buckthesystem

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4679716a4560.html Great grandmother Teresa Castro, 84, is so glad she made it through the winter she joined thousands of other elderly Chileans for a party on to celebrate staying alive. Castro and her 83-year-old husband, deaf after a lifetime of working in the textile industry, danced and cheered alongside some 3,000 retirees at a party to celebrate the end of the Southern Hemisphere winter, when dense pollution and low temperatures raise the risk of fatal respiratory illnesses. Chile's first woman President Michelle Bachelet, championing a push to improve old age security for the poor, joined the party and even took part in an aerobic sequence to electronic music. "We made it through August," Bachelet told retirees, many of whom were dressed in traditional folk costumes, after performing Chile's national dance, known as the Cueca. The parties in early September are a generations-old tradition in Chile, especially in the capital, home to a third of the population and, in winter, to harsh pollution. Santiago suffers in winter from some of the highest concentrations of pollution particulates in any of the world's main urban centres, and common respiratory afflictions can become fatal to the elderly. The deadly brew is created because of Santiago's topography, where the Andes mountains and a smaller coastal mountain range trap pollution in the city in winter months. "We are happy because, thank God, we got through August without getting sick, both of us," Castro said as she danced beside her husband of 59 years. Castro, with four children, seven grandchildren and four great-grandchildren, says the Santiago smog is the biggest obstacle to her seeing another generation of her family born. "When I come downtown I choke," she said. The August party is also popular in other parts of Chile, particularly in the south where winter months are accompanied by freezing rains and snow.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4678603a4560.html Hundreds of glamorous women have sprinted in stilettos to break a world record in Sydney. Donning mandatory three-inch high-heels, 265 ladies tore up an 80-metre race track at Sydney's Circular Quay to break the world record for the most people running in a "stiletto sprint". Four hundred metre hurdler Brittney McGlone, 18, was first across the line, pocketing US$5000 (NZ$6225). She was closely followed by dozens of leggy blondes and brunettes in green shorts, some of whom came off second best with scratches and scrapes from a few spills. Former Australian sprinter Melinda Gainsford-Taylor had the job of inspecting the athletes and ensuring they were wearing three-inch heals and had the customary smooth legs. "All the girls were pumped," she said. "I don't think I've experienced such energy since my racing days." An event spokeswoman said Tuesday's world record topped the previous world record of 150. "It looks like Australia has smashed the current world record and should now hold the title for the most number of people ever to participate in a stiletto sprint," Australian representative for Guinness World Records Chris Sheedy said.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4680737a4560.html A giant mechanical spider has shocked commuters in Britian's Liverpool, but don't worry, it's not the harbinger of an alien invasion. The three-story spider, seen dangling menacingly on the side of a building, was created as the centrepiece of a street theatre project, British media reports said. Dubbed "La Princess", the beast will wake up on Friday morning (UK time), when its legs will stretch out to nearly twice their current length, Sky News reported. The French arts collective La Machine is responsible for the arachnid. Previous projects by the group include "The Sultan's Elephant" in 2006, in which a rocket crash landed in London's Waterloo Place, followed by a 12-metre-high mechanical elephant that was the centrepiece of a five-day street theatre piece. The elephant was just the largest actor in La Machine's depiction of a fairytale. Eighteen months in planning in absolute secrecy, the Liverpool show is billed to be less whimsical than "The Sultan's Elephant" but no less ambitious. The show is part of Liverpool's European Capital of Culture programme.

I think you're "jumping on a bandwagon" here MorningGlory, without bothering to find out facts for yourself. "Living on a steady diet" of what other people think, rather than thinking for yourself, can also make one all sideways. HOW? JUST HOW can this be a "CONSPIRACY"? Look up the definition of "conspiracy" and try to apply it to this situation.

Mike on first reading your post, I thought "he can't be serious, there has got to be a note of sarcasm here somewhere. No one could be this obsequious, have the attitude that police are some sort of 'god-like' creatures that you daren't cross because they are so much better than you". I find it incredible that anyone would advocate this "we are just all naughty little, mentally impaired children, and we have to be tightly controlled all the time" attitude. But no, no hint that you really don't believe that garbage you are spouting, and when I came to the end and it said "the Bible even tells us that", I just about screamed. The only word I can honestly apply to that weird idea is "OBSCENE"! I really don't know how you could have been convinced that the Bible said "you must always do what the police demand of you, never think anything bad of them, and freely give up your property if they want it". Did you actually go to the links and watch the videos? I rather doubt that because if you had you would have realised that THE POLICE DID NOT GIVE RECEIPTS. There is a part at the end of the first video that has a guy on a boat looking for a safe landing place to bring in his boatload of supplies to the city when he was intercepted by five policemen on another boat who demanded that he give them all the weapons on board, he asked for a receipt, but the answer was A FLAT REFUSAL! Other news items have talked about cases whereby LOCKED houses on dry land were broken into by police, occupied or otherwise, and the firearms looted by police. You are obviously in support of this, so what do you think gives police the right to break into houses and take weapons out of gun cabinets and steal or destroy them? In this particular video did you see the part where guns were taken by force from people in a motor vehicle - trying to flee the area with their family and possessions - and then deliberately wrecked by being "smashed on the kerb"? How can you doubt that any of this took place? It even made our local news at the time, when our local news sources normally go out of their way not to air anything "a bit controversial". Tell me, what would you do if police burst into your home and demanded your firearms (and you knew that if you didn't give them up the police would tear your home apart until they found them)? Would you meekly ask for a receipt and expect to get one? Sure the area WAS under martial law, but that does not give police the right to steal from the population. I just "loved" the bit in the second video where the policewoman going round Walmart with a trolley, looting, accused the interviewer of being there to loot. These police might have been "under orders" to evaculate everybody and take all firearms. But as we learned during the 1946 Nuremberg trials, "I was just following orders" IS NO EXCUSE FOR DOING EVIL! Martial law still means that people are supposed to use "COMMON SENSE". They have to if they are to survive. It seems these stupid police were ordering people to leave properties that were undamaged and were not in any immediate danger. A waste of time considering that they could have been helping people who were in genuine need. However, the paragraph: "it was their choice to depart in a timely manner or to resist the evac order. they had warnings, but it was the governments fault that so many people lost their lives.... WHO MADE THEM STAY?????? they stayed of their own free will and accord, they were told to get out......" Is the most incredible of all, talk about victim blaming. You really should be writing that as a letter to the editor of any NO newspaper. Have you not heard about the lawsuits that the NRA had to have against the police to have the stolen arms returned to their rightful owners? And the fact that a great many of the firearms were broken or destroyed completely, had their storage cases smashed or where an expensive firearm was replaced by one of inferior quality? Just go to "google" and you will have the information in about 4 seconds.

ok, then dont shoot the help...... and as far as police stealing from the houses, this is the first i have heard of this, saw people with food, saw people carrying TV's and such, but no police doing it. do know that when the National Guard was called in to HELP, they were shot upon by some of the people that stayed behind. and if there were guns found in vacated houses, then maybe they needed to be confiscated to keep them from getting into the wrong hands..... if I were to leave my house in a hurry, i would not be thinking of guns, i would be thinking more of my family. forget the guns, can replace them (right now, but not if obama gets his way)...... I can replace other items, but not my family. mike Have a look at these; the first one is an excellent video and it certainly isn't an "isolated conspiracy theory". Look on the archives of just about any news source and you will find similar things. This is about the "great police gun theft in the aftermath of Katrina": http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/12142/ And here is another one, this time showing policewomen stealing from Walmart: ***youtube link removed*** You can be as "brown nosed" as you like toward police, but one day you may find yourself in the position of some of these people.

And I hope there will be no police stealing from houses this time and "confiscating guns" http://www.stuff.co.nz/4675601a12.html Related Links Gustav enters Gulf of Mexico after slamming Cuba Subscribe to Archivestuff Have your say New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin has ordered the city's more than 239,000 residents to evacuate in the face of powerful Hurricane Gustav, which he called "the mother of all storms." The evacuation order issued on Saturday was the first in New Orleans since Hurricane Katrina devastated the historic Southern city in August 2005. "This is the mother of all storms," Nagin said of Gustav, a monstrous Category 4 storm that could approach the central Louisiana coast just west of New Orleans on Monday. "You need to be concerned and you need to get your butts moving and out of New Orleans right now," Nagin said at City Hall. "This is the storm of the century." The evacuation order, which will not be physically enforced by officials, will start with the city's low-lying West Bank starting at 8am CDT Sunday (1am Monday NZT), followed by the East Bank at noon CDT (5am Monday NZT), Nagin told reporters. Residents have the choice to remain behind and weather the storm, but "that would be one of the biggest mistakes that you could make in your life," Nagin said. He said people might have to chop through the roofs of their houses to escape rising waters if they stay. "Make sure you have an axe," he said. But one day after the third anniversary of Katrina, many had already decided to abandon the city, much of which lies below sea level. Thousands of people fled New Orleans earlier on Saturday. Hoping to avoid the 2005 spectacle of desperate city residents crammed into the New Orleans Superdome, the government lined up hundreds of buses and trains to evacuate 30,000 people who cannot leave on their own. About 10,000 people left the city by bus or train on Saturday, Nagin said. The rest of the 20,000 people that had requested evacuation assistance would leave on Sunday, he added. Many evacuees were issued wrist bands with bar codes that will allow city officials to track them. Gustav crashed across the Cuban mainland on Saturday and could hit the US Gulf Coast as a Category 4 storm, the second-highest on the five-stage Saffir-Simpson scale, the US National Hurricane Center said. SIGNIFICANT FLOODING EXPECTED In the Lower Ninth Ward, plunged under water by Katrina's floodwaters, hundreds of residents packed belongings into cars and trucks and left. Some had returned home only a few months ago after fleeing Katrina. "After Katrina, you've got to leave," said Ruby Hall, a longtime resident, pointing to the place on the timber frame of the porch where Katrina's waters rose. "I'm not going to chance it, not with my grandchild." The city's West Bank was largely spared by Katrina but could see "significant flooding" because its 3-metre levees are no match for Gustav's storm surge, which could top 6 metres, Nagin said. Katrina's massive storm surge broke through protective levees on August 29, 2005, and flooded 80 percent of the city. New Orleans degenerated into chaos as stranded storm victims waited days for rescue. The hurricane killed about 1,500 people along the US Gulf Coast and caused US$80 billion in damages, making it the costliest US natural disaster. There was bumper-to-bumper traffic on highways leading out of the city on Saturday, and six low-lying parishes

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jh...8/30/do3007.xml When did Labour become the nasty party? By Vicki Woods Last Updated: 12:01am BST 30/08/2008 I was stunned to read this week about the stupidly named "ContactPoint": the children's database that is almost ready to be launched. "ContactPoint" will include the names, ages and addresses of all 11 million under-18s in England as well as information on their parents, GPs, schools and support services such as social worker and the police. I can think of 20 objections to such a database; but here are a few: 1) Who the hell decided that "ContactPoint" was a good idea and to whom are they accountable? Us? Don't think so. 2) Who the hell in government thought this was a good idea and why wasn't it scrutinised and argued over by Parliament? Answer: parliamentary scrutiny is a kind of yesterday idea these days; do keep up. And 3) Why should any parent in Britain agree to have their three-year-old on a database? Answer: they won't need to; nobody would dream of asking for their consent. advertisementI thank heaven I'm not bringing up three-year-olds any more but when I was the mother around here, I would have raged about a children's database. It's marginally worse than the grown-ups' database: the National Identity Register. That piece of lunacy was sold to me as a nice big present from the Government, to keep my identity nice and snug and safe and stop it being stolen by those vicious scofflaws, the global "identity thieves". Well, it won't: it'll be hacked into like any other database. Furthermore, I flatly object to people I don't know (and will not be able to find out about), not only looking at my data, but adding to it anything they fancy at the time. I'm not entirely sure if I'll be able to see what persons unknown to me have added to it. I'm damn sure I won't be able to do anything to remove it. Read more from Vicki Woods When did Labour turn into the nasty party? Was it before the invasion of Iraq or after? I am beyond sick of the corrosion of my freedoms and the extent of invasion into my privacy by this Government. I liked Britain better when I knew what was allowed and what was not. What was allowed to a freeborn Englishwoman was basically freedom. Even as a dingbat student in the mid-20th century, I knew exactly what to do if I was in a park on a sunny day vaguely "demonstrating" or "protesting" with others about apartheid or apple-picking collectives in Chile. We all knew that one's answer to a policeman demanding names was: I'm not obliged to give you my name, officer. Though the formula was often wrecked by "helpful" friends chipping in like Captain Mainwaring ("Don't tell him, Vicki"). It stuck with me. Some of the freedoms I prized were very ancient: I knew I could tell bailiffs to get off my property and not come back until they had their documentation sorted (I've only had bailiffs once: long story, not my fault, I blame the ex-wife). Now the Courts and Tribunals Enforcement Act (2007) means an Englishwoman's home is no longer her castle, and if I don't let them in, they can batter down my door. I miss knowing that if I live within the law, no little tin Hitler with a badge on can stop and hinder me as I go about my business. Now I have no idea what the law is because they've made so many stopping-and-hindering bits of legislation. The Terrorism Act 2000, the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (SOCPA) 2005, the Terrorism Act 2005. Which of those stops me shouting "Bollocks to Brown" in Trafalgar Square? Erm, dunno - possibly SOCPA? That's the one (Section 132) that was used to arrest, charge and try Maya Evans for reading out at the Cenotaph the names of British soldiers killed in Iraq. She was conducting an unauthorised demonstration within the "designated area" of one kilometre of the Houses of Parliament. But which one is it when a chubby Community Police Support Officer prevents me crossing the Queen's highway? Me: "I'm just trying to get to Horse Guards, officer." CPSO: "Just stay behind the barrier." Me: "Why? What? Is there a bomb scare?" CPSO says nothing, and Gordon Brown's armoured limo whisks through closed streets like Putin's Zil on its way to the Kremlin. Erm, dunno - maybe the Terrorism Act (2005)? That's the one that makes the whole of Greater London a "designated area" any time Jacqui Smith fancies a bit of designating. Ms Smith (who has always voted strongly against attempts to make Parliament "more transparent") has now decided to create an "extended police family" by giving 1,600 "accredited persons" sub-police powers. They're even more sub-police than the CPSOs, but they can enforce statutory fines on me for cycling on pavements or creating public disorder. Damn cheek. The accredited persons will be council jobsworths or private security workers or tenancy officers working for housing associations. They will wear a badge measuring 73?mm x 80?mm (which in old money is two and seven-eighths by 3?in). Fancy. I could make up one of those on the kitchen table. Jacqui Smith's decision to add council jobsworths to "the extended police family" (yuck) was enabled by the Police Reform Act of 2002. Damn, who knew such powers were hidden in that Act? Not me, and not you, I should have thought. Accreditation for such persons is at the behest of a chief constable. If I have nothing to hide, I will, of course, have nothing to fear from said jobsworth whose accredited powers are displayed on his/her lapel. How weird this country seems now. Since, ooh, 1997 or so? I'm fed up to the teeth with it. I don't like seeing 80-year-old socialists (Walter Wolfgang) being thrown out of Labour Party conferences. I don't like watching the British Transport Police Counter-Terrorism Protection Unit stopping and searching "random" members of the public at Waterloo Station. I don't like knowing that the Government, since the summer of 1997, has had access to all my landline and mobile-phone records. I say the Government; I mean "the Government and 700 designated agencies". There was no primary legislation for this one - and no debate in Parliament. These people are not our friends. They're a nasty bunch. Pray heaven I live long enough to vote them out.

I'm curious. How would you win the war on drugs without making them disappear? And please don't say education. The same way we won World War 2 without making evil disappear. Overwhelming force and resolve. But...as I already pointed out...I don't think this country has that type of resolve anymore. In WW2 the Allied forces sacrificed over 50 million lives to win that war. The casualties in Iraq are 0.00813% of what they were in WW2 and half the country wants to quit! Winning the war on drugs would probably require a higher death count than the Iraq war...so I'm sure that most Americans don't have the stomach for defeating evil anymore. So you're actually talking about making war on PEOPLE, people who are SUSPECTED of being involved in the illegal supply or taking of drugs, and KILLING them ("... a higher death count ....")?

Although to be exact, the word "drugs" is a noun. What would be the point of making war on drugs themselves? We need drugs as some of them are actually beneficial. If there really was a "war on drugs", there would be soldiers and police out destroying drugs all the time, and society would be in chaos with sick people having no drugs to take. Strictly speaking, what Axxman was referring to was "the war on (the taking, manufacture and trading of illegal) drugs". which is a verb.

Yep.... So okay... WHAT am I missing? So Not! I meant "taking drugs" which would be a verb, i.e. "taking" = verb (although strictly speaking "drugs" or "drug" is a noun".

Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackboot

So you believe that the government, presumably of the United States, is just looking for excuses to shoot up people's houses by implementing a 'war on drugs'? There's no way they could legitimately be trying to stamp out drugs and those who deal in them? And they are making money from the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S.? You equate putting fluoride in water with....what? Poison? Is there anything, anywhere, that's NOT a conspiracy, bts? 'Cause not! Btw, the war on Japan, the war on Germany, Britain's war on France, Spain's war on Britain, etc.....these were all wars on 'verbs'. Are you saying they weren't won? "Japan", "Germany", "France", "Britain" are NOT verbs, they are proper nouns!

Nice backbone you're showing there...and you accuse of me of saying things so I "sound tough." LOL You gotta be careful you don't get whiplash when you backtrack that fast. Once again you are on the wrong side of an issue IMO. Now your standing up for drug addicts and are saying we should leave innocent kids in homes with drug addicted parents, and that we should provide them with welfare. As far as your advice to say "there, but for the Grace of God, go I" the next time I see a drug addict...what kind of solution is that??? I'm not on drugs because I said NO everytime I had a chance to take them..EVERYTIME! Don't go blaming God because somebody is on drugs. Blame the person who choses to ruin their life. If people were really concerend about drug addicts then they would commit to winning the war on drugs and stop pandering and being all willy-nilly about how to win it. The war on drugs could be over in no time if there weren't so many liberals in the way. Unfortunately, libs don't have the stomach to do what it takes to win wars. Axxman, you have got to brush up on your sense of humour. I am not so much standing up for drug addicts as reminding everyone that drug addicts are still people and it is not always their fault if they have got caught up in something that is beyond their control. We really should try to be more understanding. This reminds me of the song "....... if they saw him (Jesus) talk at ease with the junkies, whores and thieves ......" So "what would Jesus do?" You have even misinterpreted the saying "there but for the grace of God, go I", it means that God's Grace enabled you NOT to be a drug addict, but you just as easily could be one as someone you're condemning is. I am NOT blaming God for anything. And "the war on drugs". That phrase is almost enraging. You can never win a war on a verb, a war on a verb is not a real war - it is just a ridiculous, overemotional excuse for having SWAT teams shoot up innocent people's houses (as well, of course, as guilty peoples' houses), kill people and their pets or injure them. It is just like "the war on terrorism" - that will never be won also - it is not winnable. Be real, and admit to yourself that the government doesn't really want to get rid of drugs altogether, there is far too much money tied up in that industry. And if they really were concerned about the health of the population, they'd stop lacing their drinking water with fluoride.

I know that most of you will be decrying this judge's actions, but we must hold the police to a higher standard. I mean, a grenade? Surely that's OTT, what if it was the wrong house? It would seem that this happens a lot, and might be happening even more now that the precedent has been set for police to get commendations for "getting it wrong". http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/112...08-1582706.html Judge bars evidence in drug raid By DANIELLE CAMILLI Burlington County Times MOUNT HOLLY

http://www.designnews.com/article/47898-El...o_All_Roads.php Electronics Module Could Bring Tolling to All Roads Unit combines GPS and GSM communications Charles J. Murray, Senior Technical Editor -- Design News, August 27, 2008 new technology being developed by Siemens Mobility and NXP Semiconductors could enable counties and municipalities to charge tolls on virtually every highway, not just on the major arteries that employ toll booths today. Siemens and NXP are teaming up on the development of an electronics module that would combine global positioning satellite (GPS) technology with the popular GSM (global system for mobile communications) cell phone standard and near-field communications (NFC) security technology. Together, the technologies would enable toll collection from greater distances than the short-range RFID systems used on major highways in the U.S. today, and they would eliminate the need for expensive infrastructure, such as toll booths. "When you build toll gates, it's a huge investment and it only covers the main roads," says Jeroen Alting von Geusau, business manager at NXP Semiconductors. "Using GPS and GSM in a system like this, you could cover all the small roads and the big roads, too. That's why people find it so interesting." NXP will provide a chip and basic software that combine all the functions for toll collection, such as GPS, NFC and GPRS (general packet radio service). Interfaces for flexible telematics applications, such as traffic information, will be provided on the automotive-grade, single-chip platform. Siemens will develop the on-board unit (OBU), integrating NXP's single chip and software. NXP engineers say the system will have capabilities that go beyond road tolling. "You could provide traffic information and road tolling, and you could combine it with existing (aftermarket) navigation systems," Alting von Geusau says. "With this, you get a total telematics system that could perform all kinds of functions."

Even if you are put off by the title, this is worth reading for the humorous bit at the end. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10...piece-work.html Jackboot Jacqui's a Nazi piece of work George Orwell's 1984 was supposed to be a warning about the dangers of totalitarianism, not a blueprint for government. No one seems to have told New Labour. Barely a day goes by without another assault on our civil liberties, another extension of state snooping, another exciting ruse for meting out punishment for the most trivial offence. This week

PM me please. I'd really like to know if there is anyone else other than me and two others who think this may be the case, and I'd like to see your opinion. I can definitely see that everything that might be said might not agree with the philosophy of these boards, and that is certainly fair enough, but discussing this stuff is part of what being a Christian is all about. I was wary for a long time about saying that I didn't believe in the rapture theory because I thought it would upset people and was not part of the Christian philosophy and I might get the response that this view is unbiblical, but I was wrong there because it seems that different people all have their own theories about this. I still find it really hard to believe that "the end" will come in my life time, and 20 years or less makes it still my lifetime (OK, I'll be pretty old by then, but maybe still alive).

This sums it up: "'The Act was brought out for terrorism but it suits us very nicely,' said Insp Neil Mutch of South Yorkshire Police". Exactly, I wonder how many other laws that "suit us very nicely" were brought in under the guise of "terrorism". http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?i...e#StartComments Police terror law used on underage drinkers by Sophie Freeman - Wednesday, August 27, 2008 Teen drinkers are being targeted by the Identity Card Act Underage drinkers are being arrested by police using laws brought in to combat organised crime, terrorism and identity theft, it has emerged. Teenagers using fake, borrowed or

You are absolutely right smallcald, this is not (or should not be) about welfare but about drug addiction and why it seems to be so prevalent. A theory is that there are so many addicts in the US because life is so hard for them that they retreat into fantasies - firstly watching sports or other entertainment, this is not enough so is extended by alcohol and/or drugs. This is probably why there is so much obesity - people try to blot out the harsh reality of everyday life with food, and also the prevalence of eating disorders - they feel a lack of control in their lives so cling onto something that they might be able to control, which is their weight. I might be totally barking up the wrong tree about this, but what ever is the cause, people that are able need to be helping drug addicts not deriding them and taking their children away from them. As for welfare, you're right again. The money spent on welfare in the US is pretty small, and "the measure of a society is how it treats its down and out" so we shouldn't quibble about anyone recieving welfare. What people really should be concerned about is the amount of taxpayers' money wasted on massive "salaries" and perks for corrupt and parasitic politicians and civil servants who get paid far too much for what they do and come up with the most pernicious ideas and plans and blame the "man in the street" for all the ills in society. It really annoys me to hear politicians and bureaucrats on massive "salaries" (people who really are undeserving state beneficiaries) citicising people who have lost their means of livelihood or are physically incapable of working for one reason or another or who just find themselves in need of assistance through no fault of their own. Personally I feel that I should be really grateful to God for the fact that I could find work and God has given me the ability to physically do it, and I should not ever scoff at anyone who is not in that position. As Christians we should be more compassionate and try to find ways of helping people, not criticising them.

I have to disagree, bts.....my company H.R. department refers to company paid benefits as 'bennies'. Just out of curiosity...do you seriously think that the main drawback of state paid foster care is that "Well sure, don't punish them directly, just drag them away from home, and probably into "state care" where they can be indoctrinated into the ways of a little statist, then maybe they could be sent back to their old neighbourhoods as police informants."? Where do you come up with this stuff? I'd think the biggest drawback would be the break up of the family and sending kids to live with total strangers...which might just negatively affect their psyches. Foster care is provided in private homes in the U.S....not the local police department. Morningglory I was trying to show Axxman how he tends to exaggerate by exaggerating this greatly myself and turning it into a ridiculous senario. Of course I really do realise that most kids taken away from their families - in the USA as they do here as well - go to private foster homes. I was being totally "over the top" by saying the bit about "statists and police informants" - not even I believe that. Axxman sees me as always picking on police, so I thought I'd better be true to form. I am concerned, however, for the kids of drug addicts. It would be incredibly traumatic for the whole family to have the kids ripped from the home by the government. It would be destructive, not only for the addict themself (and if the hope is for the addict's recovery, taking his/her kids away is sure not going to help) but destructive also for the kids themselves. Not only would they have to cope with drug addict parents/parents, but they would have to cope with being taken away from their own family and being put in an unknown environment.

Buck, deceiving someone to take the mark of the beast is not scriptural. Even when discussing this coming deception coming on this world and that it will be so well laid out that it would deceive even the elect "if it were possible" If it were possible the Bible would not use that phrase "If it were possible" There are many reasons why we should not trust governments with too much power. The US is a nation all it own because of the abuse of power in the 1700's by England's king. Our founding fathers warned us of letting central government have too much power and in this manor much of your thinking is aligned with mine. However this mark of the beast stuff is just not right. You can not be tricked into taking the mark of the beast if you are a real Christian who has made Jesus Christ your Lord. No one can snatch you out of his hand. The day will come (and I personally don't think its far away) when each of us will have a choice of taking the mark or dieing, but it won't be from deceit...... Other one you could well be totally right, after all what I said is only an idea, an opinion based on what I have read over the last five years or so, but opinions can be wrong and then changed. The Bible does talk of the upcoming deception. I believe (just opinion) that this deception has already occurred (or started to occur). People have been deceived enmasse to believe that there is a "terrible terrorist threat" everywhere and the only way to avoid being blown up by one of these dreaded "terrorists" is to surrender everything you have to the (so far) national government (which will eventually be a one world government) and let them control every aspect of your life and control and dole out all the natural resources of the world - coal, oil, rock, water etc., even air - and let them put all your physical property in a pool and "redistribute" 50% of it as they see fit (of course keeping the other 50% as a one world tax, for their trouble). People are well on the way to being deceived into believing that "there is danger round every corner" and the only way to survive this is to "do what they're told by nanny state" and pay massive "fines" for not wearing seat belts and bike helmets and surrender any weapons or sharp objects that they might hurt themselves on to a "trustworthy body" like a one-world police force (for proof of this you only need to look at - say - how kids used to be able to ride bikes without shoes and helmets, but today ...... ). 1 Thess. 5.3: "For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape". In my opinion "if it were possible" just refers to the fact that, of course, all of us will not be fooled (who was it who said "you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time?) Don't you think that by taking a token issued to us by the government, we are swearing allegience to the "beast" and saying that we no longer belong to God? What do you reckon about that? In the next few years nobody will face dying if they will not take the real id card, but (if things go right for the government) in 20 or 30 years I think people will be faced with "take real id or die slowly by starvation". Though of course by then hardly anybody will be questioning that idea.

Yes...it is unfortunate for the kids, but by allowing these people to partake in these social programs we are basically keeping the kids in a negative environment. If someone fails a drug test 3 times they should lose more than the welfare benefits...they should lose parental benefits. We should send the message loud and clear that if you use illegal drugs you are going to lose out BIG TIME! Here's an idea...if a person does fail the drug test 3 times...take their kids away and put ALL the welfare money the parent would have gotten towards raising the kids. Axxman I am so horrified by some of the things that you write that I find myself wondering if you really believe them or if you are just trying to "sound tough". Someone said to me late last week "..... I am suspicious of Christians because most of them sound so sanctimoneous ......". Yeah, I can see why people might think that. You say "...if a person does fail the drug test 3 times...take their kids away and put ALL the welfare money the parent would have gotten towards raising the kids". Well sure, don't punish them directly, just drag them away from home, and probably into "state care" where they can be indoctrinated into the ways of a little statist, then maybe they could be sent back to their old neighbourhoods as police informants. Also you might want to remember, the next time that you see a drug addict: "there, but for the Grace of God, go I". And BTW LadyR (although your posts are usually quite good and logical, and I mostly agree with what you say) I have to say whenever I see the word "bennies" I can be absolutely sure that it is a comment from someone "welfare bashing", nobody else refers to "benefits" as "bennies".

One thing the Bible does is warn of deception, you seem to have fallen for this deception quite badly. We will be deceived into taking the MOB. Sure, as a lot of people have said the MOB will be "voluntary", sure it will be "voluntary" in the fact that if you don't "cooperate" then you might starve to death (as well as not being able to travel anywhere, enter federal buildings - which you've paid for btw or national parks and any other things that we don't know about yet. I think id systems (eventually they will all be formed in one) are the MOB because they (1) Impose conditions on the bearer (2) Mandate that simply by accepting/carrying the "id" you are swearing allegience to the "beast" (government, i.e. you belong to government not God) and (3) You have been deceived into believing all sorts of erroneous ideas in order to think that the MOB is "necessary". Getting back to where you said "some people are on a crusade against all forms of ID...." Well yes I find it hard to accept that there is suddenly a need for the government to identify everyone. I've survived so far without any form of ID, so why all of a sudden should there be a necessity for it now? Nothing has substantially changed during the last five years or so. Another erroneous belief that I hear a lot today is "forms of ID such as DLs, Library cards, credit cards etc." The truth is that a DL is not a "form of id", it is a piece of paper stating that you have been assessed as competent to drive a motor vehicle on the road, a library card is not a form of id, it is a card enabling you to borrow books from the library, and a credit card is a card saying that the company issuing the card agrees to lend you the money to purchase something from a shop and that you must pay that money back to the company. As for your assertion that "......... going from poling station to poling station using a different name at each" Has there been a particular problem with this in the past? And "...... 17 year old girls buying alcohol ....." How do you expect that "real id" will solve this, if 17 year old girls want alcohol they can get it without having to buy it themselves.