Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|Posted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:05 pm Post subject:
|“Abolition of the Family, Abolition of Marriage and All Morality. Communal Education for Children” to Destroy Old and Create New World Order (Adam Weishaupt)
Posted by Anders under English, Euromed
Summary: The elitists of the New World Order have one goal: Dictatorial world government with a small fraction of a surviving mankind serving as their slaves. To achieve this it is necessary to tear down the Old Order to introduce Adam Weishaupt´s/Mayer Amschel Rothschild´s New World Order. A precondition to regress that far is to control the minds of the surviving few. There are many ways to do that - but the most promising way is to let the state educate children. This was the purpose of the so-called welfare state, which forced women away from homes into the labour market - forcing at the same time children into communal institutions with unlimited opportunity to inculcate children with the NWO ideology. This led to boys being educated like girls - and vice versa.
One consequence of this is that women, who were the real foundations of a stable society, are now instead making our societies matriarchies without other morality or norms than unlimited tolerance to Marxist multicultural anarchy. In her book, Diana West writes: “Is there a single adult left anywhere?” The grown-ups are all gone. The disease that killed them was incubated in the sixties to a rock-and-roll score, took hold in the seventies with the help of multicultralism and left us with a nation of eternal adolescents who can’t decide between “good” and “bad”, a generation who can’t say “no”.
The key to achieve this brave NWO is to dissolve homes: Make women just as career sick as men, disparage those women who see it as their task to secure the foundation of societies: the homes.This started with the Russian Revolution and a determined effort by Lenin. The real victims of that revolution were the children: Many ended up as thieves and prostitutes. This is the ultimate goal of the NWO: the ultimate abasement of man!
One way to do it is the publishing of distorted, biased reports presented in the Media as “research” to show, how old-fashioned it is for women to stay at home.This convinces everybody. As women were given up to work outside their homes their youth grew rootless without values or spiritual orientations. They were taught that tolerance towards evil and dissolution is the highest virtue, that good is bad and bad is good. In short: that the he Devil is the real ruler of this world. And so it is - due to his smart human stooges.
Of course this development has a history: The Rockefeller supported Mental Hygiene melted with the Communist 1968 Revolution fostering the feminist movement so easy to manipulate in the service of the NWO and so necessary for the break-down of the Old World order. This turned out to be a formidable weapon in the hands of the NWO elitists, who own the media to support this sick abolishment of 1 mio years of human arrangement. As the first president of the WHO, a brainchild of Mental Hygiene, Brock Chisholm, wrote: The only psychological force capable of producing these perversions (wars) is morality, the concept of right and wrong. For many generations we have bowed our necks to the yoke of the conviction of sin. Can such a program of re-education or of a new kind of education be charted? If it cannot be done gently, it may have to be done roughly or even violently–that has happened before.”
Maybe, some of you agree with Chisholm. But the consequence is chaos and war. For wars are only negligibly due to such differences as race and morals - much more due to one primitive factor: The selfish inclination to rule over as many of your fellow humans as possible and by all means. When morals are gone this instinct has free a free rein. This was once called wickedness.
“1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, 7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” (2 Timothy, 3).
The traditional man-woman-children family is under attack by sick ideological brains. This is a very important element of the NWO: Man must be fundamentally changed in order to tear down the Old World Order. Probably the most important individual factor is the brainwashing of children through institutions which have so much more impact when the traditional family and gender pattern is dissolved/swapped: Here are a communication from a former female Danish Family Minister about “mainstreaming of gender” even at road work and a communication from a female Danish Social Minister about boys in day nurseries having taken their cars away – to be given to the girls, whose dolls are to be taken away and given to the boys!!
Same-sex-marriagePravda 10 Oct. 2011: Traditional words ‘father’ and ‘mother’ will be replaced with official terms Parent 1 and Parent 2 in in official documents in Britain before Dec. 2011. The authorities decided to make such a “politically correct” move to accommodate same-sex couples.
Not so long ago, Pravda.Ru wrote about the kindergarten in Sweden, which became world-famous after its administration decided to simply abolish the use of ‘he’ and ’she’ pronouns. “Indeed, this is a serious international trend. It started back in the seventies and the eighties as a powerful movement to defend the rights of sexual minorities. There were organizations that tried to defend even the rights of pedophiles.
The organizations publicly said that their goal was to destroy family. They think that children must be protected from the despotism of their parents - from any forms of traditional upbringing. In order to accomplish that, one has to destroy the traditional family first.
In order to be more efficient, representatives of such movements began to cooperate with large international organizations such as the UN and the Council of Europe. This led to the creation of a small, albeit a very strong lobby for the protection of the rights of sexual minorities on the international level. The lobby intends to distort the perception of traditional family in the modern society.
As a result, European officials already try to avoid the use of the word ‘family’ in top-level international documents. The family as we know it has virtually disappeared from the new term.
“The lobby prefers to move in small steps. At the same time, they create special, previously unseen “rights” and preferences for homosexuals. They attach special importance to sexual orientation, which distinguishes a person and makes them stand higher than others,” Pavel Parfentyev said.
According to them, children and parents are two different things that must exist separately from each other. They cast doubts on the special role of parents in raising children,” the expert added.
To promote this pattern, the Illuminati and here present strongly biased “reports”
Katherine-rakeThe Daily Mail 6 Sept. 2011: Centre for the Modern Family: Only one in six people in Britain think they live as part of a traditional family. Apparently, only a small minority come from ‘traditional nuclear families’ with married parents and two or more children. Its report said the traditional family is out of date and that the Government should consider ways to support alternative family forms that are adopted by the majority.
But the group’s research and findings were criticised by analysts who said that according to official statistics, six out of ten of all families with children are led by two married parents!!
Family researcher and author Jill Kirby said: ‘A large majority of couples are still married. ‘By painting the traditional family as a tiny minority this report is giving a false picture of life in Britain. It makes one wonder what their agenda is.”
Right: Dr Katherine Rake leads the Family and Parenting Institute, a state-funded quango, is on the approving panel of the report, the results of which was connected to the way the questions were framed – as admitted by a panel expert. A quarter of all couples are childless, and one in five lives alone.The latest official figures from 2010 on family structure show that 60 per cent of families living with children aged 16 and under, or under 18 if still at school, are headed by married parents.
Traditional-familyDavid Cameron’s latest pledge is to extend the full title of marriage to same-sex couples who, at present, can become civil partners but do not have the right to call themselves married.
Renew America 16 Jan. 2004 by Carey Roberts: ”No woman should be authorized to stay at home to raise her children. Because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.”
(fem-socialist Simone de Beauvoir, right)Simone-de-beauvoir.
When Lenin’s Bolsheviks seized the levers of power in 1917, Lenin faced the daunting challenge of jump-starting agricultural and industrial production. So he cast his eye on a vast, untapped workforce: peasant women. Parroting the Marxist line on female oppression, Lenin incited women to action at the First All Russia Congress of Working Women: “The status of women up to now has been compared to that of a slave; women have been tied to the home, and only socialism can save them from this.” In short order, Lenin pushed through laws assuring women equal pay for equal work and the right to hold property.
But as Simone de Beauvoir pointed out, many women would be tempted to go back to the old ways to tend to hearth and home. So the traditional family would need to be abolished. Lenin understood that fact, as well. In 1918, Lenin introduced a new marriage code that outlawed church ceremonies. Lenin opened state-run nurseries, dining halls, laundries, and sewing centers. Abortion was legalized in 1920, and divorce simplified.
In a few short years, most of the functions of the family had been expropriated by the state. By 1921, Lenin could brag that “in Soviet Russia, no trace is left of any inequality between men and women under the law.”
But Lenin’s dream of gender emancipation soon dissolved into a cruel nightmare of social chaos.
First, the decline of marriage gave rise to rampant sexual debauchery. Party loyalists complained that comrades were spending too much time in love affairs, so they could not fulfill their revolutionary duties. Not surprisingly, women who were sent out to labor in the fields and the factories stopped having babies. In 1917, the average Russian woman had borne six children. By 1991, that number had fallen to two.
But it was the children who were the greatest victims. As a result of the break-up of families, combined with civil war and famine, countless numbers of Russian children found themselves without family or home. Many ended up as common thieves or prostitutes.
In his recent book, Perestroika, Mikhail Gorbachev reflected on 70 years of Russian turmoil: “We have discovered that many of our problems — in children’s and young people’s behavior, in our morals, culture and in production — are partially caused by the weakening of family ties.”
Fem-socialists, hell-bent on achieving a genderless society, are now scheming to repeat the same disastrous experiment in Western society. Naturally, they are hoping that you not hear the story of family destruction in Soviet Russia.
The dissolution of the traditional family is an important part of Adam Weishaupt´s 6 point programme, i.e its item “5): Abolition of the family, through the abolition of marriage, all morality, and the institution of communal education for children (The Illuminati grows”).
This item 5) has been thorougly elaborated as a predominant element of the Mental Hygiene movement since Brock Chisholm, cofounder of the Marxist World Federation for Mental Hygiene and later first chief of the WHO, wrote this in his paper “The Psychiatry of Enduring Peace and Social Progress” in 1946: “The only psychological force capable of producing these perversions (wars) is morality, the concept of right and wrong. We have been very slow to rediscover this truth and to recognize the unnecessary and artificially imposed inferiority, guilt and fear, commonly known as sin, under which we have almost all labored and which produces so much of the social maladjustment and unhappiness in the world. For many generations we have bowed or necks to the yoke of the conviction of sin. We have swallowed all manner of poisonous certainties fed us by our parents, our Sunday and day school teachers, our politicians, our priests….Can such a program of re-education or of a new kind of education be charted? If it cannot be done gently, it may have to be done roughly or even violently–that has happened before.”
The imagination that non-moral persons, racially mixed and socially equalized persons will live in peace is naive. Wars are only to a lesser extent due to such differences - much more due to one primitive factor: The egoistic inclination to rule over as many of your fellow humans as possible and by all means. When morals are gone this instinct has free scope. This was once called wickedness.
The Marxist concept that children belong to the state and not to their parents was further corroborated with the Marxist 1968 Revolution, the revolution of firstDeath-of-the-grown-up and foremost of feminists and sexual promiscuity. Wikipedia: The social construct of masculinity is seen by feminism as problematic because it associates males with aggression and competition, and reinforces patriarchal and unequal gender relations.
It seems that in particular some women are keen upon dissolving traditional families in the service of the monster hybrid of Mental Hygiene and 1968 ideology. And they certainly do have a forceful weapon as educators of children in today´s institutions to change the behavioural patterns of boys and girls for life. One consequence is that women are now making our societies matriarchies without other morality or norms than unlimited tolerance to Marxist multicultural anarchy, having made boys effeminate .
Or, as Diana West writes: “Is there a single adult left anywhere?” But, the grown-ups are all gone. The disease that killed them was incubated in the sixties to a rock-and-roll score, took hold in the seventies with the help of multicultralism and left us with a nation of eternal adolescents who can’t decide between “good” and “bad”, a generation who can’t say “no”.
All this being said: I would certainly not like to live as a woman in the days of old - and certainly not today. The change of the old arrangement leads to the NWO whether we like it or not. And the double labour at home and at the labour market alongside with pregnancy preventive measures lead to a population vacuum which is more than filled with subversive dictatorially minded immigrants.
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 13 Jan 2007
Location: Westminster, LONDON, SW1A 2HB.
|Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2015 2:11 pm Post subject:
|Childcare Bill contains threat of two years in jail for parents, critics warn
Parents could be locked up for failing to fully disclose details of working arrangements
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/childcare- bill-contains-threat-of-two-years-in-jail-for-parents-critics-warn-103 34263.html
By JANE MERRICK
Saturday 20 June 2015
David Cameron’s flagship election pledge to extend free childcare to 30 hours a week has run into trouble on its first airing in Parliament, amid concern that parents and nursery staff could face “draconian” criminal penalties, including a two-year prison term, if they fail fully to disclose details of working arrangements.
A senior Conservative peer and the leader of Richmond Council, Lord True, warned that the Government’s new Childcare Bill, which enshrines the 30-hour Tory manifesto pledge, contained “disturbingly wide, disturbingly ill-defined and draconian” regulations, including a provision to impose jail sentences.
The 30 free hours – a doubling of the current entitlement for three- and four-year-olds – only applies to children of parents who are both working, or single parents, and excludes stay-at-home parents. Both parents must be working for more than eight hours a week to qualify. But critics worry that the criminal penalties could cover parents who find the bureaucracy overly complex, particularly if one parent sometimes works for less than eight hours one week and more the next, or if they do not know whether the 30-hour pledge covers the entire year or 38 weeks of traditional school terms. There are also fears that nurseries and other childcare providers will fall foul of the law if they fail to check the employment details of every parent.
In a heated debate on the second reading of the Bill in the Lords, Lord True said: “I am afraid that I agree with others that the regulation-making powers in the Bill are disturbingly wide, disturbingly ill-defined and draconian. Potentially, they could lead to effective state control of the whole sector by the back door … I am troubled to see, in the Bill, proposed criminal penalties. I would like this to be explained ... Penalties on whom? Would nursery teachers be sent to jail for up to two years, as the Bill allows, if they fail to find out the whole truth about the private affairs of every one of their parents, or if they fail to disclose confidential details of their businesses to a local authority? I think we need to know.”
The Bill, which is just six clauses long, reads: “Regulations may ... for the purposes of enabling any person to check whether a child is a qualifying child of working parents, make provision about the disclosure of information held by a Minister of the Crown, the Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs or any other person … [and] create criminal offences”.
In response, Lord Nash, the Schools minister, did not rule out parents and nursery staff being caught up by penalties, saying: “I can assure him that this is intended for serious cases relating particularly to the protection of people’s confidential data, as is the case now for the current provision, and for cases of fraud.”
Labour’s leader in the Lords, Baroness Smith of Basildon, said: “The Government’s response gives little reassurance that criminal penalties won’t be used widely – especially as ministers have been so unforthcoming on the detail of this Bill and the regulations that would go with it.
“It’s a classic case of a policy announcement made in the heat of an election campaign – in this case, when things weren’t looking so favourable to Mr Cameron – but one knock-on consequence is the regulations could also be made on a whim, without proper parliamentary scrutiny. I think even people on his own side find this all quite amateurish.”
During the debate, the Bishop of Durham, the Rt Rev Paul Butler, warned that the legislation risked making stay-at-home parents feel guilty for not getting back to work and putting their son or daughter into childcare. He was concerned about “the impression increasingly ... created that a parent choosing not to work but to raise their child themselves is somehow not doing the best for the nation or the child”.
There has already been criticism that the Government’s £1.7bn funding of the pledge will still leave childcare providers with a shortfall of £250m after they have paid for the cost of the extended hours.
Read more: Cameron has 'no idea of the cost to deliver childcare'
Cameron at odds with Gove and May over human rights
Cameron pledges to phase in childcare reforms ahead of schedule
Imogen Thompson of Mothers at Home Matter said: “The rhetoric from Westminster would have all parents believe they must be engaged in full-time economic activity in order to contribute to the nation’s GDP. They overlook the fact that a working, taxpaying family doesn’t mean both adults must be in work all of the time since there’s plenty of invisible work to be done in bringing up children, saving the taxpayer millions of pounds in subsidies offered for registered provision.
“The Government often cites the introduction of the married couple’s tax allowance as the evidence of support for stay-at-home parents. Yet, it is limited in qualification, of paltry amount and is equally available to those without children. It can hardly be classed as a family-friendly policy comparable to the assistance that will shortly be available to households in which every adult works in paid employment.”
Tory pledges in trouble
The Government is getting a rough ride over its Childcare Bill – what other measures in the Conservative manifesto are in trouble?
* Plans to give employees up to three days’ paid leave a year to volunteer are believed to have been quietly dropped.
* The details of £12bn of welfare cuts still haven’t been spelt out.
* Pledge to extend right to buy to housing association tenants caused Lord Kerslake to warn it wouldn’t address affordable housing problem.
* Still no details of funding an extra £8bn a year for the NHS.
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."