Tuesday, May 31, 2005

33. Bush Supports Abortion in War on Terror.

How intelligent people (conservatives & Christians) can't see how phony the war and this president are boggles my mind.

In both Afghanistan and Iraq, abortion was ILLEGAL before our war on terror rained on them. Now they both allow infant-killing and have Planned Barrenhood abortion chambers operating.

Wasn't this war support to get the tyrannical killers OUT?

Here is the documentation on Afghanistan. Iraq has followed their lead:

http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/mos/mos_09afghanistan.html

Project Afghanistan

Steve Mosher President, Population Research Institute

The Population Research Institute is making plans to establish a pro-life office in Afghanistan ... to assist Afghan women and families in their fight against the anti-natal agenda of UN agencies and anti-child NGOs.

The recent legalization of abortion by Kabul's interim government was the catalyst for Project Afghanistan. Abortion in Afghanistan is now legal up to the third month of pregnancy. Muslim press has already begun expressing concerns about the UNFPA's promotion of chemicals and equipment for first-trimester manual suction abortions to NGOs who specialize in performing abortions.

International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), have made no secret of their desire to bring abortion to the longsuffering women of Afghanistan. The international death peddlers equate shedding the burka of Taliban oppression with abortion. The Feminist Majority Foundation has flaunted abortion as the way to crush the "gender apartheid" of the Taliban.

Abortion cannot be a remedy for the Taliban's enslavement of women.

The United States is committed to sending about $400 million in aid to Afghanistan. Since none of this aid is classified under "family planning," any amount of it can be used to promote abortion. This would circumvent current laws prohibiting family planning funds from going to groups that counsel or lobby for abortion.

The real needs of Afghan women must be promoted, defended and demanded in Afghanistan. At PRI, we're committed fighting the abortion agenda of the Culture of Death, and to promoting life-saving basics.

Here, there, or in the air!

Teno Groppi
God & Country Center
http://www.baptistlink.com/godandcountry/index.html

Monday, May 23, 2005

Updates: 18B and 18C Mrs. Bush to Honor Islam.

For the updates 18B. Mrs. Bush to Honor Islam and 18C. Bush Again Aids Islam Terrorists,

Please click here.
Thank you.

Updates: 7B and 7C

For the updates 7B. Porn Star to Dine With Bush, and 7C. Bush Nominee Adulterer Who Forcefully Sodomized Wife.

Please click here.

Thank you.

Friday, May 20, 2005

Update: Bolton Bared.

To read the latest update:

29 B. Bolton Bared.

Please click here.

Thank you.

Update: Patriot Act Made More Oppressive (and Unconsitutional).

To read the latest update:

28. C Patriot Act Made More Oppressive (and Unconstitutional).

Please click here.

Thank you.

Tuesday, May 03, 2005

Baldwin Summary

TG: Pastor Chuck Baldwin, the V.P. candidate for the Constitution Party in 2004, might not have had the Bush Scoreboard in mind when he wrote this (from an article by Howard Phillips, CP presidential candidate in 1992, 1996, and 2000), but he could have. This is an excellent summary of what the Bush Scorecard has been trying to establish.

With Republicans Like These, Who Needs Democrats?

By Chuck Baldwin

May 4, 2005

My friend Howard Phillips recently wrote a column outlining the philosophy and historical track record of the Republican Party since George W. Bush became President. Sad to say, even a cursory review of this record reveals the fact that the Republican Party in Washington, D.C., has become little more than a carbon copy of the Democratic Party.

Phillips writes, "Sadly, the GOP's elected and appointed officials conform themselves almost without exception to that which Mr. Bush espouses, including:

a. an expanded Federal role in education,

b. record setting subsidies for pro-abortion and pro-homosexual organizations,

c. increased funding for the United Nations,

d. the attempted extension of Bill Clinton's assault weapons ban (blocked in Congress),

e. social Security benefits for illegal aliens who have returned to Mexico,

f. the ongoing reduction of the U.S. Navy (which now stands at 289 ships, compared to 600 under Ronald Reagan),

g. amnesty for illegal aliens,

h. nominees for the Federal judiciary and the Office of Attorney General who espouse the doctrine that Roe v. Wade is 'settled law',

i. support for Food and Drug Administration policies approving the abortion 'pill', RU-486, which has been used to kill scores of thousands of unborn children,

j. overturning Ronald Reagan's decision to withdraw from UNESCO,

k. increased funding for the National Endowment for the Arts,

l. multi-billion dollar support for the Federal Legal Services Corporation and its 25,000 left-wing legal activists,

m. murder-abetting assistance to the Communist government in Angola,

n. historically high multi-trillion dollar fiscal deficits and trade deficits,

o. a multi-trillion dollar Medicare entitlement program,

p. a $20 million 'New Freedom' program to evaluate the mental health of 53 million students in the government schools.

q. enactment of the McCain-Feingold campaign regulation law which criminalizes free speech,

r. support for the U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty (UNLOST) which President Reagan rejected,

s. endorsement of homosexual 'civil unions',

t. promotion of FTAA, NAFTA, CAFTA, and the WTO,

u. a too broadly drawn Patriot Act with its outrageous 'sneak and peek' provisions,

and many more things, a significant proportion of which would have been blocked by a Republican Congress had a Democrat President proposed them."

Of course, most conservatives have chosen to ignore or even deny these facts. The only answer they seem to come up with is, "Think how bad it would be if Democrats were in charge."

However, with Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?

© Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:Chuck Baldwin's commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished, reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact and that full credit is given and that Chuck's web site address is included.

Please visit Chuck's web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com.

When responding, please include your name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.

Here, there, or in the air!

Teno Groppi

God & Country Center


http://www.baptistlink.com/godandcountry/index.html

32. Bush Supported LOST Treaty Written by Marxist.

What a surprise! After 150 entries in the Bush Scorecards, who would've dreamed he'd support a Marxist, socialist, New World Order program? [sarcasm off]

This treaty hinders the US militarily, hampers American exploration and science, hamstrings U.S. businesses, and gives the Marxist United Nations control of 70% of the planet.

http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44085

THE NEW WORLD DISORDER

Socialist was behind U.N. sea treaty

Author of Bush-supported pact that cedes U.S. sovereignty

May 3, 2005
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

One of the main authors of the U.N.'s Law of the Sea Treaty, or LOST, not only admired Karl Marx but was an ardent advocate of the Marxist-oriented New International Economic Order, according to a new report.

Supporters of LOST – now before the U.S. Senate and backed by the Bush Administration – depict it as a pact that merely guarantees freedom of navigation on the high seas. But a new report issued by Cliff Kincaid of the public policy group America's Survival Inc. identifies Elisabeth Mann Borgese, a socialist who ran the World Federalists of Canada, as having played a critical role in crafting and promoting LOST.

Borgese openly favored world government, wrote for the left-wing The Nation magazine and was a member of a "Committee to Frame a World Constitution." She served as director of the International Center for Ocean Development and chairman of the International Oceans Institute at Dalhousie University in Canada.

President Reagan rejected the [LOST] pact, and his ambassador to the U.N., Jeane Kirkpatrick, said it was viewed as the cornerstone of a New International Economic Order that would transfer money and technology from the U.S. and other developed countries to the Third World.

Kincaid says that at a time when the U.N. is under fire for mismanagement, corruption and scandal, LOST establishes a new international legal regime, including an International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, to govern activities on, over and under the world's oceans.

The treaty explicitly governs seven-tenths of the world's surface and permits international rules and regulations concerning economic and industrial activities on the land area of the world in order to combat global warming and other perceived pollution dangers.

In a January 1999 speech, Borgese declared, "The world ocean has been, and is, so to speak, our great laboratory for the making of a new world order."

Borgese noted how LOST stipulates that the oceans "shall be reserved for peaceful purposes" and that "any threat or use of force, inconsistent with the United Nations Charter, is prohibited."

She argued that LOST prohibits the ability of nuclear submarines from the U.S. and other nations to rove freely through the world's oceans.