Latest

Climate & Globalism

Beckhams ‘irresponsible’ say Greens

8 September 2011

The Beckhams were happy parents when Victoria gave birth to her fourth child this summer, but not everyone was thrilled by the birth of little Harper Seven.

In her article, ‘Beckhams a ‘bad example’ for families‘, Guardian journalist Tracy McVeigh reported that “according to a growing group of campaigners, the birth of their fourth child make the couple bad role models and environmentally irresponsible.”

Mc.Veigh cited the UK-based Optimum Population Trust, whose chief executive, Simon Ross, linked family size to carbon emissions, saying:

“The Beckhams, and others like London mayor Boris Johnson, are very bad role models with their large families. There’s no point in people trying to reduce their carbon emissions and then increasing them 100% by having another child.”

Forget that Europe is approaching a demographic crisis. Forget that the birth rates in the Western world are dipping below replacement level, while the Muslim populations continue to reproduce at unprecedented rates. For the virulent voices of the population control lobby, there is only one reality worth considering and it is this: less people = less polluters.

At least, that is what I argued in a recent article I wrote for the Charles Colson Center titled ‘Fourth Child Furor.’ In the article I explored some of the proposals that are being put forward for reducing the ‘surplus population’, including the following:

Dr. Barry Walters, a professor of obstetrics at the University of Western Australia, came up with an idea a few years ago. He suggested that those who refuse to use contraception should be levied with a climate-change tax. In a 2007 article in the Medical Journal of Australia,Dr. Walters proposed that such a tax be assessed on all couples having more than two children. He suggested an initial fine of $5,000 for each “extra” child when born, with another $800 assessed every year thereafter. However, parents could redeem themselves by using contraceptives or undergoing sterilization procedures, for which they would receive carbon credits.

Simon Ross, chief executive of the UK-based Optimum Population Trust, floated a similar idea in the furore over the Beckham’s fourth child.

Such ideas are nothing new, as Salvo Magazine has shown in their article ‘Baby Freeze: Is Population Control the New Solution to Global Warming?‘ Moreover, Salvo Magazine warned, what is at stake here is a “new religion of science” that “sees mankind as the curse, and scientists as the prophets pointing out the path of redemption. Like the prophets of old, the modern scientist-prophets know that salvation can never occur without sacrifice. The sacrifice they are calling for is simple: We must become fewer and poorer. Only then will the world will be saved from the environmental Armageddon that is fast approaching as a result of ‘reckless breeding’ (a term employed by Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger).”

The larger issue here is that radical environmentalists will stop at nothing when following through the implications of their most cherished presuppositions. This even includes an attempt to impose guilt on those who, like the Beckhams, decide to have more children than the Western average.

SOROS FUNDS ‘BOMB LIBYA’ POLICY

Stephen

18 August 2011

With full attribution to World Net Daily:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=333897

In their Article: Brace for another U.S.-Mideast war. First Libya, now sources say next country warned of NATO attack. . . George Soros-funded doctrine with White House ties

The Libya bombings have been widely regarded as a test of a military doctrine called Responsibility to Protect.In his address to the nation in April explaining the NATO campaign in Libya, Obama cited the doctrine as the main justification for U.S. and international airstrikes against Libya.

Responsibility to Protect, or Responsibility to Act, as cited by Obama, is a set of principles, now backed by the United Nations, based on the idea that sovereignty is not a privilege but a responsibility that can be revoked if a country is accused of “war crimes,” “genocide,” “crimes against humanity” or “ethnic cleansing.”The term “war crimes” has at times been indiscriminately used by various U.N.-backed international bodies, including the International Criminal Court, or ICC, which applied it to Israeli anti-terror operations in the Gaza Strip. There has been fear the ICC could be used to prosecute U.S. troops.The Global Centre for Responsibility to Protect is the world’s leading champion of the military doctrine.

As WND reported, Soros is a primary funder and key proponent of the Global Centre for Responsibility to Protect.

Several of the doctrine’s main founders sit on boards with Soros.

WND reported the committee that devised the Responsibility to Protect doctrine included Arab League Secretary General Amre Moussa as well as Palestinian legislator Hanan Ashrawi, a staunch denier of the Holocaust who long served as the deputy of late Palestinian Liberation Organization leader Yasser Arafat.

Also the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy has a seat on the advisory board of the 2001 commission that originally founded Responsibility to Protect.

The commission is called the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. It invented the term “responsibility to protect” while defining its guidelines.

The Carr Center is a research center concerned with human rights located at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.

Samantha Power, the National Security Council special adviser to Obama on human rights, was Carr’s founding executive director and headed the institute at the time it advised in the founding of Responsibility to Protect.

With Power’s center on the advisory board, the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty first defined the Responsibility to Protect doctrine.

Power reportedly heavily influenced Obama in consultations leading to the decision to bomb Libya.

Two of the global group’s advisory board members, Ramesh Thakur and Gareth Evans, are the original founders of the doctrine, with the duo even coining the term “responsibility to protect.”

As WND reported, Soros’ Open Society Institute is a primary funder and key proponent of the Global Centre for Responsibility to Protect. Also, Thakur and Evans sit on multiple boards with Soros.

Soros’ Open Society is one of only three nongovernmental funders of the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect. Government sponsors include Australia, Belgium, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, Rwanda and the U.K.

(Note: Ask your MP – Email address HERE – to ask the appropriate Secretary of State how much money the UK has given to the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, from which budget is has come, what the grant(s) is intended to achieve and how this will be monitored.

There is an in-depth study on the funding of Responsibility to Protect HERE and more on how Soros switched from being pro- to anti-Gadaffi and the implications of R2P on Israel HERE)

Board members of the group include former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, former Ireland President Mary Robinson and South African activist Desmond Tutu. Robinson and Tutu have recently made solidarity visits to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip as members of a group called The Elders, which includes former President Jimmy Carter.

Annan once famously stated, “State sovereignty, in its most basic sense, is being redefined – not least by the forces of globalization and international co-operation. States are … instruments at the service of their peoples and not vice versa.”

Soros: Right to ‘penetrate nation-states’

Soros himself outlined the fundamentals of Responsibility to Protect in a 2004 Foreign Policy magazine article entitled “The People’s Sovereignty: How a New Twist on an Old Idea Can Protect the World’s Most Vulnerable Populations.”

In the article, Soros said “true sovereignty belongs to the people, who in turn delegate it to their governments.”

“If governments abuse the authority entrusted to them and citizens have no opportunity to correct such abuses, outside interference is justified,” Soros wrote. “By specifying that sovereignty is based on the people, the international community can penetrate nation-states’ borders to protect the rights of citizens.

“In particular, the principle of the people’s sovereignty can help solve two modern challenges: the obstacles to delivering aid effectively to sovereign states, and the obstacles to global collective action dealing with states experiencing internal conflict.”

More George Soros ties

“Responsibility” founders Evans and Thakur served as co-chairmen with Vartan Gregorian, president of Carnegie Corp. charitable foundation, on the advisory board of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, which invented the term “responsibility to protect.”

In his capacity as co-chairman, Evans also played a pivotal role in initiating the fundamental shift from sovereignty as a right to “sovereignty as responsibility.”

Evans presented Responsibility to Protect at the July 23, 2009, United Nations General Assembly, which was convened to consider the principle.

Thakur is a fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation, which is in partnership with an economic institute founded by Soros.

Soros is on the executive board of the International Crisis Group, a “crisis management organization” for which Evans serves as president-emeritus.

WND previously reported how the group has been petitioning for the U.S. to normalize ties with the Muslim Brotherhood, the main opposition in Egypt, where longtime U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak was recently toppled.

Aside from Evans and Soros, the group includes on its board Egyptian opposition leader Mohamed ElBaradei, as well as other personalities who champion dialogue with Hamas, a violent offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood.

WND also reported the crisis group has petitioned for the Algerian government to cease “excessive” military activities against al-Qaida-linked groups and to allow organizations seeking to create an Islamic state to participate in the Algerian government.

Soros’ own Open Society Institute has funded opposition groups across the Middle East and North Africa, including organizations involved in the current chaos.

‘One World Order’

WND reported that doctrine founder Thakur recently advocated for a “global rebalancing” and “international redistribution” to create a “New World Order.”

In a piece last March in the Ottawa Citizen newspaper, “Toward a new world order,” Thakur wrote, “Westerners must change lifestyles and support international redistribution.”

He was referring to a United Nations-brokered international climate treaty in which he argued, “Developing countries must reorient growth in cleaner and greener directions.”
In the opinion piece, Thakur then discussed recent military engagements and how the financial crisis has impacted the U.S.

“The West’s bullying approach to developing nations won’t work anymore – global power is shifting to Asia,” he wrote.

“A much-needed global moral rebalancing is in train,” he added.

Thakur continued: “Westerners have lost their previous capacity to set standards and rules of behaviour for the world. Unless they recognize this reality, there is little prospect of making significant progress in deadlocked international negotiations.”

Thakur contended “the demonstration of the limits to U.S. and NATO power in Iraq and Afghanistan has left many less fearful of ‘superior’ western power.”

Show George Soros who is boss! Join Christian Voice right now:

EU PROMOTING GAY RIGHTS IN AFRICA

Stephen

15 August 2011

Please sign our PETITION to Save Africa from Sodomy! A 300,000 Euro grant for the promotion of gay rights in Cameroon has led to a diplomatic rift, Christian Voice has discovered. It predates David Cameron’s declaration, exposed on this blog, that he will use British aid to promote homosexuality in Africa and the Caribbean. The European Union gave the grant in January to a group of pro-gay organisations led by Cameroon’s Association to Defend Homosexuals (ADEFHO).But Cameroon’s Foreign Minister Henri Eyebe Ayissi immediately summoned the head of the EU delegation in Cameroon, Raoul Mateus Paula, for a ten minute meetingto protest against the funding of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) groups that “violate the laws of Cameroon.”The award of the grant has also prompted calls for the arrest of lawyer Alice Nkom who founded ADEFHO. However, it appears the Cameroon Government may itself have recognised ADEFHO as long ago as 2003.

The grant award will no doubt make Alice Nkom wealthy and increase her visibility but if anything it has created a more hostile environment for homosexuals in Cameroon. In January, three men were arrested in Cameroon and charged with committing homosexual acts.

In August 2011, another three were arrested for acts of gross indecency in a car.

PRAY that Almighty God will reveal the extent of the European Union’s attempts to undermine Christian morality in Africa. Ask your MEP (Find him/her here with email address) how much money the EU has given to Africa for sexual rights and reproductive rights over the last ten years.

HOW TO WRITE TO YOUR MP

Stephen

12 February 2011

: Houses of Parliament

These are the rules for writing any letter or email to your MP:

1 Ask your MP to ask a question of the minister responsible. This ensures you will get a reply. Never write to a minister direct. It makes your MP look redundant. Kill two birds with one stone.
2 Be precise. Do not ramble. State the matter in the first paragraph and make each point concisely. I always try to say everything on one well-spaced page. If you go to three pages, you have lost the game.
3 Be patient. Assume your MP knows nothing about the case, so explain carefully (but precisely!)
4 Be accurate. Do your own research or rely on a group like Christian Voice who check everything.
5 Be legible. If your handwriting is not up to it, type it or email and spell-check.
6 Be calm. No ranting and raving, no over-the-top comments, no snide remarks.
7 Ask your MP to agree with you if the occasion arises. This could be your question (see 1).
8 Keep to one subject. If two things are on your mind, write two letters, a couple of days apart.

Letters are always written to your MP at: House of Commons, LONDON, SW1A 0AA

Emails can also be sent. You need to know either your MP’s name or your Parliamentary Constituency. Both of these, together with email addresses may be found here on the Parliament website. If you know neither your MP nor your constituency you can simply type your postcode in a box. In fact, that is the easiest way to get staight to his/her contact details.

Britain Begins 2010 as a Vasal of the EU

Robin

15 January 2010

“To the liberalism they profess, I prefer the liberties we enjoy; to the Rights of Man, the rights of Englishmen.” — Disraeli

As Britain begins a new decade, it does so on a radically different footing. 1010 marks the beginning of Britain being a vassal state to the powerful EU.

It began on 1 December, 2009 when the Lisbon treaty came into force, removing the remaining vestiges of British sovereignty.

Intended as a replacement to the rejected EU constitution, the treaty transfered vast swabs of power from Parliament to Brussels . It also stripped Britain ’s right to veto new EU laws in more than 40 different policy areas.

The treaty also granted new powers to the European Commission, European Parliament and European Court of Justice.

Defenders of the treaty argued that it would create a more powerful Europe . By establishing the first president of Europe and a foreign minister and a diplomatic corps, the treaty paves the way for a European empire not seen since the days of Charlemagne.

The purpose of the treaty was to streamline EU institutions, divesting local governments of decision making ability in order to achieve a greater centralization of power. The 250-plus page treaty also allows more laws to be passed by a simple majority instead of unanimous consent.

LABOUR BREAKS ITS PROMISE

In order to pass, the Lisbon treaty had to be ratified by all 27 member states. Although the treaty was rejected by Irish voters in June 2008, it received overwhelming support in a second referendum in the Irish Republic on 2 October 2009.

The people of Britain , on the other hand, were not given the chance to vote on the treaty, despite the Labour Government having promised a referendum. Indeed, Labour won the 2005 election largely on a manifesto pledge to give the British people a referendum on the treaty.

Tory Euro MP Daniel Hannan said: “It is appalling, demeaning, disgraceful that such a thing should have been done without popular consent and in the absence of the referendum that all three parties had promised.”

LISBON TREATY IN CONTEXT

Reprinted with permission from Soeren Kern’s article ‘ Lisbon Treaty: Europe ’s Slow-Moving Coup d’État’)

The EU has its origins in the Treaty of Rome (1957), which gave birth to the European Economic Community (EEC). The EEC, also known as the “Common Market,” was a customs union. EEC member countries agreed to dismantle all tariff barriers over a 12-year transitional period, and over time a common tariff was also established for all products coming in from third countries.

The Single European Act (1987) extended the scope of the EEC to include not only the free circulation of goods, but also the free movement of persons, capital and services. The Act established a genuine common market, but it also codified European Political Cooperation, which was the forerunner of the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP).

The fall of the Berlin Wall (1989) and the reunification of Germany (1990) led French President François Mitterrand, who feared a return of German hegemony, to search for a way to permanently anchor Germany within European institutions. Together with German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, who was keen to relieve misgivings in Paris and London about a reunified Germany , Mitterrand worked to transform the whole of Europe into an all-encompassing union.

In 1989, an Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) established monetary and economic union. In 1990, another IGC was called to study the constitution of a political union. Then, in 1992, following three years of closed-door debate which ignored public demands for more transparency, the Treaty of the European Union (also known as the Treaty of Maastricht) came into being.

The Maastricht Treaty modified the Treaty of Rome and the Single European Act by moving far beyond the limits of a common market toward political union. The Maastricht Treaty also changed the official name of the EEC to the European Union.

The Maastricht Treaty created three pillars, one of which enables joint actions in foreign policy and military matters, and another one which enhances co-operation in the fight against crime. The Maastricht Treaty also established a European Central Bank (ECB), fixed exchange rates and introduced a single currency called the euro.

In 1998, the Treaty of Amsterdam modified parts of the Maastricht Treaty, again with no public participation. The main change introduced by the Amsterdam Treaty was the creation of a new position called the High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy. The treaty also provided the EU with a common security policy, including the gradual formulation of a common defence policy.

In 2001, the Treaty of Nice was designed (once again without public input) to reform the institutional structure of the EU, with a view toward eastward expansion.

Fast forward to 2009, and the stated aim of the Lisbon Treaty is to “complete the process started by the Treaty of Amsterdam and by the Treaty of Nice with a view to enhancing the efficiency and democratic legitimacy of the Union and to improving the coherence of its action.”…

The Lisbon Treaty is the stunning culmination of more than 50 years of European economic and political integration, a process that has resulted in the systematic erosion of democracy and democratic accountability in Europe .”

READ: Genesis 11; Proverbs 11:21.

PRAY: Genesis 11:6-7 shows that the confusion of the nations (and, by implication, the existence of separate nation states) is God’s way of restraining the effects of man’s fallenness. However, the Lisbon Treaty, like the entire European project, fails to reckon with the doctrine of the fall. Like the Tower of Babel , it is based on the faulty foundation that fallen man can achieve utopia by separate peoples simply working together.

The Utopian aspirations can be seen in the way that defenders of the EU, like apologists for ancient Rome and Nazism, point out that their empire is making one new humanity out of previously warring pluralities, ushering in a new world order of peace. Moreover, they often describe the European project as the final stage in an eschatological climax triumphing over the forces of nationalism, war, self-interest and isolation in order to usher in an age of peace and prosperity. Unhampered by the reality of man’s sin and foolishness, they present a vision of eschatological progress echoing the pretensions of the Babel architects.

Arthur Seyss-Inquart, the Austrian Minister for Security and Interior, made these utopian aspirations explicit in 1938 when he said that, “Above and beyond the concept of the nation-state, the idea of a new community will transform the living space given us all by history into a new spiritual realm. . . . The new Europe of solidarity and co-operation among all its people…will find an assured foundation and rapidly increasing prosperity once national economic barriers are removed. . . . Nations and human beings only develop to the full when they participate actively in a great common destiny.”

Gordon Brown echoed Seyss-Inquart’s comments this Spring when he said, “I think the new world order is emerging, and with it the foundations of a new and progressive era of international co-operation.”

Despite these utopian hopes, God promises to judge all empires built on the sand of such arrogance (Prov. 11:21). He did not spare Babel or Rome and neither will he spare the new EU superstate. God’s answer to the world’s problems is not a resurrection of Babel but Pentecost (Acts 2), in which separate people groups became united through acknowledging the Lordship of Jesus. Empires that are built on any other foundation than an explicit recognition of Christ’s Lordship will crumble.

WRITE: in a democracy it is crucial that constituents hold their representatives accountable, especially when those representatives have lied to them. It is therefore essential that lots of citizens write to their MPs and complain about the way Government has reneged on its promise of a referendum. Also share with your MP the words of Immanuel Kant who warned of the consequences of European integration when he said: “The idea of the law of nations presupposes the distinction between independent states. Although this is a state of war…it is still, according to reason, better than the fusion of those states by means of a hierarchy of power culminating in a universal monarchy. Laws which are passed for a large area lose their vigour, and such a soulless despotism, after it has hollowed out the kernel of goodness, ultimately collapses into anarchy.”

See how to join Christian Voice by clicking below (Link does not commit you to join):

‘Copenhagen Must Fail’ Says Christian Group

Stephen

11 December 2009

A leading Christian lobby group has said it is calling on fellow-believers to pray against the Copenhagen Climate Change talks.

They are also asking Christians who have been urging others to pray for an agreement to look beyond the headlines and at the plans in the UN document to set up a world government to enforce its provisions. (Link to the Copenhagen draft treaty.)

It is the first time in an international treaty that the word ‘government’ has been used of an globalised enforcement agency

Page 18 of the treaty proclaims, “The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following: (a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. (b) The Convention’s financial mechanism will include a multilateral climate change fund including five windows. (c) The Convention’s facilitative mechanism will include…”

‘COP’ stands for Conference Of the Parties. It is the highest body of the United Nations Climate Change Convention, consisting of environment ministers of the various nations. The COP will have authority to extract and distribute the funds which the richer nations will pay to the poorer, and enforce the treaty amongst all the nations, bypassing national parliaments.

The payments to third world nations will flow through the World Bank, which establishes interest rates on loans it will issue to underdeveloped countries. The treaty discloses the World Bank’s role on page 39 and again on pages 67 and 129. With this “front” of climate change, and saving the environment, the World Bank and the small group of the bank’s private owners, will profit.

The President of the World Bank, Robert Zoellick, openly admitted its role in a plan to eliminate national sovereignty and impose a global government during a speech on the eve of the G20 summit at the end of March. He said, “If leaders are serious about creating new global responsibilities or governance, let them start by modernizing multilateralism to empower the WTO (World Trade Organization), the IMF (International Monetary Fund), and the World Bank Group to monitor national policies.”

Last year, Henry Kissinger, who has held numerous positions in several administrations from Richard Nixon to George H. W. Bush, told an interviewer last year, “There is a need for a new world order. I think that at the end of this administration, with all its turmoil, and at the beginning of the next, we might actually witness the creation of a new order.”

In April, at the G20 Summit, Prime Minster Gordon Brown said, “From today we will together manage the process of globalisation.” “Today’s decisions, of course, will not immediately solve the crisis. But we have begun the process by which it will be solved,” Mr Brown said. “I think a new world order is emerging with the foundation of a new progressive era of international co-operation,”

Christian Voice National Director Stephen Green said today:

‘I am all for saving energy and for the UK to lead on environmentally-friendly policies. But at the domestic level a new breed of eco-Nazis appears to be using the issue of climate change to snoop on and manipulate the people and enlarge their own empire. And internationally it is now clear that it is providing an opportunity for a fledgling world government to be set up.

‘The Bible, in Psalm 2 and in Revelation, speaks of a global conspiracy to set up an Antichrist New World Order. The Council of Europe brazenly used Brueghel’s painting of the building of the tower of Babel to portray the people of Europe finishing off what Nimrod failed to do after God scattered the people and confused their language. The slogan was: ‘Many Tongues, One Voice.’ The European Parliament building in Strasbourg was deliberately modelled on the tower of Babel . There is an arrogance about our present-day leaders.’

Psalm 2 says: ‘The kings of the earth set themselves and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and against his anointed.’ Banker David Rockefeller, the leading light behind the Bilderberg group of secretive internationalist, said in 1994: ‘All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.’

Stephen Green continued: ‘Climate change is the perfect ‘major crisis’ which the globalist bankers have been waiting for. For them it is a money-making opportunity and a chance to impose anti-life secularist policies on third-world nations. I am not denying climate change is a major issue, ranking alongside the destruction of the Christian foundation of the western nations in its impact, but the glee with which the One-World Government advocates have jumped on it should make Christians stop and think.

‘There has to be a better way, and Christians need to look further than the newspaper headlines. We need to pray against an agreement which would benefit no-one but the bankers and advance the ambitions of those who want to rebuild a modern tower of Babel .’

Charles Speaks for the Poor on GM Crops

Robin

14 August 2008

Support for the Prince of Wales has come from a Christian prayer and lobby group over the matter of GM crops.

Charles in GM ‘disaster’ warning http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7557644.stm

Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice, said today:

‘Prince Charles’s timely intervention should be heeded. Firstly, the development and cultivation of GM crops is not about helping food supply, it is not being done for altruistic motives, it is being carried out by multi-national companies for money, and it will lead to strangulation of the means of production, putting poorer farmers out of business.

‘Secondly, the environmental disaster His Royal Highness predicts is as a direct result of mankind playing God, interfering in systems about which we can never have anything more than flawed and limited knowledge.

‘It is not enough for the Government to say that safety is their top priority. Who can trust them, especially as the employees of Monsanto and other agrochemical companies rotate around as Government advisors?

‘The comment from the anti-monarchy group “Republic” is the oddest response, saying “Prince Charles is quickly making his position as heir to the throne untenable with his meddling in politics.” No he isn’t, he is speaking up for respect for the complexity of our environment, against man’s arrogance, and for the world’s poor. I guess “Republic” would not understand any of that.

‘In the past, Christian Voice has not been slow to criticise the Prince of Wales and his sons for activities which have brought their family into disrepute. But in this matter, the more the Prince of Wales articulates what is on the hearts of ordinary people and in the heart of God, the better.’

Met Becomes Private Security Force for Olympic Torch

Stephen

6 April 2008

Sir Ian Blair was criticised today for allowing the Metropolitan Police to become an additional private security force for the Olympic Torch procession.

The Commissioner of the Met said in a television interview that the Metropolitan Police would ‘do everything’ to protect the Olympic Torch procession from being disrupted by demonstrators.

Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice, said this afternoon:

‘Sir Ian Blair should not have provided the Olympic authorities with an additional free private security firm in Metropolitan Police uniforms. The Chinese security should have been increased instead of presenting Londoners with a bill for something totally outside their control.

‘Instead, the police should allow protests and merely keep the way clear for the procession. It should be the responsibility of the Olympic authorities to provide protection for the misguided celebrities taking part.’

In the past, Christian Voice has protested outside the Chinese Embassy against the Chinese policy of forced abortions and the Chinese Government’s treatment of Christians. Christians who are not members of state-registered churches are, like Falun Gong followers, subjected to summary arrest, imprisonment and torture by a regime which cannot tolerate what it cannot control.

Stephen Green said: ‘The last time we held a witness outside the Chinese Embassy, the Met had to be forced to allow it by the threat of court action. The British police should not allow themselves to be used as a private security force to save the blushes of one of the most despotic and anti-Christian regimes on God’s earth. ‘

Join Christian Voice

Christian Voice is a prophetic ministry in the ‘forthtelling’ sense for those Christians who are fed up with the way things are, have had enough of secularist politicians imposing wickedness on the rest of us and who are not satisfied with trying to get ‘Christian influence in a secular world’ because they know ‘The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof; the world and they that dwell therein’ (Psalm 24:1). If you want instead to lift high the Crown Rights of the King of kings, you have found the right place!

Membership Application

Yes, I/we wish to join Christian Voice. (Husband and wife may join as one)
I/we unreservedly support the aims of Christian Voice and agree with the Statement of Faith.
Please send me my free copy of Britain in Sin, which lifts the lid on the unrighteous legislation of the past fifity years and its devastating social consequences, my free copy of Understanding Islam, which will tell me all I need to know about Islam, my free copy of Labelling Halal, which exposes the secret sale of Islamic meat, and the latest Christian Voice newsletter, full of confidential prayer targets, which never goes up on the web.
I/we agree to computer storage of all information provided, solely for the use of Christian Voice.

Aims of Christian Voice

To uphold Christianity as the Faith of the United Kingdom.
To be a voice for Biblical values in law and public policy.
To defend and support traditional family life.
At all times to rely humbly on the blessing of Almighty God.

Statement of Faith

We believe in one creator God, eternally existent in three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, as stated in the historic creeds of the Christian church.
We acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord over all creation.
We believe the Holy Bible to be the inspired, infallible, written Word of God to whose precepts, given for the good of nations and individuals, all man’s laws must submit.
We believe all government to be under the authority of God and that its purpose is the maintenance of freedom and justice solely in accordance with Biblical principles.

Cost of annual membership is £20.00

If you agree with the Aims & Statement of Faith then click the button below.

If you wish to renew your membership please click the button below. We will match your details to our records.

Atheist Ignorance in Skanda Vale slaughter

Stephen

23 August 2007

A Hindu community was facing the slaughter of more animals today as an old bullock and a young water buffalo indicated positive from a bovine tuberculosis skin test.

The announcement by Welsh Assembly officials comes less than a month after Shambo, a bullock regarded as sacred by the Hindus at Skanda Vale Temple in Carmarthenshire, was forcibly removed and later reported to have displayed ‘lesions typical of bovine tuberculosis’ after being killed by lethal injection.

But the report of Shambo’s diagnosis was greeted with scepticism by a Christian prayer and lobby group.

Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice, said today:

‘Interestingly, the results of “further tests” which were supposed to be carried out to verify TB do not seem to have been made public to date. Even if the vets did come back with positive results, the suspicion must be that no autopsy on Shambo would ever be allowed to find him free of TB. The outcry would be too great for the “animal health” people to live with. The fact is, there is discretion in the Animal Health Act 1981 for an animal to be isolated and treated. Poor old Shambo was sacrificed to an animal health policy which is flawed and implacable.’

But there was also scorn from Christian Voice for the atheist ‘National Secular Society’, which the BBC in particular appears to regard as the fount of all wisdom. Its director was quoted expressing his pleasure that Shambo had been put down. Keith Porteous Wood (sic), accused the Skanda Vale protestors of ‘putting religious dogma before the welfare of the community’ and said ‘The consequences of the bull potentially infecting the national herd and the financial consequences of that for people’s lives, and indeed potentially people’s health, are just unthinkable.’

Stephen Green, who lives and farms in Carmarthenshire, went on,

‘Poor Wood has let his hatred of all things religious run away with him. The pompous secularist is now claiming to be an expert on farming and animal health, from his comfortable pad in the livestock-rearing heartland of suburban West London.

‘The truth is that the risk to humans of catching TB from drinking milk from cattle which have the disease is very low, as is the risk from eating meat. In the UK, cases of humans catching it by aerosol from infected animals are miniscule. There is a picture of three of the officials who collected Shambo on the SkandaVale website. None of them is wearing protective gloves and there is not a facemask between them. Clearly Skanda Vale endangered ‘the welfare of the community’ not one whit.

‘In addition, the test for bovine TB is not 100% accurate. It isn’t even 50% accurate. As it happens, only around 35% of animals who react to the TB skin test were actually proved post-slaughter to have TB in the last three years, according to Ben Bradshaw MP in a written answer in Parliament on 8th January 2007. Defra admit that for the new Gamma-Interferon test the proportion drops to 20%, but cover themselves by saying all the others probably had it anyway. On the ground, farmers in the know make sure they drench their cattle for liver fluke when a TB test is due. That simple measure reduces false positives.

‘Finally, the image Wood conjured up of Shambo rampaging around the British countryside infecting ‘the national herd’ is not ‘unthinkable’, his word, but laughable. Shambo was in a secluded, secure pen. Hindu monks may view things differently from other people, but they were not going to turn Shambo loose in the Carmarthenshire lanes to spread his infections from Land’s End to John O’Groats. And Shambo looked more like a bullock than a bull to me.

‘What farmers have been saying all the way through is not that the TB test is infallible – no-one can claim that – but that everyone should be treated the same. Farmers have lost whole herds on the basis on a flawed TB test, but if they were going to be treated like that, then they said the Hindus at Skanda Vale should be dealt with just the same.

‘Of course it is daft to deify created things rather than the God who made them, but secularists are unable to say that; after all, they deify mankind: Man is his own god to them. People like Keith Wood can’t or won’t see any difference between any religion, and in such a blinkered mind, a chance to do Hinduism down just because it is a world religion was just too tempting a bait to pass by.

‘Perhaps in future Pompous will stick to pontificating upon things he knows something about. Of course that will narrow it down quite a lot.

Maskless Defra Health Officials arrive at Skanda Vale to remove Shambo

In the meantime, it is really rather sad that animal health officials are so inflexible as not to allow quarantine and treatment of animals including the newly-tested bovines. It isn’t as if the Skanda Vale bullock and water buffalo will be getting anywhere near the food chain or pose any risk, properly quarantined, to other animals. But of course flexibility, humanity and common sense have not been demonstrable qualities amongst Defra or Welsh Assembly officials.’

Seven things you might not have known about the National Secular Society:

1 Its Executive Director, Keith Porteous Wood, is homosexual.

Partners in Perversion: Keith Porteous Wood and Terry Sanderson (the latter is now deceased). — Partners in Perversion: Keith Porteous Wood (l) and Terry Sanderson (the latter is now deceased).

2 Its President, Terry Sanderson, is also homosexual.

3 Wood and Sanderson are partners in, er, perversion, sharing a house in Ealing and having chosen to benefit from entering into a ‘civil partnership’, which, of course, the National Secular Society campaigned for.

4 Both are leading members of the Gay & Lesbian Humanist Association (Galha).

5 The National Secular Society hates all religions and despises all people of faith with a passion. It is especially piqued at Christianity in general and Britain’s Christian Constitution in particular. Its leadership detests all expressions of Christian morality, and the virtues of chastity and fidelity are especially repugnant to them, given the intensity with which they fulminate against projects like the Silver Ring Thing.

6 The National Secular Society is very keen on children being sexualised at an early age by free condoms and sex education – especially if it includes material on homosexuality. What a surprise!

7 The NSS don’t know the difference between a bull and a bullock. For the record, a bullock (or steer) is a bull who was castrated as a calf. Such an animal is more placid than a bull and lacks the bull’s characteristic high neck-muscle and powerful fore-quarters. Bulls are only kept for breeding, bullocks are for meat. (Or, rarely, to have garlands hung round them in Hindu temples in Wales.)

LINKS

National Secular Society’s Submission on the Interim Report

Two temple animals face slaughter

Common sense prevails in the case of Shambo the ‘sacred’ bull

Bovine Tuberculosis: Environment Food and Rural Affairs

Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association Annual Report for the Year Ending 31 July 2004