AMERICA; THE LORD GOD ALMIGHTY HAS A 'WORD' FOR YOU!!! LISTEN AND LEARN!!!

AMERICA: THE LORD GOD ALMIGHTY HAS A 'WORD' FOR YOU!!!  LISTEN AND LEARN!!!


THE LORD GOD REVEALS WHAT IS BEING NEGOTIATED IN SECRECY IN THE BACK ROOMS AND TO BE IMPLEMENTED SHORTLY IN AMERICA...........................

Just received this - prophesied by a known and respected prophet of God - NOT one of the self promoting money making well known ones .................

30 January 2015

Bob’s 30 January 2015 revelation from the Father/Holy Ghost (2nd Amendment, Treaty, Netanyahu, open pollinated seeds, etc.)

The Congress is going to give Obama “carte blanc” (meaning he can do as he pleases) authority to negotiate a treaty called the “TPP(?)”; which may mean Trans Pacific Pact? Provisions of this will set up a “North American Union”, i.e., US, Canada, and Mexico.

However, the main thrust of this is to negate the Second Amendment in the USA! The Lord said, “This will be the ‘second shot’ heard round the world”. [The first “first shot” having been that which started the Revolutionary War!] “This will mean war in the USA!”

“[Apparently] this treaty won’t even need ratification -- seeing how it’s to be written and knowing how “double minded” and crooked the legislative process is becoming; and how clandestinely our 'government' is behaving in these matters.] “This initiative is in progress now!”

Note: On 11 November 2014, a date which Bob warned us about last year, Obama was in China and “made a ‘deal’ with [Red] China”. I saw that news clip on 12 November 2014. (Did you see the pic in the news media - the enormous and long RED CARPET rolled out for Obama to walk on while in China?! Treated like ROYALTY - like the anti-Christ himself?!)

From Heaven: there is a move to “ban the selling and trading of open pollinated/heirloom seeds”. (Be alert and watching as wise folks know what this means. food control!)

From Heaven: Obama is making laws which, if passed, will allow him to continue his ‘rule’, even though he may no longer be in office."

"Furthermore, this Administration is sending a team to Israel to attempt to defeat Bibi Netanyahu in the political process now shaping up there. The Lord said, [my paraphrase]: “I SHALL DEAL WITH THESE PEOPLE!”

NOTE:  Regardless of whether you wish to believe this or not, and regardless of the propaganda and outright lies about Bibi Netanyahu, he was and is appointed by the Lord God Almighty Himself for this day and time. To speak against Netanyahu and Israel (and the 'jews' as is so often referred) is to speak against the Lord God Himself and will bring judgment upon that person's head.  

USA Today columnist calls for arrest and imprisonment of vaccine skeptics

truther 0

Now we finally come to the real agenda of the vaccine industry.
After vaccines have  been repeatedly documented by the Natural News Lab to contain neurotoxic chemicals such as mercury, formaldehyde and MSG; after vaccine shots have been repeatedly shown to kill people who take them; and after flu shots have been exhaustively shown to be based on no science whatsoever — with vaccine manufacturers openly admitting there are no clinical trials to show they even work — the rabid vaccine pushers are unveiling their end game: throw vaccine resistors in prison.

REST OF THIS STORY HERE:

http://www.pakalertpress.com/2015/01/30/usa-today-columnist-calls-for-
arrest-and-imprisonment-of-vaccine-skeptics/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_
medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+pakalert+%28Pak+Alert+Press%29

Fired Cop With History Of Brutality Gets Job Back (And A Raise)

Fired Cop With History Of Brutality Gets Job Back (And A Raise)

January 30, 2015 | By Guest Post | Tyranny & Police State, US News

By: Carey Wedler | The Anti Media -

Des Moines, Iowa police officer Cody Grimes, a fired police officer with a history of brutality and abuse, has had his job reinstated. He was fired in December of 2013 for domestic abuse that caused injury and fourth degree criminal mischief.

At the time, his superiors said he was fired because he

“violated the department’s policies on standards of conduct and obedience to laws and orders.”

During the domestic dispute, he

“choked his former girlfriend, threw her down the stairs of his Des Moines house and then threw her in his kitchen after she threatened to report him. That caused her to hit her head and hand.”

At his court date in May of 2014 (until which he was on paid leave), he plead guilty to the lesser charge of criminal mischief, avoiding jail time and paying $1,000 instead. Prosecutors dropped the domestic abuse charge but he was ordered to take a class on abuse.

Today, the Des Moines Civil Service Commission, as expected, reinstated his job, saying firing was too severe a punishment. Some would argue, however, that it was not severe enough. In addition to domestic abuse, Grimes had a history of professional abuse which the commission acknowledged as it gave him back his job. It openly stated he was fired previously for

“misconduct and prior discipline for excessive force.”

In 2010 he shot at a photojournalist from KCCI-TV and was put on paid leave for two weeks. He claims he thought the photojournalist was a suspect and no charges were filed. In 2011, he punched a restrained man so hard he broke bones in his face. It was John Twombly’s wedding day when he allegedly got in a fight that Grimes inserted himself into. Twombly was found not guilty on related charges and the other man’s charges were dropped. Grimes was cleared of any wrong doing in his department but Twombly was eventually awarded $75,000 from the city.

Grimes’ case in particular demonstrates a painful reality: there are always multiple avenues for the state to help police abuse citizens. Usually, police refuse to reprimand officers and charges are rarely pressed by the justice system or the city (the Department of Justice just declined to charge Darren Wilson with civil rights violations). Aside from Grimes, the city of Des Moines resinstated the job of another officer fired for excessive force, but he never took back his job because he was convicted by a federal jury of violating civil rights and obstructing justice.

In the case of Grimes, the police department (in a rare showing) attempted to deal with him but was overrun by the city itself–in spite of the fact that he cost it $75,000 in damages (and thousands more in paid leave).

This is not the only chunk of $75,000 the violent officer is costing the city. Now that he has is job back, he has received a raise. Whereas he used to make $68,500 a year, he now will earn $73,000.

Before he can have his job back, he will undergo a one to two week training to reacclimate. Sgt. Jason Halifax explained

“He will be required to complete some refresher training as is typical for officers who are gone for an extended time.”

There were no known conditions given for Grimes rehiring, meaning that if he commits another act of abuse, there is no guarantee he will be permanently fired.

New Bill Would Let Cops Enter Your Home without a Warrant and Kill Your Dog.....

 01/30/15        

Joshua Krause

In light of recent events, it’s become apparent that the public’s opinion of law enforcement is rapidly falling apart. Technology is partly to blame for giving the average citizen the ability to film police encounters at a moment’s notice, and post these videos on the internet for the world to see. There’s always been bad cops, but now their antics are being exposed now more than ever.

Of course, that’s not even the half of it. The police wouldn’t get any bad exposure if they weren’t caught doing terrible things in the first place. A cursory look through a Facebook group like Copblock will give you page after page of cops being stupid, trigger happy, petty, and negligent (and those are just the links gathered from the last 24 hours).

But I don’t think anything has sullied the reputation of American law enforcement more than their propensity for killing dogs. For most dog owners, their pets are members of the family. They treat them like their children. To walk onto someone’s property and shoot their dog, is like shooting their kid. And yet these cases are rarely, if ever, brought to court. It’s hard enough to convict a cop for murder. To the courts, reprimanding them for killing a dog would be laughable.

A recent bill being proposed in Mississipi may make it even more difficult to hold the police accountable for these crimes. Specifically, if that dog is a pit bull. If this legislation passes, then anyone in the State of Mississipi who owns a pit bull may have their homes searched by the police without a warrant.

Dubbed, the Mississippi Regulation of Dangerous Dogs Act, it also grants police permission to kill your dog if certain criteria are met. If the dog is not “under proper restraint when on the premises of its owner,” isn’t wearing any vaccination tags, and if the police have failed to peacefully subdue the dog, then they would have every right to shoot.

I think the first category is the most egregious. What exactly is their definition of “proper restraint?” And more importantly, what does this mean for dog owners who don’t keep their pets on a leash in their backyard? I mean, how many of you reading this are dog owners, who keep their dogs kenneled or leashed at all times? I’m sure some folks do, but unless your dog has a reputation for being violent or escaping, then doing so sounds kind of cruel. Leashes are for going on walks and kennels are for going to the vet or the dog park. They shouldn’t be necessary on your own property.

They’re basically saying that if you own a certain kind of dog, they have every right to enter your property, which practically guarantees that the police will have an encounter with your dog. And since most dog owners don’t keep their pets restrained at all times, it practically guarantees that your dog will be killed by the police. This bill should be called “The Mississipi Kill All Pit Bulls Act”, but obviously that wouldn’t go over to well with the public. So they’re hiding their intentions behind a facade of safety and benevolence.

And don’t get me started on the whole pit bull debate. I don’t believe for a second that a certain breed of dog is more prone to killing people than another breed. I’m sure there are certain breeds that are easier to train for that (like, I don’t know, maybe the German Sheperds the police use), but pit bulls don’t just attack people for no reason (at least no more than any other dog). My brother has owned a pit bull for about 5 years, and that dog has never attacked anyone. So to me, saying a domesticated dog breed is more likely to attack someone, is like saying Asians are good at math, or Africans or inferior.

When this flawed logic is applied to humans, we rightfully call it racism. When it’s applied to dogs, we start treating each breed like they’re separate species. We forget that all domesticated dogs are from the same species (Canis lupus familiaris), and their differences are marginal at best.

Granted, each breed has some slightly different genes, which makes them better suited for certain tasks, but we have the same thing with humans. Like people from Nepal who can live with less oxygen, or how Europeans are better at digesting dairy than Asians or Africans. But no sane person believes that certain human races are more prone to violence because of their genetics. This whole debate on the aggression of pit bulls is completely asinine.

So what we have here is a piece of legislation that is designed to violate the rights of law abiding citizens, gives police permission to kill their dogs without provocation, and is based on an argument that is more akin to an urban myth.

In my mind, this reveals the lynchpin of police state’s strategy to take away our rights. When they fail to take away our collective rights in one fell swoop, they will try to widdle them away by criminalizing every community, every opinion, and every activity, one at a time, until they’ve captured us all. Someday everyone will be a criminal, if they aren’t already.

And when that day comes, they’ll be at liberty to pick and choose who goes to jail, and who gets to enjoy the illusion of freedom and privacy. Welcome to the new America.

http://www.pakalertpress.com/2015/01/30/new-bill-would-let-cops-enter-your-home-without-a-warrant-and-kill-your-dog-see-more-at-httpwww-thedailysheeple-comnew-bill-would-let-cops-enter-your-home-without-warrant-and-kill-your-dog_0120/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+pakalert+%28Pak+Alert+Press%29

Some doctors won't see patients with anti-vaccine views

Some doctors won't see patients with anti-vaccine views

POSTER SAYS THIS IS REALLY GOOD NEWS .... YOU SHOULD BE HAPPY....AND NOW GO SEE A NATUROPATH AND DUMP THE MD'S THEY ARE TOTALLY WORTHLESS ...

Jan 29, 7:20 PM EST By ALICIA CHANG AP Science Writer

AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes Health Video This video player must be at least 300x168 pixels in order to operate. Buy AP Photo Reprints LOS ANGELES (AP) -- With California gripped by a measles outbreak, Dr. Charles Goodman posted a clear notice in his waiting room and on Facebook: His practice will no longer see children whose parents won't get them vaccinated. "Parents who choose not to give measles shots, they're not just putting their kids at risk, but they're also putting other kids at risk - especially kids in my waiting room," the Los Angeles pediatrician said. It's a sentiment echoed by a small number of doctors who in recent years have "fired" patients who continue to believe debunked research linking vaccines to autism. They hope the strategy will lead parents to change their minds; if that fails, they hope it will at least reduce the risk to other children in the office. The tough-love approach - which comes amid the nation's second-biggest measles outbreak in at least 15 years, with at least 98 cases reported since last month - raises questions about doctors' ethical responsibilities. Most of the measles cases have been traced directly or indirectly to Disneyland in Southern California. The American Academy of Pediatrics says doctors should bring up the importance of vaccinations during visits but should respect a parent's wishes unless there's a significant risk to the child. "In general, pediatricians should avoid discharging patients from their practices solely because a parent refuses to immunize his or her child," according to guidelines issued by the group. However, if the relationship between patient and doctor becomes unworkable, the pediatrics academy says, the doctor may want to encourage the vaccine refuser to go to another physician. Some mothers who have been dropped by their doctors feel "betrayed and upset," said Dotty Hagmier, founder of the support group Moms in Charge. She said these parents made up their minds about vaccines after "careful research and diligence to understand the risks versus the benefits for their own children's circumstances." Dropping patients who refuse vaccines has become a hot topic of discussion on SERMO, an online doctor hangout. Some doctors are adamant about not accepting patients who don't believe in vaccinations, with some saying they don't want to be responsible for someone's death from an illness that was preventable. Others warn that refusing treatment to such people will just send them into the arms of quacks. The measles-mumps-rubella vaccine, or MMR, is 97 percent effective at preventing measles, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Measles spreads easily through the air and in enclosed spaces. Symptoms include fever, runny nose, cough and a rash all over the body. In rare cases, particularly among babies, measles can be deadly. Infection can also cause pregnant women to miscarry or give birth prematurely. All states require children to get certain vaccinations to enroll in school. California is among 20 states that let parents opt out by obtaining personal belief waivers. Some people worry that vaccines cause developmental problems, despite scientific evidence disproving any link. Others object for religious or philosophical reasons. Nationally, childhood measles vaccination rates have held steady for years at above 90 percent. But there seem to be growing pockets of unvaccinated people in scattered communities, said Dr. Gregory Wallace of the CDC. In recent years, nearly all U.S. measles cases have been linked to travelers who caught the virus abroad and spread it in this country among unvaccinated people. Northern California's Marin County has a high rate of people claiming personal belief exemptions. In 2012, Dr. Nelson Branco and his partners at a Marin County practice started turning away toddlers whose parents refused to make sure they received the measles vaccine. Branco said 10 to 20 of his practice's 8,000 or so patients left after the change. Vaccines "can be spooky for parents," Branco said. But "in the end, we have the science. We have the experience that it's the right thing to do."