new

That Hollywood, which is a district of the city of Los Angeles (L.A.) in the United States of America on the west coast of the continent of North America in the state of California, should be called ‘Babylon’ after the capital city of the Persian Empire, Babylon (c. 4000 B.C.), derives from a description of ‘a woman’, Babylon, by Jesus’ disciple, John, in his apocalyptic Revelation of the future, ‘Mystery, Babylon the great, mother of harlots and of the abominations of the Earth.’ (Rev: 17. 5) Hollywood is called ‘Babylon’ because it’s the capital of the global media Empire of the USA and has been since the first movie was made there by director D. W. Griffith, Old California (1910), before the censorship of the ‘Hays code’ (1934-67), established by President of the Motion Picture Producers Of America (MPPDA), Will Hays, effectively made it impossible for humans to ever learn anything of their own mode of sexual reproduction from mainstream mass media edutainment on the moral grounds that it would encourage adultery.

Christianity, after Jesus ‘Christ’, that is, ‘the chosen’, assured everyone it frowned on adultery severely, and despite Jesus’ leniency: `… women, in love scenes, at all times have `at least one foot on the floor` (in other words, no love scenes in bed).`1 Christianity’s moral stance is based on Jesus’ words to a woman allegedly caught in the act of adultery in the New Testament of the Bible, which Christians believe supersede the Old Testament law and history of the Jewish ‘chosen people’ of God, that is, the Torah and Talmud written in their Hebrew language, ‘Let he that is without sin cast the first stone.’ (John: 8. 7) Because women are capable of sexually reproducing with each other, as the futanarian human species of women’s seed, adultery is what men practice on their race. Moreover, as it seems unlikely that women would ever marry, given the opportunity to be free of their ring slavery in host womb parasitism for war against their species, women aren’t ever adulterate. Consequently, Hollywood’s stance against adultery is a sham designed to suppress women’s seed, because if women were seen to be able to sexually reproduce with each other through the medium of cinema or television, it’d threaten the system of human slavery imposed upon the Earth by an alien rulership.

As 100, 000 women of the human futanarian species of women’s seed could sexually reproduce 1. 5, 000, 000 in 34 years, women are the perfect planetary colonist should their species ever achieve interstellar space travel. However, if they can be prevented from producing enough brainpower to give them the permanent memory through the immortality conferred by medical science to build and maintain the starship technology needed to carry them to the planets amongst the stars of heaven above and beyond the Earth, they’ll remain host womb slaves in parasitism. Although parasitism seems harsh in describing what men do with women, parasitologists use the term ‘parasitoid’ to describe the parasite that emerges from the host to kill it, and that’s what men do in their wars against women’s seed, ‘The dragon was wroth with the woman and went to make war upon the remnant of her seed.’ (Rev: 12. 17) At least since the period of ancient Egypt, men and women have been manufactured as a single male brained creature wearing each other’s clothes as a transvestite for ‘TV war’. In the myth of Ra, the sun god, he’s incarnated as Osiris, who is dismembered by his evil brother, Set. Although the goddess, Isis, remembers him, his phallus can’t be found, so Isis gives him hers, that is, without women’s seed the human race is a TV. Osiris is restored as Horus, ‘the sky god’, because satellite TV is more advanced.

When US President Ronald ‘Ray Gun’ Reagan announced his ‘Strategic Defense Initiative’ (SDI) on March 23, 1982, to establish a ‘ground and space based missile system’, it was labeled ‘Star Wars’ after the 1977 movie, Star Wars IV: A New Hope, featuring a ‘Death Star’ created by the evil Empire of Palatine to orbit planets and kill them, that is, it was an advanced Egyptian satellite TV system. The symbol of ‘the sky god’, Horus, is the hawk, because he has a hawk’s head, and the members of the Republican Party in the United States who’re gung-ho for war are known as hawks, that is, it’s the hawks of war that seek to prevent the human futanarian species of women’s seed from escaping the Earth to colonize the planets.

The actors and actresses in Hollywood are known as ‘stars’, because they are trained to be ‘egoids’. It was ‘the father of psychoanalysis’, Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), that created the term ‘id’ to explain that the unconscious contained material repressed by the conscious mind because of taboo; for example, Christian morality’s taboo against adultery caused society to become sexually repressive to the extent that Africa’s DR Congo discovered a simian immune deficiency virus (SIV) mutation transmitted by homosexuals’ mixing of blood, shit and semen in each other’s anus in 1983. The human deficiency virus (HIV) injected at the base of the spine resulted in acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS), and collapse of the organs of the body, before the brain died. In short, Freudian psychology was the basis for understanding that homosexuality in the human ‘id’ produced an ‘incurable killer disease’ as their ‘biological weapon’ aimed at eradicating the human species, because that’s what Christian morality and homosexuals were for.

Although ‘ego’ was a term used by Freud, it was Carl Jung (1875-1961), a developmental, rather than a repression psychologist, that saw it as a vehicle for individuation through what he called ‘the archetypes of the collective unconscious’. Jung argued that the unconscious of each human individual contained archetypes, that is, images to be found in dreams, art and the imagination, which assisted the development of the ego, that is, consciousness. Where Freud posited a Super-ego that functioned as a censor to repress into the ‘id’ or unconscious, Jung posited a shadow level to the unconscious, corresponding to human instinct, which contained the archetypes. Consequently, it was only necessary to allow the instinctual subconscious shadow to emerge through art, dreams and imagination for ego-consciousness to develop.

Hollywood egos were called stars, because the life of most planets is dependent on their local sun, which for the Earth is its day star, Sol. In other words, actors and actresses were perceived as commensurate with suns in regard to planets, that is, they were their life. What this produced is describable as ‘egoid’, that is, a star’s belief that their ego was greater than that of the planetary consciousness. In simple terms, because men and women are a TV, they’re unable to accept the anonymity of being a woman amongst women’s seed, so they wage war on the human race in order to assert their egoism, which is ego-id, that is, a conflation of Jung’s ego and Freud’s id. For Hollywood unable to celebrate human sexual activity, ‘action’ movies featuring violence against an unnamable horror is usual, although war against women is what its audience are for. Typical is the nucleus of brave heroes fighting against an alien invasion, for example, Independence Day (1996), because it’s a psychological displacement of men’s actual role as aliens invading women’s Earth. In the ID4 movie, actor Bill Pullman has the role of US President Thomas Whitmore who, before an air battle with the alien invader, addresses USAF personnel in the west of the United States’ Area 51 top secret facility, which is 134 km north-northwest of the city of Las Vegas, near Hiko, Tonopah Basin, State Route 318, Lincoln County, Nevada state, a locale where research on alien spacecraft and their occupants has unofficially always occurred:

‘Good morning. In less than an hour, aircraft from here will join others from around the world, and you will be launching the largest aerial battle in the history of mankind. Mankind. That word should have new meaning for all of us today. We can’t be consumed by our petty differences anymore. We will be united in our common interests. Perhaps it’s fate that today is the Fourth of July, and you will once again be fighting for our freedom. Not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution … but from annihilation. We’re fighting for our right to live. To exist. And should we win the day, the Fourth of July will no longer be known as an American holiday, but as the day when the world declared in one voice: We will not go quietly into the night! We will not vanish without a fight! We’re going to live on! We’re going to survive! Today we celebrate our Independence Day!’2

As women are capable of sexually reproducing 15 billion from 1 million in 34 years, even if the age of conception were formally agreed as 16 +, men would have had to have killed a huge number of women in order to be the dominant invading alien creature. However, because Hollywood stars are egoid, that’s what they’re produced for.

This legislation may be the most ominous attack on "free speech" and Christianity since the founding of our nation. The silence of the mainstream media multiplies that concern. It suggests that many of our most powerful leaders want these bills passed behind closed doors, freed from any public accountability. Even so, the public is awakening to the facts.

On April 25, 2007, a House of Representatives committee approved a measure to add homosexuality to the list of groups "protected" by hate crimes laws. The Senate has prepared a twin bill, S. 1105. Except for the addition of the name Matthew Shepard, its title is the same.

Matthew Shepard? Few Americans could miss the shocking details of this young homosexual's horrible death in 1998. The media published that story 3007 times -- 45 times in the New York Times alone. It made Matthew a martyr for the cause of gay rights, hate-crimes legislation, and anti-Christian sentiment.

Did you read about Jesse Dirkhising's torture and murder at the hands of two homosexual lovers eleven months later? Probably not. The thirteen-year-old boy was drugged, strapped down, sodomized, tortured, and killed by two adults living in an apartment that 'reeked of excrement and was littered with drug paraphernalia. Like Matthew's murder, it was a horrible crime -- almost unfit to print. But that's not why most newspapers across the country refused to tell the story. The real reason? It didn't fit their agenda! It wasn't politically correct!

Nor is the Bible. Its unchanging standards can't be adapted to the new global guidelines for holistic spirituality and politically correct tolerance. So when eleven Christians shared the gospel as well as warning about homosexuality during Philadelphia's 2004 homosexual 'OutFest', they were promptly arrested and temporarily "charged under [Pennsylvania's] hate crimes legislation."

Christians aren't the only ones vulnerable. On April 11, a Maine Middle School student did something really foolish on a dare: He put some ham -- considered "unclean" by Muslims -- on a cafeteria table occupied by Muslim students. As punishment, the school suspended him. School principal, Maureen Lachapelle, sent a report of this incident to the Attorney General's office and to the County District Attorney because the ham incident was perceived as a hate/bias crime.

A crime? Does this line up with the fast-track Hate Crimes Bill in Congress? And if so, why? A quick review of HR 1592 might, at first, suggest a negative answer. Section 7(2), like the corresponding Senate Bill, defines "Hate crime acts" as:

(A) In general. Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability of any person"

But, you might argue, the boy neither caused nor intended "bodily injury."

True! But consider another key word, one that's part of the title in both bills. That all-important word is "prevention!" We're looking at the "Hate Crimes Prevention Act," not simply a law against "hate crimes." And the concept of prevention (or pre-emption) is open-ended. Its wide range of interpretations could be used in almost any situation to silence offending voices and to intimidate critics of useful "protected" groups such as homosexuals and Muslims -- long before any signs of actual violence.

For example, a Canadian pastor was concerned about the overt promotion of Islam at a local high school. It not only distributed copies of the Quran, it also offered Muslim students a room for prayer during school hours. Of course, Christian and Jewish students had no such "freedom." But when Pastor Mark Harding began handing out leaflets protesting this strange favoritism, he was charged with having "willfully promoted hatred." Having violated a new Canadian hate-crimes law, he was sentenced to 340 hours of "community service" at the Islamic Society of North America.

Pastor Harding claimed to be motivated by love for Muslim students, not hate. According to worldnetdaily.com, he expressed that love in a recorded phone call. Yet his own phone was swamped with more than three thousand real hate calls, including many death threats. When his trial began, the police protected him from the crowds of Muslims chanting "Infidels, you will burn in hell."

What is going on? Who is behind this unequal and borderless "protection" system?

THE UN "CULTURE OF PREVENTION"

The UN has established a massive, worldwide, inter-agency program of "prevention." Through the coordinated efforts of UNESCO, The World Health Organization, The World Bank and countless other UN agencies, its agenda is transforming not only beliefs and values everywhere, but also schools, churches, communities and nations. Words like "war" and "genocide" have been used for more than fifty years to persuade the world to participate in "peace-building" ventures that would create a climate of prevention everywhere. This cultural atmosphere is defined by UN declarations such as UNESCO's Declaration on Tolerance and Declaration of Principles on Religion in a Culture of Peace.

The UN policy of prevention requires "lifelong learning," re-learning, group-learning and service-learning. Continual progress must be measured through unceasing assessments that monitor compliance with new global standards for human resource development. What counts is progress toward the envisioned solidarity -- a global community where no one takes a stand contrary to UN ideology -- and where everyone is willing to compromise their beliefs, seek common ground, and flow with the group consensus.

While Biblical Christianity hinders such universal solidarity, the war against "hate" supports it. After all, it provides the incentive needed to intimidate and persuade the masses that they must change and conform.

In 1999, the United Nations published a pamphlet by Secretary-General Kofi Annan titled, "Facing the Humanitarian Challenge: Towards a Culture of Prevention." In it, Mr. Annan states: "...the common thread running through almost all conflict prevention policies is the need to pursue what we in the United Nations refer to as good governance. In practice, good governance involves promoting the rule of law, tolerance of minority and opposition groups.... Above all, good governance means respect for human rights...
[See Whose Rights?]

"Long-term prevention strategies, in addressing the root causes of conflict, seek to prevent destructive conflicts from arising in the first place. They embrace the same holistic approach to prevention that characterizes post-conflict peace-building...."

Do you wonder what he means by a holistic approach? It has to do with the vision of unity, wholism, solidarity, interconnectedness, or -- as the new global management puts it -- a systems approach based on "General Systems Theory." It tolerates no Christian "separatist" views.
As Al Gore said at a 1992 Communitarian Conference, "Seeing ourselves as separate is the central problem in our political thinking."

But "peace-building" implies more specific action than simply a holistic approach. An UNESCO publication I picked up in Istanbul during the 1996 UN Conference on Human Settlements (See Habitat II) clarifies a broader issue. Ponder the following excerpts from Our Creative Diversity: Report on the World Commission on Culture and Development.The first paragraph was written by former UN Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar: "An ounce of prevention is better than a ton of punishment.... Imagination, innovation, vision and creativity are required.... It means an open mind, and open heart and a readiness to seek fresh definitions, reconcile old opposites, and help draw new mental maps."

"Universalism is the fundamental principle of a global ethics."

"Religion... has affected and sometimes poisoned the relations between majorities and minorities.... Extreme doctrinaire views[Biblical Christianity?] look to an imagined past, seen as both simpler and more stable, thus preparing the ground not only for a variety of overtly violent acts but also for the intimidation of individuals and indeed entire communities in matters of thought, behavior and belief, coercing them into accepting a single 'orthodox' point of view.... The challenge today, as in the past is to... distinguish between the beliefs and activities of the peaceful majority... and a minority of extremists...."

"PREVENTION" AS A PLOY TO SILENCE CHRISTIANS

Some of the same warnings were sounded by the respective founding directors of both UNESCO (Julian Huxley) and the World Health Organization (Dr. Brock Chisholm). Both were determined to wipe out the "poisonous certainties" of Biblical Christianity in their quest for UN solidarity. Notice Dr. Chisholm's emphasis on prevention back in 1946:

"We must... find and take sure steps to prevent wars in the future.... The re-interpretation and eventually eradication of the concept of right and wrong which has been the basis of child training... these are the belated objectives of practically all effective psychotherapy.... The pretense is made [by uncompromising Christians who cling to old standards] that to do away with right and wrong would produce uncivilized people, immorality, lawlessness and social chaos....

"When [infectious diseases] were attacked at the preventative level, some martyrs had to be sacrificed to the cause of humanity, because reactionary forces fought back.... The problem is no longer the germ of diphtheria, but rather the attitudes of parents who are incapable of accepting and using proven knowledge for the protection of their children. Surely the training of children in home and schools should be of at least as great public concern as their vaccination.... [See Homosexuals brainwashing our children in elementary schools]

"For the very survival of large parts of the human race, world understanding, tolerance, and forbearance have become absolutely essential.... If it cannot be done gently, it may have to be done roughly or even violently."

Today, more than half a century later, the world is rapidly conforming to this UN agenda touted by Chisholm and Huxley in the 1940s. The global network of "lifelong learning" aims to prevent anything that would hinder "positive" collective thinking. Few notice how effectively its tentacles now reach into community [mental] health programs in over 130 nations around the world.