Thursday, March 03, 2005
Readings: March 1 - 2
Articles by others of note:
(1) Patrick J. Buchanan on the Law Of the Sea Treaty (LOST)--a fitting acronym for just one more New World Order styled United Nations campaign, this one to assume control of the oceans by setting up yet another globalist bureaucracy, the International Seabed Authority, which would assume jurisdiction over 70 percent of the planet.
(2) "They Wouldn't, Would They?" asks Lynn Stuter, referring to whether or not our Federal Government might be concealing crucial information about its own involvement in the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. She observes how Roosevelt lied about the attack on Pearl Harbor, and then she talks about the scary Northwoods Document--how under the Kennedy Administration our Government hatched a plot to down commercial U.S. airlines and blame the attacks on Cuba--as a pretext to going to war, of course (this was prior to the Bay of Pigs episode).
We know that the Gulf of Tonkin incident, used as a pretext for expanded U.S. involvement in Vietnam, never happened.
So would the Feds lie about having neither knowledge of or involvement in 9/11? You tell me.
(3) According to Douglas Kern, we need more speech codes at colleges and universities. Read the article, and you'll see what he really means. All he wants to do is extract honesty from these institutions. For a change.
(4) More on the eminent domain case in Connecticut, Kelo v. City of New London, by Pejman Yousefzadeh. Useful links are provided.
The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing arguments regarding the posting of the Ten Commandments. The only argument they need recognize, it seems to me based on having actually read the U.S. Constitution, is that posting the Ten Commandments is not tantamount to the establishment of a national religion because it does not establish a national church or anything of that variety. It merely acknowledges God and the role of Christian theism in the development of our legal system. If the Supreme Court decides this case wrongly, it will deepen the culture war by informing us that the Supremes really are on the side of secular materialists.