Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Wikileaks reveals a monstrous, dangerous, criminal America? -New York Times justifies wikileaks choice while our service slates their stance as prejudiced

Note from SACNS

The New York Times, in a piece admits to an editorial bias in what is said and how, and what is published. The New York Times also admit to have gained the Wikileaks documents without Wikileaks' permission- from the guardian paper. They admit the founders of the US strongly opposed big government, even though they often promote it. They admit that the Obama administration, though not Wikileaks (claiming this would be a conflict of interests) were given access to what they had to say. They are also publishing only 100 of the documents with justification according to the New York Times.

From SACNS some context based on Wikileaks accusations not in dispute by the US government: America has abused the location of the UN and their power- to get their diplomats, really spies to spy on important players, steal finger prints and bank account details- of top ranking UN officials.

According to Wikileaks- the US government had full knowledge of a Georgian attempt of Genocide before it happened, and still allowed Russia to be blamed for attempting to stop ethnic cleansing (RT reports).

It is American policy to use human rights only as an excuse and to only pursue its own agendas- against human rights.

The Arab nations around Iran have all asked America to invade their neighbour (anyone who like me monitors military spending and equipment could say this anyway).

America has shown a direct interest in who and what has power in foreign governments, called the French President The Naked Emperor, claimed Putin saw himself as Alpha Dog, the new head of Russian government was Robin to his Batman, called Merkel of Germany Teflon, and insulted foreign officials all around.

Massive human rights abuses and conflicts of interest from America have appeared in previous releases.

In contrast to their care for a Democratic Party president and his administration, the New York Times, did not even fact check claims against the Roman Catholic Church.

SACNS believes the Wikileaks organisation claims are almost certainly accurate.


See what the New York Times said
http://mobile.nytimes.com/article?a=706025&single=1&f=20

Friday, November 26, 2010

Insight Scoop | The Ignatius Press Blog: One of the most thoughtful and rigorous pieces of analysis written so far... - condoms always utterly evil- no good ever

Note by Marc Aupiais

While reading through one of my daily news aggregates (e-mail me with request if you want access to some of our specialist custom made sources) I came across the publishers of the pope's new book once again desperately opposing the portrayal secular media has given their book. This argument the quote says that condom use is always in ever circumstance only intrinsically evil and a grave mortal sin. Theologically speaking I agree- I personally have concluded from dogma that it is far more moral though illicit to have extra-marital sex without a condom than with one. Because use of a condom is blasphemy against the holy spirit given that sex is the best representation of the Holy Trinity on earth: hence marriage as a sacrament. Further, statistics have shown that condom use and education generally increases both abortions and HIV infections in a community (while testing with promise of ARV's decreases infection, as with promotion of fidelity and combating of homosexuality and polygamy- both the major spread machines of HIV. New research has found a pill which if taken perfectly could do away with infection altogether according to researchers after initial tests using HIV danger group- homosexual men):

"One of the most thoughtful and rigorous pieces of analysis written so far...Posted: 25 Nov 2010 09:51 AM PST

... about the Holy Father's remarks about condoms and the resulting conversation/furor, is a post on the "end of the modern world, etc." blog, written by

Dr. Steven A. Long, professor of theology at Ave Maria University. Here is an excerpt:

[Original had blockquote covering the rest]
This is often portrayed as though the Pope is saying that the disordered sexual act of sodomy is morally bad, but condom use, as something incipiently responsible and moral, is nonetheless good. That is precisely what the Pope is not saying. That is why he says the Church does not regard it as a moral solution. He well realizes that condom use introduces no new species in a homosexual act, because no contraception takes place. Rather, the condom use is wholly predicated upon, and willed as a function of, the intention of sodomy, and condom used participates the species of the sodomitic act. Hence the condom use is morally evil, and indeed gravely evil. Janet Smith, who has written penetratingly about this, notes that all that condom use does is make an already gravely evil act slightly less evil, but that the Church is not in the business of directing people to perform grave evils in a slightly better way.

But what, then, of the papal language? Can a gravely evil act really be such that "there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement towards a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality"? Certainly in the epistemic order, a person who is morally coarse and living sinfully, may in beginning to reflect on the consequences of his action for others and beginning to take responsibility for these, move in such a way that were it to continue he would eventually enter into genuinely moral considerations. If this is what the Pope means, then it is surely defensible, although the language even so seems somewhat rhetorically over-freighted: simply doing an evil act in a way that prevents infection does not necessarily suggest anything other than that the homosexual prostitute does not wish his customer to die, which frankly could be from venal or vicious motives; and if it is from a better motive, the act is still similar to a strangler who gives all his victims the opportunity to make a good act of contrition, and whom he calms and kills in as gentle a fashion as possible: all of which hardly seems to count as "a first step in a movement towards a different way, a more human way" of living. The Church is not in the business of endorsing grave evils when they are "lesser"--because grave moral evil may never rightly be done by anyone. The rhetoric of "first step" towards "a more human" sexuality makes the epistemic motion seem more proximate to the good of a more human sexuality than in fact it is. The "first step" is, in the epistemic order, toward a moral awareness generally speaking, which must be developed and enriched far more in order to constitute any specific movement in the practical moral order toward a "more human" sexuality.

Nonetheless one must give due credit to the "can" of the Pope's formulation--something that expresses raw possibility. And it is true that those who do move from moral evil to moral good, must epistemically at some point begin to be aware of their responsibility, and such a beginning might be found in someone who before had cavalierly exposed others to infection whilst sodomizing, who then tries to minimize the occasion for giving infection. But "first step"? Normally the first step toward a purpose partakes of the genus of that purpose. If the end is genuinely moral, then the use of the condom is not a "first step" any more than the gentler strangler is taking a first step toward a moral way of living and honoring the good of life. The "first step" of the Pope's example must be understood as nakedly epistemic, not in the least moral, but with the possibility that it could lead at some point to the genuinely moral. All the efforts to speak of the instance to which the pope refers as an exceptional case or circumstance for which the Holy Father has distilled the right moral theological understanding seems thus utterly wrong, because the Pope is not saying that condom use is morally good.
Given the refined nature of these reflections, one may also think that the Holy Father perhaps placed too great a weight upon a fragile medium which cannot sustain it--but from the best of motives, the desire to manifest the true nature of the papal service to the world, and openly to engage common questions and inquiries. Further, his words appear far better than Lombardi's explanation of them, which tries to render the entire matter a function of moral theology, whereas part of the Holy Father's treatment is simply and purely epistemic, something that the media probably will never be able to grasp"
Read more
http://insightscoop.typepad.com/2004/2010/11/one-of-the-most-thoughtful-and-rigorous-pieces-of-analysis-written-so-far.html

Unwrapping Christmas | Catholic Exchange- an inspiring tale

"Once upon a time there was a young woman seeking, always seeking the meaning of life.

For a long time, she thought she would find it in the bottom of a shopping bag.  Or in a fancy restaurant.  Or a beautifully decorated home.

She had married a wonderful man and had three beautiful daughters…still, she felt empty, and was constantly seeking to fill that void with something outside of herself.  It never worked.

The coming Christmas Season only seemed to heighten this feeling, and so she worked feverishly, from the beginning of November, to fill the family home with the smells, sights and sounds of Christmas.

The artificial tree was assembled on November 1st and by the 5th was completely decorated.  Each room was filled with images of Santa Claus and angels, jingle bells and reindeer…the entire home had become a reflection of the secularist view of the "holiday" season.  There was a Nativity…in the corner of the living room on a small table and for the most part it was neglected.  The Advent Wreath was placed on the dining room table, its candles only rarely lit, and by the time she realized that Advent had passed, she would notice that two of the candles had never even been lit.  She just didn't understand the necessity.  There was so much to do to get ready for Christmas!  Cookies to bake, shopping and wrapping.  No time to pray, just time to work.  Work, work, work.  She sadly noticed that the Christmas tree and all the decorations had already gathered a layer of dust…things were beginning to look a bit worn, a bit shabby.  It took all her energy to hold everything together for 60 days of festivity.  The excitement had long ago vanished for her, but the show had to go on…

Christmas Day and the frenzy began.  Midnight Mass had been skipped because the wrapping and baking wasn't quite finished.  She awoke the following morning, up hours before her girls to set up the video camera and placed herself, like the consummate actress she had become, in the appropriate location to experience her children's joy.  There was a flurry of excitement as mountains of gifts were unwrapped, pictures snapped, videos recorded…Mom and Dad both privately calculated with growing dismay just how much this "joy" would cost in the coming year.

By the New Year, the tree was down.  The decorations were packed away and many of the toys and baubles had already lost their newness.  The house, once again returned to the ordinary, seemed to reflect her heart.  It was neat.  It was tidy.  Everything was where it should be…and yet something…something was horribly wrong.

SOMEONE, not SOMETHING, was missing…

She felt like a princess, kept prisoner in a very beautiful castle.   Although she was surrounded by everything she loved and had everything she wanted, she one day realized that the castle was really a dungeon of her own making.

One day, the Prince of Peace came and kissed the poor, sleeping princess and awoke her from her slumber.  He showed her a Manger.  A Star.  A Woman.  He told her about a Promise and showed her the ultimate gift…the Wounds of Love's making.

Her heart aflame, she disposed of her worldly approach to the Season of Wait.  Her husband and children began to notice a subtle change.  The prized Santa collection no longer dominated the mantel piece…the Nativity, empty and waiting for its special Guests, took center stage.  The artificial tree was discarded in favor of a live tree, which would not be set up until just a very few days before the beginning…the BEGINNING of the Christmas Season, which is the Day, itself.  The Advent Wreath was placed on the center of the coffee table, and after prayers, candle lighting and singing, it would be placed in a prominent window for the world passing by to see the Light…"

Read on


http://catholicexchange.com/2010/11/26/142207/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+catholicex+%28Catholic+Exchange%29

Living With Martyrs At A Boarding School | Catholic Exchange- a wonderful read!

"Living With Martyrs At A Boarding School

Posted: 25 Nov 2010 09:00 PM PST

St. Edmund's College, a small Catholic boarding school in Ware, England, is full of history. Not the usual type of history at the usual high school. St. Edmund's actually traces its history back to 1586 and the founding of the English College at Douay, France. Cardinal William Allen started the college in order to educate young Catholics not allowed to exercise their religion under the harsh laws of Elizabeth I, who reigned from 1558 to 1603.

English Catholics who hid priests from authorities, who desired to practice their faith, or who simply bought Catholic books smuggled into the country, faced severe punishments, including fines, imprisonment, and even death. For Elizabethan Catholics, faith was hazardous to one's health. Yet Catholics remained faithful in large numbers and the English Church, although heavily persecuted, never succumbed. The English College at Douay flourished during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and sent scores of priests into England as missionaries.

With the beginning of the French Revolution in 1789, it once again became rather dangerous to be an English Catholic, this time for a different set of political reasons. The Catholic Church was one of the primary targets of the revolutionaries' violence. With few options available and in the face of imminent destruction, Douay College moved from France back into England and became St. Edmund's College in 1793.

Now over two hundred years old, St. Edmund's College educates more than five hundred students each year. Church history and institutional history saturate St. Edmund's in manifold ways. Pictures of every English bishop beginning from 1793 hang in a row on the way to the dining hall. Original buildings from 1793 are still in use today. Amazingly, archivists know the names of all 12,100 students and teachers who have studied and taught at the College from its founding in 1568.

The Witness of English Martyrs Born under dire circumstances, the Douay College at St. Edmund's also preserves the story of martyrdom. Few American Catholics, of course, fully appreciate martyrdom. Although anti-Catholicism is as American as apple pie (especially entrenched in Hollywood and secular universities), religious freedom remains the law of the land. We do not and have not had to die for our faith.

English Catholics, on the other hand, count forty martyrs from the reign of Elizabeth I alone. For them, the altar is stained with the blood of ancestors. This reality manifests itself in a variety of ways. At St. Edmund's, the living tradition of martyrdom envelops the entire school. Perhaps largely unnoticed or quietly assimilated by the students and faculty, this sense of martyrdom is, to the outsider, both disturbing and awe-inspiring, both shocking and spiritually edifying.

I didn't travel to St. Edmund's looking for martyrs. I am, by training, a university professor, and my research interests include Shakespeare and sixteenth-century books. St. Edmund's houses a spectacular collection of Catholic books from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, so my trip had everything to do with this collection, the remnants of the library from the English College at Douay."

Read on:
http://catholicexchange.com/2010/11/26/28810/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+catholicex+%28Catholic+Exchange%29

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Please Spread: The pope has NOT endorsed condom use in ANY circumstance EVER:

​Please Spread: The pope has NOT endorsed condom use in ANY circumstance EVER: Click play to play, in the alternative right click link and select view in new window/tab to download




Please send this to Catholics and non-Catholics alike (as I have), as misinformation is in no one's interests.>





Please Spread: The pope has NOT endorsed condom use in ANY circumstance EVER:


Video:
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPpq-5r3IcE


Pope says a male prostitute using a condom can never be justified
Article posted by: Marc Aupiais


URL: http://sacns.scripturelink.net/2010/11/pope-says-male-prostitute-using-condom.html


Note by Marc Aupiais
Due to the as ever sensationalist and irresponsible journalism of Vatican based but not Vatican vetted paper L'Osservatore Romano- which heroised the Beatles for saying they were more popular than God, U2's Bono who spent just 200 000 of over ten million raised by his organisation One on the poor- for praying in public for his own agenda, and promoted a pro-abortionist stance in the Recife issue, we once again have to clarify their inexcusable hell-worthy errors, which have been aplenty since their new editor somehow got the job:

"Fortunately, now you can read the full text of the Pope's remarks.

Also, in anticipation of the controversy that these statement would produce, Dr. Janet Smith has prepared a helpful guide to what the Pope did and did not say.

Let's look at the Pope's remarks and see what he actually said.

Seewald: . . . In Africa you stated that the Church's traditional teaching has proven to be the only sure way to stop the spread of HIV. Critics, including critics from the Church's own ranks, object that it is madness to forbid a high-risk population to use condoms.

Benedict: . . . In my remarks I was not making a general statement about the condom issue, but merely said, and this is what caused such great offense, that we cannot solve the problem by distributing condoms. [EMPHASIS ADDED] Much more needs to be done. We must stand close to the people, we must guide and help them; and we must do this both before and after they contract the disease.

As a matter of fact, you know, people can get condoms when they want them anyway. But this just goes to show that condoms alone do not resolve the question itself. More needs to happen. Meanwhile, the secular realm itself has developed the so-called ABC Theory: Abstinence-Be Faithful-Condom, where the condom is understood only as a last resort, when the other two points fail to work. This means that the sheer fixation on the condom implies a banalization of sexuality, which, after all, is precisely the dangerous source of the attitude of no longer seeing sexuality as the expression of love, but only a sort of drug that people administer to themselves. This is why the fight against the banalization of sexuality is also a part of the struggle to ensure that sexuality is treated as a positive value and to enable it to have a positive effect on the whole of man's being.

Note that the Pope's overall argument is that condoms will not solve the problem of AIDS. In support of this, he makes several arguments:

1) People can already get condoms, yet it clearly hasn't solved the problem.

2) The secular realm has proposed the ABC program, where a condom is used only if the first two, truly effective procedures (abstinence and fidelity) have been rejected. Thus even the secular ABC proposal recognizes that condoms are not the unique solution. They don't work as well as abstinence and fidelity. The first two are better.

3) The fixation on condom use represents a banalization (trivialization) of sexuality that turns the act from being one of love to one of selfishness. For sex to have the positive role it is meant to play, this trivialization of sex—and thus the fixation on condoms—needs to be resisted.

So that's the background to the statement that the press seized on:

There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality. [EMPHASIS ADDED]

There are several things to note here: First, note that the Pope says that "there may be a basis in the case of some individuals," not that there is a basis. This is the language of speculation. But what is the Pope speculating about? That condom use is morally justified? No, that's not what he's said: that there may be cases "where this [condom use] can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way to recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed."

In other words, as Janet Smith puts it,

The Holy Father is simply observing that for some homosexual prostitutes the use of a condom may indicate an awakening of a moral sense; an awakening that sexual pleasure is not the highest value, but that we must take care that we harm no one with our choices. He is not speaking to the morality of the use of a condom, but to something that may be true about the psychological state of those who use them. If such individuals are using condoms to avoid harming another, they may eventually realize that sexual acts between members of the same sex are inherently harmful since they are not in accord with human nature.

At least this is the most one can reasonably infer from the Pope's remarks, which could be phrased more clearly (and I expect the Vatican will be issuing a clarification quite soon).

Second, note that the Pope immediately follows his statement regarding homosexual prostitutes using condoms with the statement, "But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality."

By "a humanization of sexuality," the Pope means recognizing the truth about human sexuality—that it must be exercised in a loving, faithful way between a man and a woman united in matrimony. That is the real solution, not putting on a condom and engaging in promiscuous sex with those infected with a deadly virus.

At this point in the interview, Seewald asks a follow-up question, and it is truly criminal that L'Osservatore Romano did not print this part:

Seewald: Are you saying, then, that the Catholic Church is actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms?

Benedict: She of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality."

Jimmy Akin

National Catholic Register
(Catholic special interests coverage; American Based; Independent of the United States government and USCCB official hierarchy of the USA Catholic Church)

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/the-pope-said-what-about-condoms?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NCRegisterDailyBlog+%2540The+Daily+Register%2541#When:22:09:08Z

Posted "at": 8:43:00 AM
Links to this article 0 comments
The Pope Said WHAT about Condoms??? | Blogs | NCRegister.com
Article posted by: Marc Aupiais
Survey on Article:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Google Buzz

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/the-pope-said-what-about-condoms?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NCRegisterDailyBlog+%2540The+Daily+Register%2541#When:22:09:08Z
Posted "at": 8:37:00 AM





Sancte Philomena Ora Pro Nobis!

Pope says a male prostitute using a condom can never be justified

Note by Marc Aupiais

Due to the as ever sensationalist and irresponsible journalism of Vatican based but not Vatican vetted paper L'Osservatore Romano- which heroised the Beatles for saying they were more popular than God, U2's Bono who spent just 200 000 of over ten million raised by his organisation One on the poor- for praying in public for his own agenda, and promoted a pro-abortionist stance in the Recife issue, we once again have to clarify their inexcusable hell-worthy errors, which have been aplenty since their new editor somehow got the job:

"Fortunately, now you can read the full text of the Pope's remarks.

Also, in anticipation of the controversy that these statement would produce, Dr. Janet Smith has prepared a helpful guide to what the Pope did and did not say.

Let's look at the Pope's remarks and see what he actually said.

Seewald: . . . In Africa you stated that the Church's traditional teaching has proven to be the only sure way to stop the spread of HIV. Critics, including critics from the Church's own ranks, object that it is madness to forbid a high-risk population to use condoms.

Benedict: . . . In my remarks I was not making a general statement about the condom issue, but merely said, and this is what caused such great offense, that we cannot solve the problem by distributing condoms. [EMPHASIS ADDED] Much more needs to be done. We must stand close to the people, we must guide and help them; and we must do this both before and after they contract the disease.

As a matter of fact, you know, people can get condoms when they want them anyway. But this just goes to show that condoms alone do not resolve the question itself. More needs to happen. Meanwhile, the secular realm itself has developed the so-called ABC Theory: Abstinence-Be Faithful-Condom, where the condom is understood only as a last resort, when the other two points fail to work. This means that the sheer fixation on the condom implies a banalization of sexuality, which, after all, is precisely the dangerous source of the attitude of no longer seeing sexuality as the expression of love, but only a sort of drug that people administer to themselves. This is why the fight against the banalization of sexuality is also a part of the struggle to ensure that sexuality is treated as a positive value and to enable it to have a positive effect on the whole of man's being.

Note that the Pope's overall argument is that condoms will not solve the problem of AIDS. In support of this, he makes several arguments:

1) People can already get condoms, yet it clearly hasn't solved the problem.

2) The secular realm has proposed the ABC program, where a condom is used only if the first two, truly effective procedures (abstinence and fidelity) have been rejected. Thus even the secular ABC proposal recognizes that condoms are not the unique solution. They don't work as well as abstinence and fidelity. The first two are better.

3) The fixation on condom use represents a banalization (trivialization) of sexuality that turns the act from being one of love to one of selfishness. For sex to have the positive role it is meant to play, this trivialization of sex—and thus the fixation on condoms—needs to be resisted.

So that's the background to the statement that the press seized on:

There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality. [EMPHASIS ADDED]

There are several things to note here: First, note that the Pope says that "there may be a basis in the case of some individuals," not that there is a basis. This is the language of speculation. But what is the Pope speculating about? That condom use is morally justified? No, that's not what he's said: that there may be cases "where this [condom use] can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way to recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed."

In other words, as Janet Smith puts it,

The Holy Father is simply observing that for some homosexual prostitutes the use of a condom may indicate an awakening of a moral sense; an awakening that sexual pleasure is not the highest value, but that we must take care that we harm no one with our choices.  He is not speaking to the morality of the use of a condom, but to something that may be true about the psychological state of those who use them.  If such individuals are using condoms to avoid harming another, they may eventually realize that sexual acts between members of the same sex are inherently harmful since they are not in accord with human nature.

At least this is the most one can reasonably infer from the Pope's remarks, which could be phrased more clearly (and I expect the Vatican will be issuing a clarification quite soon).

Second, note that the Pope immediately follows his statement regarding homosexual prostitutes using condoms with the statement, "But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality."

By "a humanization of sexuality," the Pope means recognizing the truth about human sexuality—that it must be exercised in a loving, faithful way between a man and a woman united in matrimony. That is the real solution, not putting on a condom and engaging in promiscuous sex with those infected with a deadly virus.

At this point in the interview, Seewald asks a follow-up question, and it is truly criminal that L'Osservatore Romano did not print this part:

Seewald: Are you saying, then, that the Catholic Church is actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms?

Benedict: She of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality."

Jimmy Akin

National Catholic Register
(Catholic special interests coverage; American Based; Independent of the United States government and USCCB official hierarchy of the USA Catholic Church)

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/the-pope-said-what-about-condoms?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NCRegisterDailyBlog+%2540The+Daily+Register%2541#When:22:09:08Z

The Pope Said WHAT about Condoms??? | Blogs | NCRegister.com

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/the-pope-said-what-about-condoms?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NCRegisterDailyBlog+%2540The+Daily+Register%2541#When:22:09:08Z

Friday, November 19, 2010

Official Opposition alleges press bias in Cape Town reporting

Note by Marc Aupiais

The liberal Democratic Alliance (DA) leader Helen Zille has alleged serious media bias in covering "service delivery protests", where terror tactics were used.

Our service is quite familiar with the unfortunate ability certain local media houses have for misportraying facts- at times given the same information as these and yet seeing it portrayed very oddly!

Our service is familiar with allegations of ANC interference with local communities. The allegations here by Helen Zille are very likely entirely accurate.

[The Scripturelink Vote service has seriously considered removing the DA from our clean conscience vote list.]

"Truth is the first casualty Anyone who follows the news will have read and heard about the recent series of 'service delivery protests' around the country, including in the Western Cape. Most casual observers believe these protests signal a groundswell of dissatisfaction with 'service delivery' – because that is how they have been reported in the press.

Sometimes this is true. But sometimes it isn't. Each 'service delivery' protest takes place in a specific context, and is driven by different agendas.

Last week, three vehicles were burnt during a so-called 'service delivery' protest in Khayelitsha. Ironically, each of these vehicles was busy delivering a service to the community. One was delivering matric exam scripts to the marking centre. Another was fetching disabled people (for whom the City provides a special, subsidized transport system). A third was transporting children to a camp for abused children. The fourth vehicle escaped the blaze, but was stoned. It was an ambulance responding to an emergency call in the community.

It is beyond irony that services are destroyed in the name of service delivery protests.

In the television footage of these protests, further evidence of service delivery to the area was abundantly clear: tarred roads, storm water systems, overhead electricity wires, refuse bags awaiting collection (although their contents had been strewn across the street by protestors). And in Khayelitsha's TR section (from which most of the protestors allegedly came) construction workers were being prevented from going onto site to build houses the people were supposedly demanding. In a nearby settlement, where an electricity sub-station was recently built, the local community is refusing to allow the electricity servitude to cross their land, thus preventing the City from supplying electricity to the surrounding shack settlements.

Service delivery is by no means perfect in Khayelitsha. But one thing is certain: there would be far more of it, if it were not for 'service delivery protests'. Various forms of community conflict are the main reason that delivery is held up for years. That is one of the key reasons why it is far easier and much quicker to build a stadium than upgrade an informal settlement. The latter is wracked by community conflict, which usually turns violent, about who should benefit, who should move to make way for installation of underground services, who should get work on the project etc. etc. etc. Almost every issue results in conflict which takes months to resolve and adds hugely to the cost.

And every time there is a so-called 'service delivery' protest in an area, more resources are used up to prevent wanton injury and crime caused by people with other agendas. The massive redeployment of scarce police manpower and vehicles to riot scenes means that other areas across the City are deprived of their services.

But in the present situation there is an additional dimension. Local government elections are due in about six months, and hundreds of local activists are competing with each other to be the chosen candidate for their ward, or to secure a place on the list. Building a following and a public profile through protest action is certainly one way of promoting your candidacy.

In the ANC-dominated wards of Cape Town, there is yet another dimension at play because the ANC is determined to do whatever it takes to unseat the DA-led coalition in the City. Their agenda is to create the illusion of spontaneous community anger at lack of service delivery, to reinforce their lie that the DA does not care about the poor.

This contextual analysis of the reasons for some 'service delivery' protests is usually met with a combination of cynicism and derision by most journalists and commentators. They tend to believe that this is an excuse politicians use to disguise government failures. And we accept: there is always room for improvement, especially after a decade of massive urbanization in Cape Town which shows no sign of slowing down.

But this time, we do not need to make any deductions or inferences about the cause of the "service delivery" protests. Because, believe it or not, the ANC Youth League (ANCYL) called a press conference to announce their strategy publicly.

On November 12 they issued a press statement announcing a 14-day period of "non-stop serious protest" – while at the same time demanding that the Education Department compensate for the fact that students' exam scripts had been burnt.

Calling on people to "know that their comfort depends on government," the ANCYL said it "associated itself with the revolutionary ideas that are aimed in improving the living conditions of our people".

This comes after repeated calls by ANCYL Khayelitsha leaders Andile Lili and Loyiso Nkohla, to make Cape Town "ungovernable". And after Julius Malema's call to drive the DA "cockroaches" out of the Western Cape with "Doom".

Is anyone out there joining the dots?

Not long ago, a newspaper group ran a series of full-page advertisements with headlines such as "Why Standing for the Truth Means Never Standing Down". The advert promised the reader that "we won't rest in our relentless mission to always bring you the truth because ultimately, that's what separates good journalism from bad".

We agree. We also know it is difficult, if not impossible, for anyone to get to the full truth of any situation. But, in the context of "service delivery protests" appropriate coverage of the ANCYL's press conference, where they voluntarily exposed their real agenda, would have been an important step in getting closer to the truth.

Far too many reporters base their articles on a pre-conceived template. Government is the villain, protestors are dependent victims. This template, unthinkingly super-imposed on every riot that happens in the name of 'service delivery' does more to disguise than reveal the truth."

Helen Zille SA Today

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

For our homo(phone)-phobic column for the day: Democrats wanna still repeal law before don't ask don't tell nonsense?

Note by Marc Aupiais

We at SACNS are deeply homo(phone)-phobic- we hate media that sounds the same.

According to France 24 the Demon-crates - mean deomocrats are still trying to repeal "don't ask don't tell" (actually don't ask don't tell just removed questions of sexuality from the military- repealing it would introduce an outright ban on all homosexuals de facto as it exists de jure).

They called it what it is- lame duck- if they try.

Why would this be a bad choice? 1 in five men who have sex with men have HIV/AIDS 44 of one hundred don't know. Besides- women before gays- women aren't allowed to fight for their country? Well then repeal that first!

And what do we base this on- why the position of the US bishop for soldiers of course. We're a bit homophonic ourselves.

Would the world end if homosexuals were allowed? No- but I wouldn't want to be sexually harassed by another man! Which technically makes me "homopho(ne-pho)bic"- the fear of homosexual acts.

Besides- I'm sure Al Qaeda will enjoy a boost in Africa and the rest of the world- where we want your sexual activities kept mum- is all we want- if you want to be bad- tell your spouse- but stop overloading us with unwanted sexual imagery.

Of course there are those who just fear gay men with firearms- but anyone in America can have guns anyway. Terribly sad.

So join us in saying- we want girls with guns- girls before gays!

And for that matter- leave the poor arabs alone. Bad America- where's my stick?

Really the only real reason why banning gays in the military- is that the move firstly sends a message that sex in the public realm is acceptable, and secondly pushes gender theory- and of course affects military effectiveness.

The South African military which accepts all orientation may have an unofficial policy of itself. "Don't ask- please don't ask... I don't want to be beat up!" Which is another reason America should not revoke at least the don't ask part of "Don't ask don't tell!"

That's our homo(phone)-phobic thought of the day!

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

The Anglican Church is Fun!

The Anglican Church is Fun!

Hilarious ... still smiling.


South African Catholic News Service: Twitter|Facebook|Facebook Discuss|CAF|YouTube|UStream News|UStream Editorial | Email



As an internationally collaborative: initiative to provide a more transparent, accurate view of the world: This service is brought to you by the Scripturelink Search Engine (quotations, or confers in this service/initiative, are provided to give perspective independently, or reference some external sources: and do not imply collaboration, or any kind of affiliation, or co-operation with other services, or initiatives, which are quoted or noted in articles)


Check the accuracy, and perspectives of our contents via the above listed search engine: against other "Catholic" services

No need for killing fetuses at all- with new Stem cell treatment

Note by Marc Aupiais

In the past it has been claimed there is a need to harvest stem cells from abortions to compare with adult stem cells moved back. Embryonic stem cells often cause cancer, adult stem cells (not from aborted human beings) were seen as the safest. If it is confirmed, a new method which involves straight transfer from stem cells to needed cells may do away with that so-called not really need altogether:

"Canadian scientists have turned human skin cells directly into blood cells, the first time one kind of mature human cell has been converted into another, according to a study published last week in the journal Nature.

The transformation was completed without first rewinding the skin cells into the flexible pluripotent stem cells that have most frequently been used to grow tissues. By skipping the pluripotent step, the researchers believe they have skirted the risk that the replacement cells might form dangerous tumours.

The team created blood progenitor cells - mother cells that multiply to produce other blood cells - as well as mature blood cells, according to the report. Both types of cells could be useful in medical treatments, said study leader Mick Bhatia, a stem cell scientist at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario."

in reference to: IOL Technology - A world first for stem cell research (view on Google Sidewiki)

Unprecedented

"Unprecedented
November 16, 2010 -
With an election without precedent Timothy Dolan has become the new president of the Bishops' Conference of the United States.

For the first time was not elected vice president, in this case Bishop Gerald F. Kicanas of Tucson in Arizona, but his main "opponent", Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York."

(automatic translation from Italian.

in reference to:

"Unprecedented November 16, 2010 - With an election without precedent Timothy Dolan has become the new president of the Bishops' Conference of the United States. For the first time was not elected vice president, in this case Bishop Gerald F. Kicanas of Tucson in Arizona, but his main "opponent", Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York."
- Palazzo Apostolico - Diario Vaticano Paul Rodari »Blog Archive» Unprecedented (view on Google Sidewiki)

Dolan, Kurtz elected

Note by Marc Aupiais

Dolan is new USCCB US Bishops' president- Archbishop Kurtz is vice president. In the first vote Kicanas (alleged Paedo-friend-bishop) has 104 votes. Dolan 84 Chupat 20. Fortunately something turned it around and Dolan won the third vote. The Bishops were using electronic voting which is new. Dolan is loved by media and the church alike. He was the perfect choice to head the United States' bishops.

From an initial google search Kurtz also seems a good choice.

As much as moves by Cardinal Ratzinger at the beginning of this century to stop sex abuse circles in the Catholic church (despite still encountering opposition from John Paul II), this vote- while so close- sends the message that the inexcusable and utterly depraved abuse of the weak is worthy of hell- not the protection of the church.

SNAP who were protesting the expected vote for alleged paedophile friend bishop will certainly be pleased- hopefully they and their friends at the New York Times will decide to actually note a victory over the foundations of evil!

Dolan or Kicanas

If Kicanas wins- church will send message allowing paedophilia is acceptable!

Pray alleged Paedo-Bishop doesn't head the US bishops- he's likely to

Note by Marc Aupiais

If tradition is followed the current vice president of the USCCB will be the next president of the US bishops. We must all pray that THAT MAN does not get in.

If secular and Catholic news are anything to go by- while Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) is the best ally of the weak and abused minors- the vice president (second in charge) of the USCCB is his alter ego.

Of all the bishops outside of jail who might have been guilty of complicity in sex abuse it is this man. SNAP and many other organisations have slammed the man- hinting at the publicity nightmare to come. The man is endorsed by the Rainbow Sash movement, and most of the worst heterodox Catholic movements.

If children are to be safe in church, men like him should be defrocked- not voted in charge of one of the most influential bishops' conferences in the world.

When Notre Dame arrested dozens of pro-life protesters for just being on campus to protest its support of radically pro-abortionist Barack Obama- this is one bishop who increased his support of the Notre Dame "Catholic" tertiary education system via feeder schools.

The bishops are voting RIGHT NOW!

Save Asia Bibi

From AsiaNews:

"15/11/2010
PAKISTAN
Your signature to save Asia Bibi and Pakistan
by Bernardo Cervellera
An online petition (to be sent to AsiaNews, or directly to the President of Pakistan) for the revocation of the death sentence for a Christian woman sentenced to hang for blasphemy. But we are also asking for the cancellation or overhaul of the blasphemy law, which is destroying harmony and development in Pakistan.Rome (AsiaNews) – At our reader's request,
AsiaNews has decided to launch an international petition to be sent to President Asif Zardari to save the life of Asia Bibi, who was sentenced to hanging for blasphemy.
AsiaNews is also asking President Zardari to cancel or change the unjust blasphemy law, which kills many innocent victims and destroys coexistence in the country. We are asking you o support this initiative by sending a message to the following email:
 
saveasiabibi@asianews.itOr you can send a message directly to the Pakistani President:

publicmail@president.gov.pkOur campaign is one of many being launched in Italy (with Tv2000), Pakistan, India and the United States.

Asia Bibi, a Christian woman of 45, mother of five children, was sentenced to death for blasphemy on November 7 last. A Punjab court in ruled that the woman, a farm worker, offended the Prophet Mohammed. But in reality, Asia Bibi was first insulted as "impure" (because not-Islamic), then forced to defend her Christian faith in the face of pressure from other Muslim labourers. The husband of one of them, the local imam, decided to launch charges and denounce the woman, who was first beaten, then imprisoned and finally, after one year, sentenced to death.

Asia Bibi and her husband Ashiq Masih have decided to appeal to overturn the ruling. Meanwhile, the mother now faces months of imprisonment at the mercy of prison guards or some fanatic who could kill her under the misguided belief that he is giving glory to Allah.

Up until now, the blasphemy law had not led to an execution of any accused or convicted. But 33 people charged with blasphemy were killed in prison by guards, or in the vicinity of the court. The latest such case involved two Protestant Christians, Pastor Emmanuel and his brother Rashid Sajjad, shot at point blank range as they left the court in Faisalabad on 19 July. However we can group these deaths with those killed in the massacres of entire villages, in Gojra, Korian, Kasur, Sangla Hill, where hundreds of houses belonging to Christians were burned and where women and children were killed or burned alive, just because one member of the village had been accused of blasphemy.

It is now startlingly clear that this law has become a tool in the hands of fundamentalists that pit Muslims against Christians in order to measure the extent of their power over Pakistani society. It is also clear that almost all the accusations of blasphemy are born from envy, revenge, competition, and that the arrest of the accused is but the first step to allow the expropriation of land, looting and theft.

We desperately want to save Asia Bibi. But we can not content ourselves with this alone. We must strive so that this law, defined by the Pakistanis themselves as "obscene", is changed or better yet, revoked. It was desired by the dictator Zia ul-Haq in 86, in exchange for the Islamic community's support. But in doing so he laid the foundation for the destruction of Pakistan. This country, founded as a secular republic and neutral toward religion, has become an Islamic state that kills its own people, destroys its own social fabric and is of major concern to the international community.

The blasphemy law has become a sword of Damocles over every person's head and especially those belonging to minorities, who are paying dearly; Christians, Ahmadis, Hindus, Muslims but also Shiites and Sunnis.

By eliminating this law - or at least curbing it – new impetus will be given to interfaith coexistence in Pakistan, to democracy and development. This will also give greater breadth to security and the international community, which views the spread of Taliban rule in a country that has nuclear weapons with concern.

We believe that the only bulwark to the growth of fundamentalism is to ensure equal coexistence between Christians and Muslims. For this reason we ask for the life of Asia Bibi to be saved. And with this we ask, we hope that Pakistan may also be saved."

Sunday, November 14, 2010

Cover Your Face or Lose a Government Grant.

c.f.

Cover Your Face or Lose a Government Grant.


http://blogs.canoe.ca/corenscomment/consider-this/cover-your-face-or-lose-a-government-grant/?sms_ss=blogger&at_xt=4cdf3b8d44a61acf,0



Editor's note: "

Cover Your Face or Lose a Government Grant.


2010/11/14 06:20:17AM


Our Canadian correspondent links to an opinion piece by a controversial Canadian columnist, who suggests Canadian dress laws which allow the covering of the face, in any and all circumstances, leave women more open to kidnapping. Canada like South Africa is a multicultural society.





South African Catholic News Service: Twitter|Facebook|Facebook Discuss|CAF|YouTube|UStream News|UStream Editorial | Email


As an internationally collaborative: initiative to provide a more transparent, accurate view of the world: This service is brought to you by the Scripturelink Search Engine (quotations, or confers in this service/initiative, are provided to give perspective independently, or reference some external sources: and do not imply collaboration, or any kind of affiliation, or co-operation with other services, or initiatives, which are quoted or noted in articles)


Check the accuracy, and perspectives of our contents via the above listed search engine: against other "Catholic" services

Friday, November 5, 2010

Obama is leaving the country

On the two hundred million a day stat- from Sheila of Inforumblog writing for Mercator

"
11:24:29 AM


November

04

Obama is leaving the country

by Sheila Liaugminas | 4 Nov 2010 | 

tags: Obama India trip

Presidents do have business overseas often enough, but the timing and details of this one are particularly intriguing. So why aren't media covering it yet?

Maybe they're still reeling from the elections and scrambling to keep up with those nail-biters that haven't come in yet and looking for ways to map out their reporting going forward under the new realities.

But speaking of maps….President Obama is going across the world and taking several thousand of his closest friends, staffers, and other associates with him. In spite of the need to do some business in India, it's just so unseemly to do it this way.

There's a groundswell of anger in the US over the high cost of Barack Obama's trip to India this weekend. The sentiment stems from reports that the president and his entourage of about 3,000 officials, business people and security personnel will spend an estimated $200 million a day when he visits India for four days, beginning Saturday.

That cost figure has been disputed, but frankly the picture of 3,000 people on dozens of planes descending on Mumbai and taking over whole hotels with the president is just jarring. Or, as veteran Democratic strategist Lanny Davis put it, meekly, when pressed for a response to this junket…"The optics of this are not good right now."

Maybe that's it. The inability to spin this extravaganza as even remotely reasonable in scope is keeping the press from touching it. Until they're forced to, from locations on the ground during that journey.

And speaking of on the ground……Indian officials are reportedly clearing the areas Obama will travel of coconuts.

He leaves the country tomorrow. The optics ought to be interesting… "
http://www.mercatornet.com/sheila_liaugminas/view/8232/

US President leaving for India to sell weapons of war

Note by Marc Aupiais



To add to the story, not only has the Obama administration seemingly done away with efforts at enforceable de-nuclear-ization treaty efforts with Russia. He is in India, the sworn enemy of American ally Pakistan- to sell billions in conventional weaponry.



Among nations which use American military equipment are the likes of Egypt. Most top American military machines are far from restricted to their Nato alliance, including F16 fighter jets, and other weapons easily sold across the globe.



Obama arrives just after US elections where economic conservatives were handed victories over Obama's reckless spending and leftest healthcare legislation. He arrives with an unusually massive state sponsored party of 3 000 (Three Thousand) advisors and close friends, costing an estimated 2 00 000 000 (Two Hundred Million) US Dollars a day. The US Reserve, under the dusk but not lame duck majorities Obama still holds until next year, has launched another stimulus package of about 600 000 000 000 (Six hundred billion) US Dollars, despite little proof that the first two stimulus packages worked, and international observers claiming it the equivalent of a bankrupt man remorgaging their house a third time.



The greatest problem according to the US voters, is that Obama has massively indebted the country to lenders like China, without any visible improvement in the economy, while economies like Germany, which made a conservative response to the crises, are now coming out of them.



Obama is seen as a massive over-spender, and incompetent in finance and economics, with much of his team having quit or being made to leave just two years into his radical far left presidency.



Catholic news services are complaining that Catholic colleges, and universities and hospitals risk closure under laws Barack Obama has pushed through which attempt destroy conscience protection for pro-life and pro-family individuals.



Obama's healthcare legislation opens the door for taxpayer funding for expensive contraceptive measure such as surgery, according to Fox News, which approved of the idea. It also directly mandates funding of abortion. The presidential order asking that this part of the legislation be ignored- according to Catholic legal experts, will not stand up in court.

Monday, November 1, 2010

Foreign Islamist militants attack Iraqi stock exchange, then Syrian Catholic Church in Iraq

Article by Marc Aupiais

(SACNS Asia and Middle East; SACNS Audio-Visual article; Social Justice South Africa)


français | English | Afrikaans | español

Download/Stream the audio of : Massive Casualties as Syrian Cathlic church attacked in Iraq
​​
​​
​​​​​Massive casualties as Syrian Catholic church attacked by Islamic Special Interest ​​terror tactics utilising group|​
​​
​01 | November (11th Month) | 2010 AD​
​​
Article by Marc Aupiais
​​
​A Syrian Catholic church was held hostage in Iraq, resulting in dozens of deaths ​​and more injuries. It is uncertain if the majority of deaths occurred before or after ​​police stormed the church, having reportedly not attempted to negotiate with ​​hostage takers, reportedly belonging to an Islamic Special Interests group, which ​​some in the West link to Al Qaeda.​
​​
​47 people are dead, and dozens more that is: at least about 60 (mostly women) ​​injured, after militants, claimed as foreign by local Iraqi press, stormed the Iraqi ​​stock exchange, and after this, a Syrian Catholic church: Our Lady of Deliverance ​​parish. The militants, on taking the parish, killed the priest instantly, and took ​​about 100 people within the church hostage according to reports. When police ​​stormed the building without any reported negotiations, suicide bombers set off ​​their bombs and threw grenades at police according to reports. A local Iraqi ​​television station claims an attacker phoned them claiming to be part of the ​​Islamic State of Iraq, an Islamic special interests group, allegedly linked to Al ​​Qaeda, and allegedly capable of using terror tactics.​
​​
​Islamic State of Iraq, also is possibly the source of a text on an Islamic militant ​​website, claiming to be from the group and giving the alleged reasons for the ​​attack.​
​​
​The text referred to two women who allegedly converted from Coptic Christianity ​​to Islam, in order to divorce their husbands in Egypt, before disappearing. They ​​reportedly reappeared claiming no conversion, before allegedly being spirited ​​away to distant monasteries. People converting from Islam have previously ​​alleged being in danger of life and limb for the move. The Islamic special interests ​​group, has asked the Vatican to "release" the women, whom it says it considers ​​victims of Christian oppression, and to be Muslim. It claims the women are being ​​held by Christians.​
​​
​Whether the church was the intended target of the militants, or the stock ​​exchange, is uncertain. Attacks against Christians in Iraq have been ​​commonplace since an American invasion disposed of former President Saddam ​​Hussein, imposing a new regime upon Iraq with the help of a northern tribe of ​​former separatists. Iraq has asked foreign nations not to accept Christian ​​refugees due to a skills draining caused by what some players in the region ​​consider a genocide against minority Christians in the country.​
​​
​Before Republican US President George W. Bush invaded Iraq, the Vatican ​​warned of such a potential genocide, asking the president not to enter the ​​country. While sectarian violence has been reduced under years of occupation, ​​after an initial spike due to the ending of the Saddam Hussein regime, violence ​​against Christians has only increased. Critics of the current Democratic Party ​​Barack Obama US administration have claimed that early withdrawal of American ​​troops created a power vacuum, endangering westerners and minorities in the ​​majority Islamic and Arab nation.​
​​
​Police on the scene, the Iraqi government, and the US military all give different ​​statistics for casualties, arrests, and the number of militants. About 10 Iraqi police ​​died in storming the church.​
​​
​Attacks against churches, and kidnappings, and murders of Christians are ​​common in Iraq, with Christian groups reported as claiming that the US installed ​​and now elected Iraqi government does little or nothing to protect their basic ​​human interests.​​​
​​
​​



​​​​​Sources:​
​​
​American; Independent of ​​the state; Catholic special ​​interests Source:​
​​
​American Papist/ Catholic ​​Vote Action​
​​
​​
​​
​​​​​​​Terrorists storm Mass in ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Iraq: Murder priest, kill ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​dozens of hostages​
​​
Thomas Peters

01 / 11 | November / 2010
​​
​​
​​
​​
​​
​​
​​​​​sources that are Secular ​​interests coverage.​
​​
​British based Sources:​
​​
​Daily Mail (Independent of ​​the state)​
​​
​​
​​
​​​​​​​Thirty nine killed in ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​hostage bloodbath as ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Iraqi security forces storm ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​militants in Baghdad ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​church​
​​
​​
​​
​​
​​​​​01 / November | 11 / 2010​
​​
​​
​​
​​​​​KATHERINE FAULKNER​
​​
​​
​​
​​​​​​​http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-​​​​​​​​​​​​​​1325481/39-killed-Iraqi-security-forces-storm-​​​​​​​​​​​​​​militants-Baghdad-church.html?ito=feeds-​​​​​​​​​​​​​​newsxml​
​​
​​
​​
​​
​​
​​
​​​​​American based, ​​Independent of the State, ​​Liberal; secular/general ​​interests source​
​​
​AP (ASSOCIATED ​​PRESS)​
​​
​​
​​
​​​​​​​Baghdad church seige ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ends with 47 dead​
​​
​​
​​
​​
​​​​​01 / November | 11 / 2010​
​HAMID AHMED​
​​
​​
​​
​​​​​​​www.msnbc.msn.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​com/id/39935278/ns/world_news-​​​​​​​​​​​​​​mideastn_africa/​​​​​​​​​



Lancet article considers alcohol more dangerous than drugs

(SACNS Europe; SACNS Audio-Visual; Social Justice South Africa)

français | English | Afrikaans | español




Download/Stream Audio Article



​​​​​Lancet Publishes contrary and controversial alcohol/drugs study|​
​​
​01 | November (11th Month) | 2010 AD​
​​
​Article by Marc Aupiais​
​​
​In a controversial article, the Lancet Medical journal has given a platform to David ​​Nutt, a controversial scientist who was fired from the British government for his ​​controversial view that dangerous drugs should be classified as less dangerous ​​than they are by the British government. He has suggested that horse riding is ​​more dangerous than ecstasy use, and was angered when the British government ​​refused to accept some of his more controversial views.​
​​
​The Lancet study considers Alcohol the most dangerous drug in use, 8 times ​​more dangerous than ecstasy. Over a dozen factors were taken into account ​​ranging from lost friendships to damage to the environment, with the acute ​​danger to drugs users themselves only one of many factors. A commentary also ​​appearing in the edition of Lancet noted that the study did not look at cross ​​usage of drugs, but said this was beyond its scope.​
​​
​Professor David Nutt was fired by then home secretary Alan Johnson for ​​demanding ministers listen to the controversial advice of his government Advisory ​​Council on the Misuse of Drugs, which had fronted his views on drugs in a ​​different format, according to the Daily Mail. Professor David Nutt told the BBC ​​that alcohol is a terrible societal ill in his perspective and that this is because it is ​​so available.​
​​
​The direct connection between drugs, violent crime, the Taliban, drug lords, and ​​organized crime has not seemed as important to the Lancet "experts" as Alcohol's ​​negative effects. It also does not seem to note that alcohol when taken in ​​moderate amounts is not extensively dangerous to health, and that there are ​​many forms of alcohol.​
​​
​The study was released just as California considers legalising Cannabis use by ​​the population in general. Cannabis is known to cause schizophrenia in those with ​​genetic predispositions.​
​​
​The study seems to have relied on value judgements in every case made by "the ​​experts". David Nutt, and another scientist who quit after the British parliament ​​had him fired, are two thirds of the authors of the study.​
​​
​CNN, and a BBC blog, appear to have portrayed the Lancet study very ​​favourably. A possible factor in Alcohol's high danger rating is the fact that ​​alcohol is legal and openly used and acceptable in society, while drugs are not. ​​The study is being used by drugs legalization special interests campaigners to ​​attempt to get narcotics legalized, despite the fact the study does nothing to ​​reduce the huge personal harm of using narcotics.​
​​
​While most adults consume alcohol, many with no negative effects, much fewer ​​people regularly take narcotics, giving heed to laws introduced due to high road ​​accidents, deaths, and other preventable societal ills.​​​
​​
​​




Sources:

All sources are Secular.

British Sources:

Daily Mail (Independent of 
the state)
"Alcohol 'more dangerous 
than crack, 
heroin and 
Ecstasy'"
01 / November | 11 / 2010
KATHERINE FAULKNER
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1325472/Alcohol-dangerous-crack-heroin.html#ixzz141ucDMiN
BBC World News (British 
Broadcasting 
Corporation) (Not 
Independent of the state)
"Alcohol 'more harmful than heroin' says Prof David Nutt"
01 / November | 11 / 2010
Staff report
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11660210?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

American, Independent of 
the State, Liberal


C
NN (Central News 
Network

Study: Alcohol 'most 
harmful drug,' followed by 
crack and heroin


01 / November | 11 / 2010
staff report
http://edition.cnn.
com/2010/HEALTH/11/01/alcohol.harm/

Popular Posts - This Week

Popular Posts This Month

Popular Posts | All TIme