film). Other accounts of the photo, which have been circulating (we learn) for years, have it being taken during the 1970s at Jerusalem's Western Wall. In this rendition, those in the picture are Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea (since Peter would not have been that old at the time, or perhaps Nicodemus), and Thaddeus. In the artwork, others are in the background (the hand and staff of one visible at the right edge of the photo).
We had concluded that in all likelihood it is indeed a photograph of an oil painting (anointed, and wondrous, now in our own home also, but, seeing the painting, perhaps not entirely miraculous). We're interested in expert input. There are certainly those who beg to differ, and after a close analysis, one of them, Rich Catti, of Somers, New York, has concluded that the photograph is what has been said: a picture of actual people.
We'll let him explain, and let you discern:
 
"Above, the original. I will now prove that the photograph you display in your article is NOT a photograph of the oil painting by J. R. Wehle ("Jesus Among the Wheatfields") but a photograph of human beings. The oil painting, correctly titled "Christ In The Grain Fields," by Johannes Raphael Wehle, in portion, is pictured below. The complete image of the oil painting is pictured above. Next below, I have converted a portion of the original oil painting to black and white for purposes of comparison to the  "miraculous photograph."
PORTION OF THE ORIGINAL OIL PAINTING                                                                   PORTION OF THE ORIGINAL OIL PAINTING BLACK AND WHITE               
THE MIRACULOUS PHOTOGRAPH
 
"[Above] on the left is a portion of the miraculous photograph (believed to be Joseph of Arimathea) compared to image in oil painting. Similar, but the one on the left is clearly a photo of a human being, while the one on the right (the oil painting) is done by an artist.
 
The image on the left (the Lord Jesus) also appears to be a photograph where the direction of the Head is faced differently than in the image on the right, which is looking downward. In addition, the image on the left is clearly a photograph of a human being and not an artist's interpretation as in the image on the right.
 
"Finally, the image [above] believed to be the young Saint John (some have fabricated this is Mary of Magdala, but it is incorrect, as it is clearly of a male, the clothing is of a male and there is no head covering as would be required by women in the time of Our Lord): the image on the left is also clearly a photograph and not an artist's interpretation as in the image on the right.
"Conclusion:  the untrained and unskilled eye cannot determine the difference between the photograph and oil painting at first glance. Most persons would say they are the same, but they are not. Only a person with artistic skills and an understanding of the difference between a photograph and an oil painting can make this determination.
 
[Above[, on the left: a photograph, on the right an oil painting.
"The mystery deepens. The above is a jacket cover for a CD album published by Foundations Bible College. From the CD booklet it states: 'The cover art for this Foundations recording is from a print in the Anvil House art collection by Johann R. Wehle. The work portrays the disciples following Christ through a wheat field.'
"Let's compare the 'miraculous photograph,' the oil painting and now the third image indicated by the Bible college as a print from the Anvil House art collection.
"Image on the left  (the miraculous photograph) is more similar to the image from the Anvil House art collection. However, if you look at the nose of the image in the miraculous photograph and the nose in the Anvil House image, you will see that there is a difference; it is wider and shorter, and the image on the right has a longer and more narrow nose. Finally, the light source in the miraculous photo is clearly from above, the sun, causing a 'whitening out effect,' whilst this is not present in the image on the right.
"Conclusion, the image on the left is clearly a photograph of a living person while the image in the middle and on the right are artists interpretations.
 
"The same facts hold true for the image of Our Lord. Note the reflection of the sun on the top of His head and on His cheeks in the miraculous photo on the left. The rest of His Face is in shadow in the photograph: the left side of His head and His hair and neck. Notice how both artists illuminate the neck, the left side of the Lord's head, and his hair in the paintings: both middle and right. 
"Conclusion: the image on the left is that of a human being while the central and right images are artists interpretations.
   
"The image on the left and the image on the right are more similar, whilst the central image is vastly different.
 
"However, even when the image from the Anvil House collection is adjusted for color saturation, brightness, and contrast, there are significant differences in the central and right images (from the Anvil House painting image) to that of the miraculous photo where tunic is awash in sun light, as are the top of the head and face. The artist in the central and right images (both different photographic manipulations of the Anvil House image) exhibit the full image of hair, eyes, nose and mouth. While artist has some expression of sunlight on the top of the head, no artist paints a human being the way they would appear in a photograph taken of the person outdoors with the sunlight washing their image out the way they would in a photograph.
"In conclusion, the miraculous photograph is not a photograph of either the original Wehle oil painting nor a photograph of the Anvil House image depicted on the cover of the Foundation Bible College music CD.
"Whether the 'miraculous photo'  is that of Our Lord in the wheat fields I do not know. It is not a photograph of oil paintings or any kind of painting, it is a true photograph of living human beings. Perhaps Johannes Raphael Wehle saw this photograph and from it made his painting, but this is doubtful as most accounts of the miraculous photograph state it was taken either in the 1950's or 1970's latest.
"Other websites claim the miraculous photograph is a fake in that it is a photograph of this painting which is a reproduction of the original Dresden painter, Wehle.
"However we have the same set of problems. On the  left are the miraculous photograph, on the right photographs of the reproduction of the original painting by Wehle."


Goodness, with mysticism: never a dull moment. Also, never a simple mystery. We may note that there are different versions of different artwork, and also that certain details, such as the hand with staff of the man leading the small group behind "John," at the right edge of the photograph, make one contemplate again the possibility that from certain angles a photo of a painting or of a different version may have the aforesaid variances with it.
But if the photo is miraculous (and it does have a very different, special quality about it), might it be that Heaven allowed the image shown to a woman decades ago in the Holy Land to be similar to artwork so as to leave room for faith?
ShareThis     

Posted by John MacHaffie at 7:50:00 PM 2 comments

Photo Of JESUS?



 __________________________________________________
IN BEDROOM OF MAJOR MYSTIC WAS INTRIGUING 'MIRACULOUS' PHOTO/ARTWORK WITH FIGURE RESEMBLING JESUS
We occasionally discuss reputed miraculous photographs, and one of the more interesting in a while is a duplicate of a "photo" [left] that was kept in a frame in the bedroom of famed mystic Maria Esperanza of Caracas, Venezuela (currently up for beatification). According to a source who saw it there and spoke about it with her family (Maria died on August 7, 2004), the photograph had been taken in the 1950s by a friend of Esperanza's who likewise had mystical gifts. As the account is passed down, it seems the woman, who had longed to know what the Lord looked like, was visiting the Holy Land when she felt compelled to have a companion point a camera over the Jordan River, resulting -- allegedly -- in what is in the photograph. However, we did not hear this from Maria herself and are made aware that it is close to identical to a painting [above, right] by an artist named J. R. Wehle ("Jesus Among the Wheatfields"). Obviously, the famous mystic felt it was special, in whatever way, however (was it like what she saw in vision?), and it certainly carries an unusual quality to it. We're not experts on photographic/artistic manipulation, but it was snapped in the days long before digital cameras and "photo-shopping." Is it simply a photo of a picture? Perhaps. But it seems anointed. Most "miraculous" photographs are more ambiguous and even amorphous and have to do with reflections of light. While it seems obvious Who the bearded Man represents, some believe the man He is speaking to may be the Apostle Peter, while the younger man behind (near the middle of the picture) is thought to be the beloved Apostle John. Is the older man supposed to be Peter or someone who would have been older at the time, like Nicodemus? They all appear to be standing along a shoreline, which indeed might be the river of Bible fame. There is "water" (in the photo version) and hillside in the backdrop. But the water is the wheat field. Esperanza herself had many visions of Jesus and believed He was about to manifest in a special way. "He is going to come in silence," she said shortly before her death. "People will realize He is among us little by little. I'm seeing Him right now. He has a mantle covering His hair. He has a robe like white and black. He will disappear for some days and appear again. He will bilocate, He will multiply Himself, to assist everyone. He will come and knock on every door." She said "Jesus will be felt very clearly in our hearts and you will see Him just as on that great day of His Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven. It will be in a way never before imagined by man, because the Light of His New Rising will be evident to everyone." We note next to the young man is a strange smoke-like configuration that seems to have a mysterious face in it (and maybe not a benevolent one). For years, many thought the photo to the right was miraculous (inexplicably appearing in a roll of film after a visit to Israel) -- but this may be a photo of a painting of the Lord at the Cave of the Milk in Bethany. (In one shot, you can see the frame.) Below are more typical "miraculous" photos.  
  
ShareThis     



Posted by John MacHaffie at 7:48:00 PM 1 comments

His full name is Willard Mitt Romney


 His full name is Willard Mitt Romney


        Personal Information:

His full Name is: Willard Mitt Romney
He was Born: March 12,1947
and is 65 years old.

His Father: George W. Romney,
former Governor of the State of Michigan

He was raised in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan

He is married to Ann Romney since 1969;
they five children.

Education:
B.A. from Brigham Young University,

J.D. and M.B.A. from Harvard University

Religion:
Mormon -
The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints

Working Background:
After high school, he spent 30 months in France as a Mormon missionary.

After going to both Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School simultaneously, he passed the Michigan bar exam, but never worked as an attorney.

In 1984, he co-founded Bain Capital a private equity investment firm, one of the largest such firms in the United States .

In 1994, he ran for Senator of Massachusetts and lost to Ted Kennedy.

He was President and CEO of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games.  He took over a project that was $400,000,000 in the red and ended up with a $100,000,000 profit.

In 2002, he was elected Governor of the State of Massachusetts where he eliminated a $1.5 billion deficit.

Some Interesting Facts about Romney:

Bain Capital, starting with one small office supply store in Massachusetts, turned it into Staples; now over 2,000 stores employing 90,000 people.

Bain Capital also worked to perform the same kinds of business miracles again and again, with companies like Domino's, Sealy, Brookstone, Weather Channel, Burger King, Warner Music Group, Dollarama, Home Depot Supply, and many others.  Yes some projects and mergers that Bain Capital was involved in caused some folks to lose their jobs.  However, if the mergers hadn’t taken place, many more folks would have lost their jobs.

He was an unpaid volunteer campaign worker for his dad's gubernatorial campaign 1 year.

He was an unpaid intern in his dad's governor's office for eight years.

He was an unpaid bishop and state president of his church for ten years.

He was an unpaid President of the Salt Lake Olympic Committee for three years.

He took no salary and was the unpaid Governor of Massachusetts for four years.

He gave his entire inheritance from his father to charity.

Mitt Romney is one of the wealthiest "self-made men" in our country but has given more back to its citizens in terms of money, service and time than most men.

In 2011 Mitt Romney gave over $4 million to charity, almost 19% of his income.... Just for comparison purposes, Obama gave 1% and Joe Biden gave $300 or ..0013%.

Mitt Romney is Trustworthy:

He will show us his birth certificate.

He will show us his high school and college transcripts.

He will show us his social security card.

He will show us his law degree.

He will show us his draft notice.

He will show us his medical records.

He will show us his income tax records that are required by law.

He will show us he has nothing to hide.

Mitt Romney's background, experience and trustworthiness show him to be a great leader and an excellent citizen for President of the United States.

You may think that Romney may not be the best representative the Republicans could have selected.
At least we know what religion he is, and that he won't desecrate the flag, bow down to foreign powers, or practice fiscal irresponsibility.
We know he has the ability to turn this financial debacle that the current regime has gotten us into.
We won't like all the things necessary to recover from this debt, but someone with Romney's background can do it.
But, on the minus side, He never was a "Community Organizer", never took drugs or smoked pot, never got drunk, did not associate with communists or terrorists, nor did he attend a church whose pastor called for God to damn the US.
You should know the difference between the men running for America's top office.
                          Do Obama/Biden deserve 4 more years?
                          Pass this on... 
Posted by John MacHaffie at 6:19:00 PM 9 comments

COMMUNIST DISINFORMATION, AMERICAN-STYLE


And the disinformation still continues today, only packaged much differently!
Communist disinformation, American-style
Shocking revolutionary roots not just of Obama, but top advisers Jarrett and Axelrod too
Published: 19 hours ago

By Paul Kengor
Editor’s note: Who could have imagined that one of the most audacious disinformation campaigns in American history would turn out, according to a recently declassified FBI file, to have a direct connection not only to today’s president of the United States, Barack Obama, but to top advisers David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett as well? Here, Professor Paul Kengor, author of “The Communist,” the new bestseller about Obama mentor Frank Marshall Davis, tells the incredible story of communist disinformation in America and its multiple ties to those now “fundamentally transforming” this country from the top.
If you want to see how Soviet-style disinformation has spread in our own country, look no further than the Communist Party USA. Sure, no one could spin a web of lies quite like the Soviets and the Kremlin, but their American devotees are likewise excellent at agitation, propaganda and deliberate deception. America’s communists have produced some impressive homegrown disinformation. Here, I’ll consider an especially productive example, which still bears bitter fruit today among the wider American left: the campaign against the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
In this skillful, cynical disinformation campaign, American communists, working with duped progressive/liberal accomplices, framed their accusers as “fascists,” “Nazis,” “McCarthyites” and even “racists” who were (allegedly) unfairly hounding and maligning them by investigating their ties to Moscow. In truth, the accused were frequently guilty – and, at the least, merited attention. Nonetheless, these leftist forces came together, under the leadership of the CPUSA, the Daily Worker and other far-left forces, in coordinated campaigns such as “Operation Abolition,” which sought to abolish the House Committee on Un-American Activities, which they tagged as “HUAC” – the “House Un-American Committee,” a label that sticks to this day.
Of special interest, one of those who engaged in this campaign was Frank Marshall Davis, a closet CPUSA member who in the 1970s would go on to mentor a young Hawaiian boy named Barack Obama, our current president.
Communist campaigns
Before examining this anti-”HUAC” campaign, consider a few words on the concept of communist campaigns.
Communists excelled at “campaigns” – that is, carefully concerted efforts where they exploited an issue or cause to further their agenda. Such campaigns were a very significant, still vastly unappreciated tactic vigorously employed by the communist movement throughout the 20th century. They were done with great effect, so much so that many of the outright untruths in these underhanded campaigns have slipped their way into history books as quasi-official versions of 20th century history.
These campaigns took on such a discernible, consistent pattern that they eventually prompted full-scale investigations by the U.S. government, which deciphered a clear tactic requiring constant surveillance. The FBI in the 1950s would produce a 100-plus-page report (classified) strictly on the subject of campaigns. The bureau defined campaigns as “concentrated, continuous and concerted succession of agitation and propaganda activities specifically devised and timed to sway public opinion. All communist campaigns are intended to arouse, influence and mobilize as many people as possible to further communist goals.” Those goals, naturally, included the promotion of the “welfare of the Soviet Union.” For American communists, the end-goal was always a “Soviet America,” or, as the 1930s CPUSA loyalty oath put it, “to insure the triumph of Soviet Power in the United States.”
Of special relevance to this article, communist campaigns, like communist fronts, thrived on deceit and disinformation. And American communists were vigilant in concealing their coordination. They needed to be ever ready to deny their participation.
The chief target audience in these campaigns was gullible liberals/progressives that communists believed could be duped. The dupes were indispensable to success. If the campaigns marshaled only the support of communists, they would be transparent and would collapse under public exposure. The presence of liberal/progressive dupes helped diminish the presence of communists.
The FBI noted that, “No other organization has ever engaged in so many diverse, intensive and extensive campaigns conducted with so much perseverance, deftness and potency as has the Communist Party USA.” CPUSA was “never without” a campaign of one type or another, and had been responsible for “an inestimable number of campaigns.”
The anti-’HUAC’ campaign
This brings me back to the anti-”HUAC” campaign.
One of the most controversial domestic battles of the Cold War was the fight between Congress’s House Committee on Un-American Activities (HCUAA) and those accused by the committee of harboring private loyalties to the Soviet Union and international communist movement. It was before this committee that certain citizens were repeatedly asked the dramatic question, “Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?” Many of those asked pleaded the Fifth Amendment.
There is much to this drama that today is misunderstood or unappreciated. To cite just one example, the actions of the House Committee are often identified with conservatives, with the political right, with McCarthyism and the man Joe McCarthy. In truth, Senator McCarthy was never a member of this House (of Representatives) Committee. In fact, throughout its history, the committee was chaired primarily by anti-communist Democrats. Its Democrat chieftains ranged from Rep. Martin Dies, D-Texas, to Rep. Francis Walter, D-Pa., to Rep. Richard Ichord, D-Mo., among others.
But more than that, and fundamental to the theme of this article, was the counter-campaign against the House Committee. That counter-campaign is known today only by a narrow group of Cold War researchers who have actually dug into the declassified archives – ranging from Soviet archives in Russia to the Comintern Archives on Communist Party USA (CPUSA), housed at the Library of Congress. A look at those archives, and other material, illuminates an interesting counter-response to the House Committee. That counter-response was a campaign called Operation Abolition.
Operation Abolition was a 1940s/1950s effort led by (among others) CPUSA, the Daily Worker, the ACLU and a splinter group from the ACLU, the National Emergency Civil Liberties Committee – headed by Corliss Lamont and I. F. Stone. The goal of this coalition of left and far-left sources was to abolish the House Committee on Un-American Activities, or at least to so question and demonize the committee in the public’s mind as to discredit the committee.
It was incredibly ironic, and utterly outrageous, that after two decades of being wrong and being duped by Stalin, by Stalinists, and by secret supporters of Stalin, that America’s liberals/progressives – led by the ACLU and National Emergency Civil Liberties Committee – would come together to find their demon not in the duped liberals/progressives or pro-communists who defended Stalin as he murdered tens of millions, but in the anti-communists who tried to tell the truth to Americans about Stalin, his murderous state and his secret supporters in America. Can you imagine? Well, that is precisely what happened. Making it worse, I. F. Stone, who we now believe was a paid Soviet agent from 1936-38, helped lead the campaign.
So intense was this campaign that Congress itself ultimately investigated the campaign. Congress correctly perceived that the campaign was built upon a larger “anti-anti-communist” campaign that liberals/progressives pushed for decades and still advance to this day. That push had been so intense and problematic in the 1950s that the Senate Judiciary Committee (run by anti-communist Democrats) would hold hearings and publish a report titled, “The New Drive Against the Anti-Communist Program.”
As noted during those hearings, leading the charge in many of these anti-anti-communist thrusts was the New York Times. As testified by the feature source in the hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Times was one of the primary “organs of anti-anti-communism,” doing so ad nauseum with “heavyweight, comatose gibberish.”
Whether gibberish or not, this work was extremely effective in stirring the emotions of liberals/progressives, with the effect of inadvertently advancing the communist cause.
‘HUAC’s’ ‘Un-Americans’
Implicit to this effectiveness, and a huge propaganda success, was the very use of the acronym “HUAC.” Language became central to the debate.
Consider: America’s communists, socialists and liberals/progressives happily inverted the phrase “un-American,” charging the House Committee itself (and its chairs and members) with being “un-American.” The political left has done this so effectively that its historic term for the House Committee on Un-American Activities is not the proper acronym, “HCUAA,” but the commonly known and widely accepted term “HUAC,” which is actually a mis-ordered acronym that incorrectly reads: House Un-American Committee. This acronym is itself a major statement. Note, too, that the term “HUAC” shows that the political left in America is not shy about labeling certain people “un-American” – a tactic that the left claims is the typical domain of the right – so long as the left is doing the labeling.
Overall, the left has done this so aggressively that it has succeeded in permanently labeling HCUAA as “HUAC.” I have noticed the results when teaching college students. In my courses, when I attempt to use the correct acronym, HCUAA, I get quizzical looks as I scribble the letters on the chalkboard. To the contrary, the moment I revert to “HUAC,” students nod, understanding what I’m referring to. The left has won this battle over language. And most ironic, the greatest champions of the term “HUAC” were American communists, who used the term incessantly in the Daily Worker and all their publications. When non-communist liberals/progressives today use that term, they are actually, whether they know it or not, employing the propaganda language of CPUSA.
Particularly brazen was the Daily Worker. In fact, it is almost laughable that the Daily Worker put “communists” in quotes when reporting on actual communists identified by HCUAA, while simultaneously not placing “HUAC” in quotes, as if the former were fantasy and the latter reality. Oftentimes, communists and liberals/progressives alike simply called HUAC “the Un-American Committee” (leaving out “House”).
Even more brazen, CPUSA, throughout the Cold War and even post-Cold War, maligned what it dubbed “the racist, McCarthyite forces of evil” and the “fascist House Un-American Activities Committee.”
Yes, fascist. This was an obscene accusation against a generation that had faced the Nazis. And yet, typical of the American left, opponents were transmogrified into political monsters: “racists,” “fascists,” “Nazis.” Liberals/progressives hurl around these vicious names still today, almost reflexively. It isn’t anything new; they and their comrades have done this for a long, long time.
Frank Marshall Davis
Interestingly, this war over language was waged not only at CPUSA organs like the Daily Worker but by a subject of remarkable modern political relevance: Frank Marshall Davis. Davis did so in his writings and publications, beginning at the Chicago Star (1946-48) and continuing with great frequency at the Honolulu Record (1949-57) – two communist-controlled publications.
For the record, Frank Marshall Davis was a card-carrying member of Communist Party USA – card no. 47544. He joined the Party in Chicago during World War II. He was founding editor-in-chief and a weekly columnist for the Chicago Star, where he wrote flawless pro-Soviet propaganda, blasting everything and everyone from the Marshall Plan and Truman Doctrine to Harry Truman and Winston Churchill. His position was always predictable: it was the Kremlin’s position. Davis continued that work in Hawaii, where he moved in 1949, and where he would eventually meet and mentor a young man named Barack Obama in the 1970s.
As to the theme of this article, I counted 43 examples of Frank Marshall Davis using the word “un-American” at the Honolulu Record in just 1949-50 alone. Some of these were in defense (to defend himself), others on offense (to attack the committee). Three times the words were typed into titles of his columns. Twice he used the word “un-Americanism.” Davis was not reticent about excoriating “the aptly named un-American committee.”
Some examples of Davis’s use of this phrase are worth highlighting:
In a May 1950 piece for the Honolulu Record, Davis described what he referred to as a natural alliance sought by bigoted anti-communists on “the un-American committee.” “This alliance with a revived Nazi Germany,” wrote Davis, “may please such persons as John Rankin of Mississippi and John Wood of Georgia, two past and present chairmen of the un-American committee whose ideas on race parallel those of Adolf Hitler.” In fact, said Davis, congressmen Rankin and Wood were not merely run-of-the-mill, redneck Democratic Party racists, but were themselves “upholders of master race theory of the Nazis.”
Frank Marshall Davis did not mince words: If America, and especially anti-communists at “HUAC,” wanted to see Nazis, they should look in the mirror.
Another “un-American” piece by Davis that’s especially illuminating was a September 20, 1947, column for the Chicago Star, titled, “I got radical thoughts.” Here, Davis candidly stated that he wanted to flat-out nationalize the packing-house industry, as well as impose national price controls and a federal tax on the rich and their “excess profits.” “I’m so un-American right now,” wrote Obama’s mentor, “that I want to see price controls clamped back on this minute, a new and stronger excess profits tax put into operation, and the whole packing industry nationalized.”
What’s fascinating about this particular article is who Frank Marshall Davis worked with at the communist-controlled packing house workers’ union – and how those comrades eerily relate to today.
Working with Davis in promoting the packing-house workers union was Vernon Jarrett. They collaborated in a communist-controlled group called the Citizens’ Committee to Aid Packing-House Workers. A surviving April 12, 1948, document printed on committee letterhead, and found by researcher Trevor Loudon, lists Davis as both committee member and among the small group of journalistically inclined individuals who comprised the committee’s publicity committee. Joining Davis in both capacities was Vernon Jarrett.
Vernon Jarrett would become a major name in Chicago and known nationally. He would also become father-in-law to a young woman named Valerie Jarrett, Barack Obama’s single most important adviser.
And the links don’t end there. Also working to advance the proletariat from the packing-house workers union was the Canter family, specifically Harry and David Canter, who in the 1930s lived in the Soviet Union while Harry worked for Stalin’s government as an official translator of Lenin’s writings. Hailing originally from Boston, where Harry was secretary of Boston’s Communist Party, the Canters eventually ended up in Chicago in the 1940s, where they worked with Frank Marshall Davis, Obama’s mentor. In the 1970s, David Canter would, like Davis, become a mentor – of a young man named David Axelrod, Obama’s chief strategist.
The links are amazing, too extraordinary to try to make up. Nonetheless, they are as true as they are shocking. And to bring this full circle to the theme of this article, the likes of the Canters worked with Frank Marshall Davis in certain circles and fronts – and the literal pages of the Chicago Star, which incessantly called for the abolition of the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
In all, whether “un-American” was hurled by Frank Marshall Davis or his liberal/progressive or communist friends, think about their argument: The left was, in effect, arguing that the true Americans were the card-carrying, closet American communists – literally pledged to Stalin’s USSR and the Comintern – whereas the un-Americans were the anti-communists, especially those elected to Congress and fulfilling their duty of investigating possible secret Soviet agents or collaborators. For these congressmen, their duties to the U.S. Constitution mandated that they pursue potential indigenous security threats.
Frank Marshall Davis and his comrades constantly tried to argue that they weren’t communists, but were mere “progressives” being unfairly hounded by Neanderthal McCarthyites and the evil “HUAC.” This was disinformation they fed to liberals, which, in turn, fomented a wider anti-”HUAC” campaign. Liberals, naturally, swallowed the bait hook, line and sinker. In truth, these guys were communists, and they were rightly being pursued for their correctly suspected pro-Soviet activities.
And yet, still today, the likes of Frank Marshall Davis himself continue to be protected by liberals who portray him as an innocent civil-rights crusader hounded by McCarthyites. Who does this? Pro-Obama liberal biographers and journalists. They do this, of course, to protect Obama. Alas, then, the disinformation curiously continues.
The preceding was excerpted from the September issue of WND’s acclaimed monthly Whistleblower magazine, “DISINFORMATION AGE: How America’s news media have become ‘useful idiots’ for Marxists, sociopaths and tyrants.”
Dr. Paul Kengor is professor of political science at Grove City College and author of the new bestselling book “The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor.” His other books include “Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century.”
Posted by John MacHaffie at 6:16:00 PM 1 comments

The Truth Will Be Hard To Hear


Hello All:
                      It is not easy to change our opinions when we have been taught them all our lives. Some times it takes a while before we can learn we have been lied to all these Years while we were growing up. The time for change is approaching. As god has decreed it.
                           God Bless   Love to all Smile Red rose Red heart        



            Nancy Detweiler: The Truth Will Be Hard To Hear

Nancy Detweiler: The Truth Will Be Hard To Hear

(Those Who Reveal Truth to Us Are Not the Culprits)

Allen: Nancy was Stephen Cook’s fascinating guest on The Light Agenda a few weeks back on 29 August. You can hear their conversation here: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/inlight_radio/2012/08/30/the-light-agenda
By Nancy B. Detweiler M. Ed, M.Div – September 29, 2012
http://pathwaytoascension.wordpress.com
Within the next few weeks, Earth humans will be shocked to learn just many lies we have been told—lies that have been deliberately perpetuated, some for thousands of years.
As Gaia, the great being whose physical body we call Planet Earth, moves toward her Ascension, all that is of a negative nature will be brought forth and released so that healing can occur. A spiritual, mental, emotional, or physical wound cannot heal until the venom within it is released.
The Divine Plan for Gaia and her inhabitants is for all to ascend together. In order for this evolutionary leap to occur, all negativity must be brought into the open, forgiven, and released. This renders inevitable the opening of many Pandora boxes, the bringing forth of unresolved grief, and the arising of painful memories that we have sought to repress.
We Earth humans believe we know the truth of what happened in and during our lives. Sadly, we know only the lies we have been told. Behind the world in which we think we live exists a very different world—a sinister world characterized by manipulation, false flag events, mind control, and often torture and/or death to any who attempt to reveal the truth to the people. The goal of this behind the store front world has been total control of this planet and its people. It has mattered not how many people are killed or starved/tortured to death. There is no compassion in this world.
Governments and religions have been used to pit one group against another, creating tensions that have frequently erupted into violence and hatred. Wars are used as the solution to all problems, with false flag events created to stimulate enough fear and hatred of the designated scapegoat, i.e. enemy, to get young people to sacrifice themselves in war. The same persons will be found to have financed both sides of a war. Religions proclaim themselves to be a good thing, but the amount of bloodshed running through every religious history tells another story.
The lists of crimes against the people of this planet is long. Now, in 2012, we are to learn the truth regarding these crimes. What we must remember is that we know only what we have been taught. We may know bits of truth or we may know nothing of truth. Either way, our initial reaction is likely to be shock, denial, and refusal to believe that we have allowed ourselves to be so severely and completely manipulated.
We must remember that those who reveal the truth to us are not the culprits. The behind the scenes world has a history of killing those who attempt to reveal the truth. We, as Earth humans, need to listen … to ponder … to discern for ourselves who brings truth and who doesn’t. Regardless of the pain involved, we need to allow truth to come forth so all can be healed.
A very important fact to keep in mind is that we do not—at this point in time—know who are the good guys and who belong to the behind the scenes world. We are very likely to have included in our list of respected people some who truly do not deserve our respect. Hearing the truth can create disillusionment and the feeling that we do not know who to believe.
On a much more difficult note, we may resist, even hate, the very people who are truly here to assist our planet in moving forward to ascension. As mentioned above, national storefront leaders do not necessarily hold the reins of power. Much can be done in their name that does not represent their true desires. As a result, the people can be taught to hate them with no real basis to do so and the actual culprits continue their sabotage.
The truth will be hard to hear and we may tend to response as people have for thousands of years—by refusing to listen.
However, the stakes are higher now!
We are only months away from an evolutionary opportunity that can propel us into a much higher level of consciousness—if we so choose. But first, the old must pass away and the old includes learning the truth about Earth humans’ history on this planet.
There is a Divine Plan and it is in the process of unfolding. There are people on our planet who are here to assist. Some are presently in leadership roles; some are not.
Earth humans—at this moment—do not know for certain those persons who are here in fulfillment of the Divine Plan. This and many more truths will be revealed to us in the coming weeks.
I encourage all of us to listen with open, unbiased minds. We will be shocked, surprised, and saddened; but above all, let’s not attack those who attempt to reveal truth to us. Instead, let’s support and help them in whatever way we can 
Posted by John MacHaffie at 6:14:00 PM 2 comments

POLICE STOP PRAYERS OUTSIDE WHITE HOUSE


POLICE STOP PRAYERS OUTSIDE WHITE HOUSE

But protesters return, willing to face jail for religious freedom

author-imageby DAVE TOMBERSEmail | Archive
Dave Tombers is a retired police officer, former teacher, ex-Realtor, and past chairman of a large Christian school. Dave lives with his wife, 6 kids, and 2 dogs and has been writing articles for several years.More ↓
rss feed Subscribe to author feed
Ads by Google
Dozens of people have already been arrested over the weekend for kneeling and praying in front of the White House.
ActsFive29, a group of like-minded, pro-life defenders launched the D.C. prayer rally knowing their members could indeed be arrested, but asserting it’s worth it, because, “The future of religious freedom in America is at risk.”
Ads by Google
The group claims Acts 5:29 – “But Peter and the Apostles answered, ‘We must obey God rather than men’” – as their basis for protesting the Obama administration’s Health and Human Services mandate requiring employer-provided health insurance cover birth control measures.
“Obamacare will force institutions, churches and individuals to purchase abortion-inducing drugs and pay for sterilization and abortion in direct opposition to their beliefs, conscience and historic teachings of the Church,” says the group. “With the recent Supreme Court ruling affirming Obamacare, the future of religious freedom in America is at risk and in grave danger of being entirely wiped out.”
On Saturday afternoon, 22 members of the group knelt on the sidewalk in prayer and were arrested by Capitol Police, with the prayer rally (and possible arrests) planned to continue through Oct. 2.
The group says that the only basis for their arrest is that the sidewalk in front of the White House is a “restricted zone” for free speech.
Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life told WND, “We have stood up for life and religious freedom in hundreds of cities. Today we do so at the president’s house. I am delighted to be here.”
The group says that the president is “dictating to Christians how they should live their faith” and that they are taking a stand, while risking arrest for doing so.
Bryan Kemper, director of youth outreach at Priests for Life, told WND that he was arrested on Saturday afternoon for kneeling on the sidewalk near the White House while holding a sign that said, “Stand Up for Religious Freedom.”
“I am here today as a father of seven children who is willing to lose my freedom to protect my children’s future freedom,” he told WND. “I was arrested yesterday when I knelt and prayed holding a sign for religious freedom, and I will kneel and pray again today, risking arrest again.”
He told WND that this issue is vital for all American’s to understand.
“We must take this stand now, or we will have no freedom to do so tomorrow,” he said. “I will obey God rather than man.”
He finished, “The HHS mandate violates God’s law and forces us to sin, and I will not comply.”
Brandi Swindell, National Director of Generation Life, a pro-life group dedicated to mobilizing activists, students, artists, musicians and young professionals to end abortion and spread the message of sexual integrity, told WND that she had a “divine appointment” in Washington today.
“Three of us chose to attend church at St. John’s this morning,” Swindell said, “and at the last minute found out that Kathleen Sebelius, the architect of the HHS Mandate was holding an adult forum between services.”
Swindell told WND that she got the secretary’s attention, and in front of a packed auditorium asked her, “Why are you forcing the American people to pay for abortion-inducing drugs that harm women? It’s a severe violation of religious freedom.”
The secretary ignored the question and left the stage.
Video of the exchange, and the critical reaction of other church attendees, can be seen below:
Swindell told WND that just four years ago she was arrested and deported from communist China for standing up for religious freedom there.
“I stood in Tiananmen Square holding a banner that said, ‘Jesus Christ is King’ and was arrested,” Swindell said. “I never imagined that just four years later I’d be standing in front of the White House risking the very same thing.”
She told WND that she intended to hold the same banner declaring “Jesus Christ is King” in front of the White House Sunday afternoon, and fully expected to be arrested for it.
Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, says of the Stand Up for Religious Freedom rally, being held across the street from the White House, “For the faith community, we can never be silent or indifferent when it comes to matters of justice, human rights and religious freedom.”
He continued, “As people of principle and faith, we must purpose in our hearts that we will never comply with an unjust or immoral government mandate [that] would require us to violate our conscience, the teachings of the Scriptures and the historic teachings of the church.”
“We want to make it clear to President Obama and all public officials,” he concluded, “that we would rather spend time in jail than to be forced into complying with a mandate that crushes religious freedom.”
Posted by John MacHaffie at 6:13:00 PM 1 comments
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)