~ The only Home on the Web You'll ever need ~

    The University of Solar System Studies


    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:07 pm

    I've been thinking about positive-possibilities for this solar system -- if and only if -- the Book of Revelation does not play-out as written. I have a high-view regarding ethics and law -- yet the historical and contemporary political and religious realities seem quite unethical and lawless. I keep thinking there is an antediluvian governance and religious system which we are not aware of. The basics of the Decalogue are actually quite good -- yet the specific wording and immediate context are most troubling to me in modernity. There must be huge chunks of the story which we are not being told. I think they know about these historical gaps in London, Rome, and the Darkside of the Moon -- but We the Peons are not deemed worthy enough to know the rest of the story. I am strangely attracted to the Desire of Ages and the Federalist Papers -- yet I know this is just scratching the surface of how things ought to be in this neck of the woods. The conditions which existed just prior to the Creation -- just prior to the Flood -- and just prior to the Tower of Babel incident might be very important for us to completely understand. This understanding might include potential conflicts between a Written Law of God -- the Spoken Word of God -- and a Libertine Race of Beings. The concept of Star-War-Lords in conflict with each other might give us insights into why things have been so harsh and violent throughout history. The hypothetical Reptilian v Human problems might have a lot to do with explaining the way things were and are. I suspect that neither the Human or Other-Than-Human Powers That Be really want the Whole Truth to emerge -- for a variety of reasons -- legitimate and illegitimate.

    I continue to get the sinking feeling that we are on the verge of a nasty Solar System Star War -- World War III -- the Battle of Armageddon -- the Apocalypse -- the Seven Last Plagues -- the Extermination of the Human Race -- etc, etc, etc. I sense that there is a Solar System Cold War which very few people know anything about. I'm fighting internal battles which most people have no idea about. I think that if we survive the next couple of decades, that technology might make most human labor obsolete -- to the point where we might wish we had been exterminated. Perhaps that's too severe -- but I'm not sure that the technology of the next couple of decades will save humanity. It might do just the opposite. Something really, really bad happened in antiquity -- and I don't know what it was. They keep me guessing. They keep all of us guessing. I keep wondering about the possibility of Michael being overthrown by Gabriel and Lucifer -- with Michael and Humanity becoming essentially Hostages to the Devil (from our perspective). Yet, from the other hypothetical side's perspective Gabriel and Lucifer might be doing God's Work -- to reign-in and re-train a Rebellious Race living on a Prison Planet in Rebellion. Once again, there are probably very, very few people who will take the time and trouble to REALLY think through these sorts of questions and issues. They take a helluva lot of time, pain, strain, and conflict to properly examine and reflect-upon. I'm sorry if I got the Gabriel and Lucifer parts of this puzzle wrong. I truly mean no harm -- yet there seems to be a helluva lot of deception and manipulation going on in this world. Something seems to be very wrong. Something seems to have been very wrong for a very long time. On the other hand -- if humanity does not want me and what I might have to offer -- I'll leave -- never to return -- even if there's no place to go. What if the original plan for this planet and humanity got implemented somewhere else -- after being rejected here?? What if the PK-47s or Future Humans are from these hypothetical places?? Was the original plan the best plan?? Is it still the best plan?? If so, who should implement it?? What Would Magoo Do??

    Mr. Magoo Meets Frankenstein!

    Mr. Magoo and Noah's Ark 1. 2. 3.

    I want to make this perfectly clear - I do not wish misery, harm, or death to come to anyone - including Reptilians, Greys, Hybrids, Nephilim, Angels, Demons, Illuminati, Satan, Lucifer, Shiva, Kali, KRLLL, The Logos, The King or Queen of Whatever, The God or Goddess of Whatever, et al. At some point - I might like to work with all of those listed above - once I got used to them! What about that debate-date, Kali??? You must REALLY hate me...

    OK...a lot of people hate me. I have been blocked by several YouTube channels - including the poster of the video series upon which this thread is mostly based. ufohypothesis (Rick Keefe - who interviews Alex Collier) has blocked me. Another one - which is critical of the Roman Catholic Church - has blocked me. This is very, very odd - since I am mostly editorially on-board with the blockers!!! None of them told me a damn thing - so I have no idea why I have been blocked. Two of my websites have been taken over by someone I have never heard of - and one has been removed from the internet - even though I am paid-up for several years. I am very paranoid - and they probably really are out to get me. Strange world we live in.

    What's odd - is that I really and truly have no animosity toward anyone. Period. Although - to be honest - I am annoyed by just about everyone - especially myself. But I have no seething agenda or fecal list. I really and truly am seeking a big-tent solution - rather than something which is narrow and exclusive. It's an equal-opportunity big-tent for males, females, hermaphrodites, and all races - including aliens and hybrids! I think I'm probably way too accomodating and easy-going.

    I'll watch videos about NDE, OBE, and Regression -- but I won't seek this sort of thing. It's just the way I was brought up. I think I'm playing a dangerous-enough game as it is. Thus far -- and no farther.

    I get the impression that most of those who constitute the Top One-Percent belong to some sort of a Secret Club (which might have several names -- but one ultimate boss -- who might not be on the side of humanity -- for whatever reasons). Sometimes I wonder about the true source of a lot of French Romantic Music. Does this music have something in common with William Shakespeare, Charles Darwin, and Albert Einstein? Who was the architect of Chartres Cathedral? Does anyone have any idea of what I am talking about? Anyone?

    I'm not going to be too specific - but if one looks at French Romantic Organ Music as a whole - what personality lurks within the music? Is it the Creator God of the Universe? Is it Jesus Christ? Is it Lucifer? Is it Mary? The individual composers? The complexity and abstractness is overwhelming. The level of genius in the design and construction of pyramids, temples, and cathedrals is likewise overwhelming. Yet something dark and troubled seems to lurk within. Could this be representative of the 'good-side' of Kali? If I'm right about all of this - do I at least get a Cracker-Jack Prize?

    I guess I'm passively pursuing a 'Pinky and the Brain - Raiders of the Lost Ark - Lucifer/Shiva/Kali/Mary - and the Temple of Doom' Hypothesis - which includes a good/genius side - and a bad/insane side. What did Spielberg know - and when did he know it? I find myself strangely attracted to the good side - and utterly disgusted and horrified by the bad side. I tend to think that if Lucifer/Shiva/Kali/Mary retired - that the bad side would go away - and that they could serve as an advisor rather than a dictator. You'd have to actually be me to understand where I'm coming from, and to see that which I visualize. I couldn't possibly put it into words.

    I just finished reading 'The Gospel of Mary of Magdala' by Karen King. The cover features a painting of a young-woman with a very dark complexion - dressed in scarlet - with a sun-disk around her head - pointing to an egg in her hand. Could this be Kali? Karen King thinks the Gospel of Mary might have been written in Egypt or Syria, with an authorship date of between 32 and 325 CE. Could Kali be the writer of most sacred texts - including the Bible and the Quran? Ralph Ellis claims that Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene were of a high class. Nicolas Notovich claims that Jesus travelled to Tibet. Alex Collier claims that our creator (or genetic engineer) is more female than male (not sure which lecture - possibly 2002). He also claims that the Andromedans consider blacks to be genetically superior (I hope I got that one right! Not sure which lecture). In a 2002 lecture - Alex hints at a deliberate removal of the Pa Taal (spelling?).

    I think I'm going to give this thing a rest. I don't really wish to convince anyone of anything. This has mostly been a research project - in a very passive and informal sense. The Jesuits, Alphabet Agents, and World Leaders know exactly what's going on - and they obviously are not stumbling over each other to get to the microphone first - to tell all of us goyim the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. In a sense - I have mostly wished to communicate with Lucifer/Shiva/Kali/Mary and his/her willing and unwilling servants. I continue to desire a top-down reformation of how business is conducted in this solar system. Hope springs eternal - but I'm not holding my breath. Namaste.

    Try thinking through the history of Earth from a Hathorian Perspective (HP) or a Kali Perspective (KP)...based upon this thread combined with your own extrapolation and imagination. Should this hypothetical Hathor or Kali figure be an object of aspiration rather than veneration?

    I don't know if I have had a close encounter with truth...or not. I invite everyone to go through all of my threads with a fine-tooth comb. See what your conclusions are. I've simply been scratching the surface of the truth...on a road less traveled. But that could make all the difference...on your investigative journey. Amen.

    Is there anyone in the solar system who openly thinks like I do? I like to think - and I hate to think. It usually hurts when I think. Efforts to figure things out, solve problems, and save the world - seem to go largely unrewarded, and are often punished. Perhaps it really is better to give people what they want - and tell them that which they wish to hear. I often think that I might hit it off better with Lucifer/Shiva/Kali/Mary/Anna (if they really do exist - as I have speculated) than with just about anyone else - even though we would probably fight like hungry feral cats. At least there might be somewhat of a common understanding of things - even though our conclusions and courses of action would probably be diametrically opposed. I continue to desire some sort of an interaction with whoever is really and truly at the top of the pyramid - without mind-games or mumbo-jumbo. Just the facts ma'am. But just tending to business is looking more and more attractive. Thinking the unthinkable - and trying to know the unknowable - has taken it's toll. Then - trying to communicate with others about these things has been sort of like trying to reinvent the wheel.

    Positive thinking is a double-edged sword which can lift one higher - or be a deluded detour down the primrose path. I am simply trying to face reality - in a very unconventional sense. I think I've found a lot of my answers - and I don't necessarily like them. The search has been somewhat destabilizing - and I fear what may happen to the general public when they really start getting exposed to a lot of what I have uncovered - assuming that at least some of it is true.

    BROOK has supplied SO MUCH valuable information on AV1 and MOA. A thread titled 'Amen Ra' on AV1 contains a lot of BROOK's hard work and research. Even though AV1 is closed to posting - the view count on this thread seems to rise by about 1,000 per month. That thread on the 'Infiltration of the New Age Movement' which starninja has contributed so much to - is a must view for all truth seekers and curiosity seekers. What you don't know - can hurt you.

    Balance is an important part of all of this - and I have been losing my balance - little by little - which is why I'm really trying to stop - at least for a while. Bill Cooper had alcohol and temper issues - and I think it may have had a lot to do with all of the upsetting information he was dealing with. I really think that the Powers That Be have made the decision to inform the public about what's really been going on - in a gradual and unofficial manner. How responsibly we deal with this information - will determine how quickly and smoothly disclosure occurs. Take a closer look at China, India, Tibet, and Kali. Just a hunch...

    I've been wondering a lot about the true nature of the soul - and wondering about the true extent of any hybridization programs - historically and presently. What if the human soul is a shapeshifting interdimensional reptilian? Could this be why we have a reptilian part of our brains? Could this really be the biggest secret? Are all of us hybrids - in one way or another? Are Dracs really human/reptile hybrids - with an exceptionally high percentage of reptile genetics? Are everyday humans really human/reptile hybrids - with a very low percentage of reptile genetics? I once knew an ivy league graduate who told me that they were a talking snake. Some of my best friends have turned out to be snakes.

    It seems reasonable to me to at least begin with the view that this solar system is our home (regardless of ancient star wars and battles for control of this and that) - and that we just keep reincarnating (as we require new bodies) back into this solar system - and that this solar system may be as good as it gets - anywhere. I'm considering any extermination events (natural or inflicted) and mass evacuations (by UFO's, the Second Coming of Christ, etc.) to be bad things. Bringing reason and peace to this solar system seems reasonable to me. Has the Queen of Heaven been trying to do this for thousands of years? OR - has the Queen of Heaven been misusing and abusing this solar system and it's inhabitants for thousands of years? I keep seeing corruption and insanity as being unavoidably connected with absolute power - despite the best of intentions - which is why I wish for this hypothetical Queen of Heaven to retire - and serve as an advisor rather than a ruler. Sorry for being repetitious - but I will continue to test this hypothesis in different settings. I think we are all in Purgatory - and that it is up to us whether we progress into Heaven - or digress into Hell. We make our bed - and sleep in it. Our planet is how we plan it. World without end.

    "Semiramis became known as the "queen of heaven," and was the prototype from which all other pagan goddesses came."--World Religions by David Terrell

    George Kavassilas said that Jesus had to be annointed by Mary Magdalene - and get permission from her - to be able to do his work. He also said that Mary Magdalene was an incarnation of the Divine Mother. He further said that in cathedrals - one must go through the mother to get to the Christ energy. Finally, he said that the rock who Jesus intended to build his church upon - was Mary Magdalene.

    I have speculated that the Queen of Heaven aka Whore of Babylon aka Mary Magdalene aka Woman in Scarlet - created the Historical Jesus - to be a Red Herring. Having said that - I continue to reverence the Teachings of Jesus - even if my blasphemous speculations are true. All of this probably has a 5% chance of being true - but I will continue to climb further and further out on a very thin limb. Did the Woman in Scarlet write the Red Letters? I'd better stop.

    George warns of ET's who claim to be here to help - and speak of love - as being deceptive enemies. Could these be some of the ET's who Alex Collier says we need to be mentored by? I am very skeptical regarding mentoring. Early Collier interviews stated that all the ET's should leave - and just leave us alone - and stop interfering with us, and stop manipulating us. Which ET's are promoting Responsibility and Human Sovereignty? Have any of them done so over the past several thousand years? Does the Bible do so? Why is Responsibility and the U.S. Constitution not the preferred foundation for this solar system? I keep sensing that Steven Greer and even Alex Collier are being strong-armed by ET's to promote their agenda. I sense that a lot of people are joining them - because they feel that we cannot beat them. I can't prove this - but I feel very ill regarding all of this.

    Starninja to Orthodoxymoron: I couldn’t say it better. Why would we want to be mentored? scratch We gave our power away to governments, falsely believing that they would act in our best interest. Why would we want to give our power away to ET’s? Some claim that ET’s are highly evolved. By which standards……..theirs? We don’t know them and we can’t make any judgment if they are more evolved than we are. We don’t trust people we don’t know. And it takes time to build trust. ET's haven't earned our trust! Hm...why would I want to trust Alex Collier? Because he said so? Bleh Not good enough for me. Secondly, TPTB worked hard for ages to convince us that we powerless and insecure. Well, they can’t control people who are secure within themselves. I see it as a big problem for those who don’t trust themselves, eager to give up responsibility and personal power away.

    Reply: Thank-you starninja. I don't wish to slam Alex Collier, Steven Greer, or the ET's (Human/Reptile Hybrids?). I just wish to work toward a minimalist solar system government - which avoids the absurdities and atrocities of the past. The human race obviously has HUGE ethical and psychological problems which need to be remedied - but if the Secret Government, the United Nations, the Vatican, the City of London, Washington D.C., the Alphabet Agencies Worldwide, the Underground Bases, the Secret Space Program, the Secret Societies, and the Royal Family, et al - were truly governed by Responsibility and the U.S. Constitution - with 10,000 representatives from throughout the solar system - I have a feeling that things would improve - after a rough and rocky transition period. I tend to think that all of us are products and victims of our circumstances - and I have absolutely no animosity or ill-will toward any of the organizations or individuals mentioned above. I'm just trying to visualize what the best next step should be. I suspect really, really nasty ancient wars in this solar system (and elsewhere) - which may not be resolved - even at this late date. If reincarnation is a reality - we may have all been a part of unspeakable horrors. I don't know the whole story. I probably don't even know 1% of the whole story - so all of my presuppositions, speculations, and proposed solutions - might be complete BS. But somehow, We the Goyim - must begin to attempt to think everything though - and not just leave it up to the ET's and the Secret Societies.

    Carol wrote:I personally know Alex Collier and much about him. He has not had contact for years although he would like to have contact and puts up a false front about having recent contact. And one of the things I've personally heard him say repeatedly is that humans are right up there with everyone else (maybe not technologically and maybe some alien races are more spiritually evolved but we should never become slaves to anyone.}

    His experience was real yet his life a bit of a mess. Collier isn't being strong armed by anyone. As for Greer, he is his own man with his own agenda and is involved with ET contact via group meditation. I've read these men's unpublished and published interviews and they are close to Paola Harris who is a close personal friend of mine.

    It would be liberating if the general public had some type of concrete clue as to how many types of ETs the US government have treaties with. There are 114 different alien races that we know about and in my personal opinion, the US military FIRST chose to go with the ones who were at the bottom of the barrel (greys, reptilians and demons). Heaven help us.
    Thank-you Carol. I always feel humbled when I read your posts. You have obviously done a huge amount of research - you are an experiencer - and you know key people personally. I'm just an armchair blogger - and I am propelled forward (backward?) by my insecurities.

    I like Alex Collier a lot - and I listen to him more than just about anyone else. But I sense a lot of internal conflict. I also sense that he knows a lot more than he reveals publicly. He probably gets into a huge amount of trouble for what he does reveal. Strong arming can occur in a lot of different ways. Perhaps that was too strong of a term. I just detect a sense of resignation in people like Jordan Maxwell, Steven Greer, and Alex Collier. Jordan has been open about this. Steven stated at a 2005 X-Con (I think) that the ET agenda was going to be implemented whether the governments of the world like it or not. Alex has changed over the years. Watch his lectures and interviews in the 90's - and then watch the lectures and interviews from the last couple of years. I sometimes wonder if his information comes from both benevolent and malevolent beings - combined with his own research and thinking. Sort of a composite. The 'benevolent' beings could turn out to be deceptive SOB's. Could this be a possible reason for an absence of recent contact? This whole thing could be a lot nastier and messier than we can imagine. I'm not studying this stuff to be happy. I'm studying it because I'm scared.

    The figure of 114 alien races floored me. However - I'm still looking at the possibility that the 'ET's' are really Human/Reptile Hybrids - created right here in this solar system. Nicholas Roerich (the Russian mystic) traveled to Tibet - and learned of a 'Sovereign Queen of the Air' from Sirius - who conducted (and conducts?) a Hybridization Program. Nicholas spoke of seeing Strange Grey People in Tibet. Could this be the source of most of these 114 alien races? If you haven't already - watch the entire series linked in the first post of this thread. Notice especially Part 14 at around nine or ten minutes - to view the Roerich information. I think the deception, corruption, and cruelty is unimaginable and unfathomable. I obviously don't know the details. I continue to fly blind (and stupid). But I continue to fly. God help us.

    I'm rather lost, at this point. I really think that the infowar will go on for a long, long time - if not forever. No matter how all the king's horses and all the king's men try to put together an ideal politcal/religious system - it will always probably seem to be wrong - and we will continue to fight about how to do things the right way. The Holy Father and the Queen of Heaven must get very, very tired of all of the razzmatazz...

    Here is a Protestant view regarding the 'Woman Who Rides the Beast' aka the 'Whore of Babylon'. I am not endorsing this video. I include it only to provide another perspective. Obviously - I have been considering the possibility that the 'Whore of Babylon' may be the 'Queen of Heaven' rather than being a particular location or church. Again - I have no animosity. I'm just trying to figure out what has been going on throughout history. I have a feeling that most of us are deluded - including me. Does anyone know how much the Whore of Babylon charges? Fifty Cities? Why is she called the 'Whore of Babylon'? Because she babbles on and on and on and on and I'd better stop...

    What if most of us came to Earth from Sirius on a UFO called Battlestar Moon - around 12,000 years ago - led by the Queen of Heaven? What if our souls are interdimensional reptilian in nature - and what if all of us are human/reptile hybrids (with a very small reptile percentage)? What if Reptilians and Greys are human/reptile hybrids (with a very large reptile percentage)? What if the Queen of Heaven conducted a spirituality, technology, architecture, art, music, conquest, and genetic hybridization program - which got out of control? What if our true history is unbearable? Would the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth - unite the solar system - or drive us into yet another star war? These are not rhetorical questions. Here's something a bit more pleasant to contemplate:
    1. 2. 3. 4.

    I feel like I'm being mugged and raped by a brutal gang of facts, theories, and entities. When the Jesuits catch up with me - there probably won't be much left...

    Reconsider the first page of the AV1 Thuban Q&A (noting especially the X-rated story!) - and consider the possibility that abraxasinas - or one close to abraxasinas - looks like my avatar - and might really be Kali aka The Queen of Heaven aka The Whore of Babylon. All of the avatars have been removed from AV1 (why?) - but remember the avatar which abraxasinas used? It showed a Hathor-like goddess figure with a dog (Anubis or Sirius?) standing in front of a pyramid. I continue to think that the whole abraxasinas/Thuban fiasco was sort of a test or a mind-game - which nonetheless revealed information and concepts relevant to our quest. A word of warning - some found the Thuban material to be very disorienting - and some claimed that they were supernaturally attacked in connection with it. I could only bring myself to read selected parts of it - over a period of weeks and months. I had my first (and only) ufo sighting shortly before the Thuban thread and AV1 were closed. Researcher beware. Stay out of Thuban! Abandon all sanity - ye who enter Thuban - and cross over into a femtotechnically truncated bifurcation of an interdimensional hypotenuse of a trinity godess space-time singularity!

    The names Mercuriel and Hadriel are quite interesting - and may indicate sovereignty - but I really don't think I'm a sovereign (whatever that really means). I do think that I am one of many billions of beings who have a right to be here in this solar system (despite all previous conflicts and star wars). I do think that negative entities can mess with me big time - and I think they have done so throughout my life - and that they continue to do so. I'm not free at all - and I don't think that uttering prayers or incantations is the solution. Benevolent entities are probably keeping me alive - but they seem to not be doing much else that I can tell - but who knows? Someone claiming to be God showed up where I work - and was worried that someone was going to kill me - and they were very concerned about me - and protective toward me. I didn't even know this person - and they had no knowledge of my internet activities (that I know of). They told me they were going to destroy the world - and I tried to convince them not to! Honestly! I've had other very strange encounters with various people (who might not have been people?) throughout the years.

    I don't think I'm a sovereign - and your confirmation of my belief comes as a relief. I am trying to think through the power structure of this solar system - going back thousands, or even millions, of years - and I am trying to think Kali's thoughts after her - but I think there are too many sovereigns or wannabe sovereigns running (flying?) around this neck of the woods. Too many chiefs!! But having said that - I do think that We the People of Earth need to be the New Elites in a Brave New Solar System.

    Just a personal note to Lucifer, Shiva, Kali, Mary, Anna, Queen of Heaven - or to whom it may concern - I apologize if I have been unfair or unkind. I'm hurt, scared, insecure, and a bit curious - and I have been attempting to get a response from you without engaging in blood rituals and soul selling. If I ever meet you - I will be very respectful - but I might ask some hard questions - and I might not appear to be very friendly or responsive. Chad Decker would be a push-over compared to me. If things went my way (editorially) - I wouldn't jump up and down, and be triumphalistic. It would just be another day at the office. I would like to hear your musical capabilities - and I think they are probably unmatched in the history of the world. Credit should be given where credit is due. Justice should be served regarding any past wrongs - but I am not in favor of the death penalty, or cruel and unusual punishment. You might be sentenced to 1,000 years as the U.N. Representative from Phobos ("I was arrested last night in Tibet - and taken to a very nice prison on Phobos")! Don't be afraid. I mean no harm. I am of peace. Namaste.

    Here is a thread (not mine) from AV1 which might be relevant to this thread. I remember that it was a good thread - but that I didn't follow it too closely. Perhaps it's time to take another look at "Remote Viewing Tibetan Monks See Extra Terrestrial Powers Saving the World". What did the Tibetan Monks know - and when did they know it???? Also - in the movie '2012' - the arks were located in China - and the most unaffected continent was Africa. In light of my speculations - is this significant? Remember - Alex Collier recently stated that disclosure might very likely come from India or China. Is something brewing? Hmmmmmmmmm. Here is the first post of the thread by Adarajones:

    Remote viewing is nothing new in Tibetan monasteries. For thousands of years remote viewing in the middle of other spiritual activities have dominated Tibetan culture. What some Indian tourists came to learn from a few Tibetan monasteries under the current Chinese rule is extremely alarming and fascinating.

    According to these tourists remote viewers are seeing world powers in the course of self-destruction. They also see that the world will not be destroyed. Between now and 2012 the world super powers will continue to engage in regional wars. Terrorism and covert war will be the main problem. In world politics something will happen in and around 2010. At that time the world powers will threaten to destroy each other.

    Between 2010 and 2012, the whole world will get polarized and prepare for the ultimate dooms day. Heavy political maneuvers and negotiations will take place with little progress.

    In 2012, the world will start plunging into a total destructive nuclear war.

    And at that time something remarkable will happen, says, Buddhist monk of Tibet. Supernatural divine powers will intervene. The destiny of the world is not to self-destruct at this time.

    Scientific interpretation of the monks’ statements makes it evident that the Extra Terrestrial powers are watching us every step of the way. They will intervene in 2012 and save the world from self-destruction.

    When asked about recent UFO sightings in India and China, the monks smiled and said the divine powers are watching us all. Mankind cannot and will not be allowed to alter the future to that great extent.

    Every human being though their current acts in life called “Karma” can alter the future lives to some extent, but changing the destiny in that large extent will not be allowed to that great an extent.

    Monks also mentioned that beyond 2012 our current civilization would understand that the final frontier of science and technology is in area of spirituality and not material physics and chemistry. Beyond 2012, out technologies will take a different direction. People will learn the essence of spirituality, the relation between body and the soul, the reincarnation and the fact we are connected with each other are all part of “God”.

    In India and China UFO sightings have increased in many folds. Many say the Chinese and Indian Governments are being contacted by the Extra Terrestrials.

    In recent days most UFO activities have been seen in those countries who have indigenously developed Nuke capabilities.

    When asked if these extra-terrestrials will show up in reality in 2012, the answers remote viewers are giving is: they will reveal themselves in such a way that none of us scared. They will reveal themselves only if they have to. As our science and technology progresses, we are destined to see them and interact with them any way.

    According to the remote viewers, our earth is blessed and is being saved continuously from all kinds of hazards all the time that we are not even aware of. As our technologies progress we will realize how external forces saved us.

    It sounds as though we deal with the visible PTB (who we love and hate), who take orders from the bloodline elites, who take orders from mysterious and nepharious entities, who take orders from who knows who? I keep feeling as though we are prisoners of an ancient star war - and that we are serving some type of a sentence. What troubles me, is that even if we do become responsible (or try to be responsible) - we are destined to remain in jail. The law of the universe seems to be that the Human Race on Planet Earth cannot and will not be allowed to succeed - and that they will not be allowed to become responsibly free - no matter what. Perhaps the Original Sin was the Unpardonable Sin. This seems to be all about being beat into reverential submission by the chastenings of the lord - as sinners in the hands of an angry god. Did Promethius steal fire from this god? Did we all go along with Promethius? Is that why we are here - and why we are in so much trouble?

    Promethius = Lucifer = Kali = Mary = Anna (in "V")? What if the gods were problematic and disfunctional? What if Promethius/Lucifer/Kali/Mary/Anna was/were/are/is problematic and disfunctional? Is there a solution to the madness? Regardless of what really happened, and regardless of what is happening presently, why is there so much secrecy, deception, corruption, violence, and insanity? Why are legitimate and well-meaning attempts at understanding and reform, met with such coldness and even hostility?

    Allow me to introduce to you, a pretty lady named TREEE. Some might say that she is simply a drug addicted former prostitute - but she seems to know a helluva lot about some very creepy supernatural phenomenon. Might TREEE give us some clues as to what a modern incarnation of the Whore of Babylon would be like? Ironically, TREEE lives in Las Vegas - which is sometimes called 'Babylon'. One never knows...

    At this point - I feel like a lost little boy who has wandered onto the battlefield - just before the Battle of the Bulge. I don't want to be a part of any of this - but I have made myself a part of the mess - with all of my internet comments and speculation. Might we be dealing with Amen Ra Annunaki vs Hathor Annunaki? Gabriel Annunaki vs Lucifer Annunaki? Could Michael be the legitimate leader of the Human Race (us and those who we encounter every day)? Awesome Gods and Goddesses? Could Adria approximate the Queen of Heaven who anciently came to Tibet from Sirius - to conduct a hybridization program (to create us?) - after stealing fire from the gods?

    This is pretty much a goddess thread - and I just wish to communicate to all goddesses who might be reading this thread - that I mean no disrespect or injury - but I do wish for the madness in this solar system to end quickly. This has gone on long enough. I am once again inviting all factions to unite around a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System. I wish to retain all of the best which presently exists - and I wish to eliminate all of the worst which presently exists. However - each and every soul should be treated with kindness, dignity, and respect. I wish no misery, pain, or death on anyone - even upon the worst of the worst. Imprisonment and eventual restoration - probably. Extermination - probably not. How quickly destruction travels from one group to the next. If one group is insecure - all of us are insecure. Proceed wisely. I am of peace. Namaste.

    Are we dealing with Father (incoming) / Daughter (local) Annunaki? Are they Sirius A, Nibiru-Inhabiting, Hybrid, and Black? Gabriel and Lucifer? Are we also dealing with Aldebaran, Sirius B, Moon-Inhabiting, White Nazis - led by ?????? Who is the Hypothetical Jesus Faction - who is trying to break-up the Star War? Was the Annunaki Faction here first? Is Earth their planet? Did the Moon show up 12,000 years ago - and attempt to take over Earth? If so - what might be a reasonable resolution? What really troubles me is that we don't know the whole story. I hate this damn guessing game - and waiting game. Annunaki vs Nazi? Masons vs Nazis? Pigmented vs Non-Pigmented? Is the Jesus Faction really good and right - but relatively powerless? I continue to send my invitation into the vast regions of space and cyberspace - to unite all factions and all beings around a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System - based upon Responsibility and the U.S. Constitution. This is probably an exercise in futility - but one never knows who reads these threads - and who comments on them.

    Could the chief administrator of the Roman Catholic Church be similar to my avatar? Could this be the 'Whore of Babylon' - rather than the RCC? See - I'm thinking that the RCC might have to deal with more secret and hidden problems than we can possibly imagine. I just watched 'Stargate Continuum' - and the scene where Ba'al and Katesh aka Vala are in their spaceship - and are preparing to attack and enslave Earth - particularly impressed me. Might the RCC have had to deal with something like this? Could there be a real-life Katesh (Vala) aka Queen of Heaven - who controls us by controlling the Roman Catholic Church? Please don't consider this post to be hateful on my part. I'm just trying to understand. BTW - are there any Jesuits out there who can point me to a book or website - from the Roman Catholic perspective - which analyzes 'The Great Contoversy' - from cover to cover? I know all about the Plagiarism and Investigative Judgment problems. I also know that most Jesuits have read this book from cover to cover - and have it in their libraries. I'm a real Pain in Uranus - aren't I?

    This post should probably be the beginning of a new thread - but I'm going to attempt to tie it into this thread. The subject is Persia. I just viewed a video which claims that Persians are the true Aryans. The Nazis were into the Aryan thing. I recently heard that Bohemian Grove is run by Persians. I also heard that Obama is Persian. This is unconfirmed - and I know nothing about this subject - so please help me out. The Persian Gulf. The Medo-Persian Empire (following the Babylonian Empire). Most people in Iran are Persian. Why do I keep hearing rumors regarding nuking Iran? Why are we REALLY in Afghanistan and Iraq? Could we be involved in some sort of an Aryan War? Could all of this be somehow related to Tibet, Kali, the Trinity Goddess, the Queen of Heaven, and Disclosure? Here is a link to the wikipedia entry for Persia (which contains lots of links)> Bahai is Persian in origin - I believe. Isn't Steven Greer - Bahai? Help me out, folks! Is that Helena Blavatsky at 5:55? Could a Persian connection be the missing link in all of this? Try thinking in terms of Sirius/Tibet/Iran/Germany. I really don't think the German people came up with the Nazi phenomenon on their own. In fact - I don't think they knew what the hell they were getting involved in - even at the highest levels. Just more speculation. I have no idea where this might lead - but give it some thought.

    Has anyone done a study of 'The King of Heaven (Father/Gabriel/ Amen Ra?) and Queen of Heaven (Mother/ Hathor/Isis/Mary/Lucifer/ Holy Spirit?) - and the Heir to the Throne (Horus/Michael/Jesus?)' concept? I just thought of that! This could be applied in so many situations - terrestrial, extraterrestrial, mythological, theological, astrological, dynastic, etc. - with a high likelihood of overlap. I reread those abraxasinas posts - and I still think of abraxasinas - or the spirit behind abraxasinas - as being more feminine than masculine. I keep thinking of Adria or Quitesh in Stargate SG-1.

    I'm sorry for saying the same things over and over -- in different ways -- but I will probably continue doing so -- just to represent a contrarian alternative viewpoint in this forum. Anyway, I continue to be interested in the Archangels Gabriel, Michael, and Lucifer -- in the context of an Ancient and Ongoing Star War in Heaven. Are Archangels really Solar System Lords aka Sun Gods??? Once again, I am NOT a Bible-Thumper -- but still -- take a close look at Genesis, the Book of Enoch, and Revelation. This is anything but a fun study. I am highly idealistic -- yet what if the universe is anything but idealistic??? I keep wondering how good or how bad the souls in this solar system really are -- regardless of present physicality?? I like the theory of Human Physicality and Responsible Freedom -- but what if the souls that inhabit human bodies are really bad to the bone?? What if the horrors of history were inflicted for legitimate reasons?? What if the horrors of the future will be inflicted for legitimate reasons?? If one were briefed by the best and brightest on the Dark-Side of the Moon -- what would they think about the madness then?? Again, I am using this website and 'my' threads as a home-base. This site really isn't where I feel most comfortable -- but I continue to think that I need the challenge it presents me with. Current events might have EVERYTHING to do with all of the above. A Regime-Change might simply be the exchange of one Star War Lord for another. Who knows, I might be an Ancient Star War Lord with Amnesia. How should this universe define and deal-with sin?? Is Sin the Transgression of the Written Law of God?? Is Sin Insubordination to the Spoken Commandments of God?? What if False-Gods rule this world, solar system, and galaxy?? What if the Best God is too nice and too weak to defeat the Nasty False-Gods?? Does it take one to beat one?? Does Might Make Right?? What if Gabriel rules Sirius and This Solar System from Battlestar Nibiru?? What if Lucifer is the God of This World (Subservient to Gabriel)?? What if Gabriel = Mary?? What if Lucifer = Jesus?? Before you stone me to death -- remember that I'm a big fan of the Red-Letter Teachings of Jesus -- but who really created them?? Anyway, it might be necessary to think through all of this esoteric-theology to properly understand what might be happening with North Korea...

    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:10 pm

    One of my theories is that all honest theologians (of whatever pursuasion) eventually come to a severe crisis of faith. I love theologians -- yet I often hate theology (of all varieties). We often gravitate to either "God is Good -- and On Our Side" or to "There is No God -- That I Know of". But what if "God is NOT One of Us -- and is NOT On Our Side"?! If the other two positions make people angry -- the last one makes them livid -- or so it seems to me. The last view is MOST upsetting -- yet what does History and Sacred Scripture reveal to us?? Again, what if False-Gods overthrew the One-True-God in an Ancient Star-War in Heaven??!! I sometimes think that people become atheists and agnostics because the theological realities are much too dark -- and not because they don't believe that God actually exists. Consider Yeshayahu Leibowitz.

    Yeshayahu Leibowitz

    First published Tue Mar 29, 2011

    Yeshayahu Leibowitz (1903–1994) was one of the most outspoken and controversial twentieth century Jewish thinkers and Israeli public intellectuals. Once termed “the conscience of Israel”[1] by his childhood contemporary from Riga, Sir Isaiah Berlin, Leibowitz's thought is founded on a far-reaching theocentrism that allows him to combine a commitment to Orthodox Jewish practice with a stripped-down definition of Jewish faith that yields a radically naturalistic theology—if, indeed, what is left can bear the burden of the term “theology” at all. But the influence of this theocentric commitment spreads far beyond the confines of his views on religious faith. It is the ultimate source of his unyielding criticism of the rabbinic establishment in Israel, and what—“in the face of so much pressure to be sensible, to be realistic, not to let the side down” as Berlin (1983, 18) put it—was seen at the time as a highly controversial stance regarding Israeli policy towards the territories captured during the Six Day war.

    •1. Life and Works◦1.1 Works
    ◦1.2 Methodology

    •2. God and Theology
    •3. Interpreting Scripture
    •4. Jewish Faith and Jewish Law
    •5. Worship Lishmah and the Meaning of Mitzvoth◦5.1 Ethics and Religion
    ◦5.2 Meta-Halakhah and the Status of Women

    •6. Religion, State, and Israel
    •Bibliography◦Primary Literature
    ◦Selected Secondary Literature and Works Cited

    •Academic Tools
    •Other Internet Resources
    •Related Entries


    1. Life and Works

    Born to an observant Jewish family in Riga in 1903, Leibowitz gained his education at the Gymnasium, with concurrent home-schooling for his Jewish studies, before the family fled Russia in 1919 for Berlin. At the University of Berlin, Leibowitz studied chemistry and philosophy, receiving his doctorate in the former in 1924. After studying at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute from 1926–1928, Leibowitz went onto study medicine in Koln and Heidelberg, though with the Nazis gaining power he would gain his formal medical degree in Basel. In 1935 he moved to Palestine, initially as professor of biochemistry at the Hebrew University, going on to be appointed as head of biological and organic chemistry and professor of neurophysiology at the Medical School, as well as lecturing on the history and philosophy of science. Yet these formal academic appointments formed but one side of his work, and far from the most public, for in addition Leibowitz taught Jewish thought, whether in an academic context, in small study groups, or on television and radio, with a number of these broadcasts and study-group notes having since been published. But aside from these activities and his being editor in chief of several volumes of the Encyclopedia Hebraica, it was for his political interventions that Leibowitz would gain most notoriety on the Israeli public scene, whether in his criticism of the religious parties as the “kept mistress” (Judaism, 115) of the Israeli government, his argument as early as 1968 that Israel should withdraw from the newly-conquered West Bank and Gaza strip, or his public call for conscientious objectors from the time of the Lebanon war of 1982 and subsequently in the Palestinian territories. Leibowitz's ability to stir up public controversy was in evidence as late as 1993, the year before he died, in a speech to the Israel Council for Israeli-Palestinian Peace, where he reiterated his call on soldiers to refuse to serve in the Territories, using, not for the first time, highly provocative language comparing special units of the Israeli army to the SS. The speech followed the announcement that he was to receive the Israel prize—the country's most prestigious civilian award—in recognition of his life's work, a move that precipitated an appeal to the Supreme Court, and a threat to boycott the ceremony by Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. Leibowitz, however, saved everyone further embarrassment by declining the award.

    1.1 Works

    Leibowitz's philosophy found expression in numerous essays that first appeared in Hebrew periodicals and were subsequently collated, with some overlap, into a handful of volumes published at irregular intervals, most significantly Torah u-Mitzvot ba-Zeman ha-Zeh [Torah and Commandments in Our Time] (1954); Yahadut, Am Yehudi u-Medinat Yisrael [Judaism, Jewish People, and the State of Israel] (1975); and Emunah, Historiah, va-Arakhim [Faith, History, and Values] (1982). 1982 also saw the publication of the transcripts of his study-group on Maimonides' Shemoneh Perakim—the section of Maimonides' Commentary to the Mishnah that serves as an introduction to Tractate Avot (generally known in English as the Ethics of the Fathers). A number of his contributions to Israeli television and radio also appeared in print—including series on the philosophy of Maimonides and on the weekly Torah reading—and continue to do so posthumously, along with transcripts of further study-group discussions. Though far better known in Israel than in the English-speaking world, the publication in English translation of a collection of his writings in 1992—Judaism, Human Values, and the Jewish State—opened the way to a growing critical engagement with his thought beyond those oft disputed borders. One now finds a broadening of Leibowitz scholarship beyond exclusively Jewish concerns and the Kantian comparisons that were the staple of early critical work, to a clutch of recent attempts to place his work in proximity to that of Emmanuel Levinas, whose work Leibowitz held in high regard.[2] His radio broadcasts on Maimonides and on the weekly Torah reading of 1985–1986 are now also available in English.

    1.2 Methodology

    In the 1953 piece “Mitzvot Ma'asiyot” (a later version of which was translated as “Religious Praxis,” in Judaism), at once the most succinct statement of his philosophy and his most expansive essay that foreshadows much of what he would go on to write throughout his career, Leibowitz tells us that he is not concerned to “elaborate a philosophic justification or rationale for the Mitzvoth [commandments],” but instead to expand on “their meaning for Jewish religion as we live it” (Judaism, 4). Indeed, while some of Leibowitz's ideas are certainly drawn from (and relevant to) the philosophy of religion more generally, his writings are very specifically directed to giving a philosophical exposition of Judaism, and in particular of the mitzvoth that are at its heart. “Exposition” may, however, appear to be a misleading term to use given that the earliest published Hebrew version of this piece opens with some introductory methodological remarks “designed to guide the argument,” in which he states that argument “and not exposition—should be the main point of our discussion,” (Torah u-Mitzvot, 9).[3] Leibowitz's mixed signals here—talk of expanding on “meaning” suggests a more hermeneutical and expository approach, and yet he wishes to eschew “exposition” for argument—indicate important limits on what Leibowitz sets out to achieve. While he is certainly concerned with a correct understanding or description of the meaning of Jewish practice, he does nonetheless argue for his view. His construal of what constitutes argument, however, needs be understood rather narrowly and “scientifically.”

    Given his scientific training, Leibowitz “argues” on the basis of empirical (most often historical) evidence for his conclusions regarding, for example, the centrality of mitzvoth in Judaism to the exclusion of mysticism, philosophy, or dogma. Yet, on the very same positivistic grounds, he is not willing to launch parallel “arguments” in order to justify specific practices or indeed Jewish practice as a whole. Thus, if one is expecting to find an argument justifying the halakhic way of life through syllogistic reasoning from foundational principles in the manner of the great medieval Jewish philosopher Moses Maimonides, one is likely to be disappointed. What we do find, in line with much contemporary Jewish philosophy, is an insider's account of the meaning of faith in Judaism as understood from within that tradition, albeit with implications beyond those boundaries. But in contrast to some of the best-known twentieth century Jewish philosophers, Leibowitz insists that the only reliable tool that we can use in order to investigate the meaning of faith is discursive reasoning. Thus we find Leibowitz arguing not only historically, but also in the sense of using the tools of rational philosophical discourse to trace the implications of certain positions to their logical conclusions.

    Rather than setting out his philosophy comprehensively in the form of a system based on foundational premises, Leibowitz generally wrote short articles devoted to specific topics. It is nonetheless fair to say that there is a single axis around which his thought revolves and to which many of his views can ultimately be traced—the radical transcendence of God. In what follows we will begin with Leibowitz's understanding of God's transcendence, which will enable us to proceed to his conceptions of theology, Scripture, Jewish faith, ethics, and briefly politics, all of which ultimately wend their way back to that fundamental idea. While occasionally developments and changes in his thought will be noted, particularly in the political section, on the whole we will be dealing with his mature views since, as Hannah Kasher has argued, in the 1992 English translations to which most readers of this will have access, even the earlier essays have been translated in a manner that often reflects the later views (Kasher, 2000, 54).

    2. God and Theology

    According to Leibowitz, the central idea of Jewish monotheism is the radical transcendence of God, a view that has previously been given its starkest exposition by his philosophical hero, Maimonides. Postponing discussion of its precise logical status for Leibowitz, and provisionally accepting that “God is radically transcendent” is a cognitive statement, a rough first formulation of its meaning would be that God is an existent entity that is absolutely incomparable to any other form of reality that we can possibly encounter.

    Following Maimonides' negative theology, Leibowitz claims that we are unable to make any meaningful statements that purport to describe God. Any attempt to speak of God's properties or characteristics transcend the limits of human thought and language. In good Kantian, or even positivist fashion, human categories of thought only get any purchase in the human context within which they are formulated. They cannot be assumed to retain their meaning when applied beyond the boundaries of possible human experience. Of course, this depends on the further assertion that God is not a possible object of such human experience, a point to which Leibowitz swiftly proceeds. For a thoroughgoing commitment to the idea of the radical transcendence of God yields a number of important ontological conclusions that go beyond the semantic point made thus far. For Leibowitz, the idea of radical transcendence, if taken seriously, implies that God cannot be “contained” within any reality that we encounter. Nature is nature, history is history—and if God is truly transcendent neither are God or are related to God in any direct sense. Thus, in a self-aware, if not self-deprecating moment, Leibowitz sets out his “heresy” (his description, not mine) thus: “God did not reveal himself in nature or in history.” (Yahadut, 240) Were things otherwise, then nature and history would be “Godly”—and thus would be perfect and worthy of worship themselves. There would be “no room for ‘the holy God’ who transcends natural reality, since then reality itself is divine and man himself is God” (Judaism, 25).

    For Leibowitz, the only alternative to this view is a form of pantheism—the attribution of divinity in some sense to natural objects—an idea that he admits finds “echoes … in Jewish mysticism,” which to that extent is therefore “incompatible with halakhic Judaism” (Judaism, 26). The idea that any material object can be holy is something that, in Leibowitz's eyes, is the ultimate definition of idolatry, potentially leading to the worship of people, objects, or—significantly for his brand of Zionism—land. In contrast, though it might seem ironic at first glance given his view of pantheism, Leibowitz here takes up an almost Spinozan approach to nature. For Leibowitz, taking God's transcendence seriously entails the elimination of superstitious beliefs in holy entities with supernatural endowments, and thus a Spinozan demythologization of the natural world.[4] But while Spinoza is willing to speak of “God or nature,” for Leibowitz, the natural world must be purified of any trace of divinity; divinity—or holiness—is a notion that Leibowitz retains as a term to be used in connection with the God who radically transcends nature, with no remainder.

    Denuding the world of divinity does not stop for Leibowitz at the natural world. History, as the story of humankind in the natural world, can no more carry divine significance than can a material object. The idea that there is some divine purpose in history, that God exerts some form of providence over humankind, would similarly contradict the idea of God's transcendence and is thus a baseless notion for Leibowitz for whom “an unbiased examination of the history of humankind and of the Jews as related in the Bible will not reveal in the entire process … any design or definite direction, or gradual approach to a specific goal” (Judaism, 102).

    On the basis of these remarks, one immediately sees that Leibowitz's thought will be devoid of much that passes for traditional Jewish or general theology. Faith cannot be formulated around propositions that speak of God and his providential relationship to the universe. Holiness is confined to God and cannot be predicated of anything that exists in the world (which also, incidentally, explains his opposition to any ethnocentric interpretation of the idea of Chosen-ness based on some intrinsic “property” of holiness that Jews inherit). Any attribution of holiness to objects that might be found in Jewish texts is to be understood as attributing functional rather than essential holiness to the object in question.[5]

    Leibowitz's God is not a providential God; history has no teleology; and we find no attempts at theodicy in Leibowitz. In contrast to many contemporary Jewish philosophers, the holocaust merits barely a mention in his philosophical writings, other than to dismiss it from theological discussion. A thoroughgoing commitment to transcendence cannot allow for a God who is involved in human affairs. Those who would question, indeed those who lost their faith in God as a result of Auschwitz “never believed in God but in God's help… [for] one who believes in God … does not relate this to belief in God's help” (Accepting the Yoke, 21).

    For Leibowitz, this is a direct result of taking one's commitment to the radical transcendence of God to its logical conclusion. It is one thing, Leibowitz might say, to pay lip service to the idea of God's transcendence. But if God is to be truly transcendent, then we cannot associate our reality at any level with that of God. The one statement that we can make regarding God—that he is radically transcendent—can only be fleshed out further by clarifying how God is not anything that we can encounter in ordinary, or for that matter extraordinary, human experience. That Leibowitz here goes beyond even Maimonides is clear inasmuch as for Maimonides, though we cannot speak of God's intrinsic properties, we can speak of his “actions,” which is to speak of the course of nature, of which God is the first cause. And yet for Leibowitz, even this would transgress the limits to which the notion of radical transcendence binds us. To say that nature reflects God's actions renders God immanent in nature, and thus no longer transcendent. From both a semantic and ontological perspective, therefore, Leibowitz takes the notion of God's transcendence further than even his own philosophical “idol.” (See Statman 2005)

    3. Interpreting Scripture

    Leibowitz begins with a definition of God and draws out its implications for how we are to conceive of the world from a Jewish perspective. But where does he find this starting point? Textually speaking, one might claim to find grounding for the radical transcendence of God in various biblical verses and statements drawn from the Jewish tradition more generally, but no less than one can find quotes to question this account of God's relationship with nature and with history—as Leibowitz himself often acknowledges.[6] Indeed, any plain reading of Jewish Scripture would seem to suggest a God very closely involved with history and nature. Leibowitz's reading of Jewish Scripture is therefore based on a very particular hermeneutic approach to the Tanakh (the acronym used to refer to Jewish Scripture, based on the three works of which is composed—Torah, (lit. instruction), Nevi'im (Prophets), and Ketuvim (Writings)).

    Leibowitz's definition of the Tanakh as Holy Scripture would appear atypically to place him in uncontroversial territory. But, what, for Leibowitz, does it mean to accord it this status and how is it to be interpreted? For simplicity's sake, we will focus in what follows on the Torah, the founding constitution of Judaism and the most authoritative part of the Tanakh. Traditionally, it was believed that: 1) The Torah is the word of God as dictated to Moses; and 2) it contains both the history of ancient Israel and the eternally valid laws that bind the Jewish people—the mitzvoth. Though both claims are contested in contemporary denominations of Judaism, Leibowitz is highly critical of such denominations, identifying himself with Orthodox Judaism within which these would usually remain fundamental tenets. Yet his view of Scripture is some distance from the traditional picture.

    While many traditionalists would read the Torah as containing the prehistory of Judaism—if not of the world—and thus as being full of factual statements teaching such information, Leibowitz cannot accept this to be the case. Beginning with a basic epistemological point, Leibowitz's scientific training and vocation led him to take a positivistic approach to knowledge claims. Thus he writes that “our source of information is science. To the extent that we possess any real knowledge it is by way of scientific cognition” (Judaism, 136). But, given God's transcendence, there can be nothing holy about history or nature, or the information it provides. So were the Torah a history book or a scientific tract detailing the science of the universe—and it is of course often read as at least giving an account of the origins of the universe—“it would be difficult to see where [its] sacredness resided” (Judaism, 140). The Torah cannot be a holy book if it is teaching us information that is by (Leibowitz's) definition profane.[7]

    But this means that the prima facie factual assertions that we encounter must be read as nothing of the sort. The Torah is not a work of fact containing truths that we can obtain through standard epistemic procedures. It is rather, a sacred work, a work that is concerned with the realm of the religious. Not for Leibowitz therefore the time-honoured medieval conundrum regarding faith and reason. While for his medieval Jewish forbears reason and revelation were competing for the same territory—raising the question of the relevance of the latter for those enamoured of the former—Leibowitz is happy to give reason its due without worrying about its encroachment into the territory of revelation, and vice versa. The Torah as a sacred work is dealing in the realm of the sacred and is not supposed to be a repository of the propositional truths of history or science. What it provides instead is “the demand made of man to worship God” (Judaism, 136). The Torah is the source of the commandments—the mitzvoth—which are the manner in which Jews are to serve God.

    In one sense, this hermeneutic serves Leibowitz well, allowing him to bypass textual objections to his anti-providential reading of the Torah by claiming that the apparent references to God's role in nature or history are no longer to be understood factually, but rather as expressing something about the nature of our obligation to God. Similarly, stories of individuals are not to be mined for their historical content but for what they teach regarding the nature of religious obligation. At the same time, it demands a far from intuitive reading of much of Scripture, especially the stories of individuals that are certainly presented as if they are in some sense historical, and that in the later books of the Prophets that are also part of Holy Scripture are surely historical in part. Yet Leibowitz insists that in attempting the impossible—speaking of God—the Torah necessarily uses various literary forms amenable to human comprehension, but that nonetheless “from the standpoint of religious faith, the Torah and the entirety of Holy Scripture must be conceived as a demand which transcends the range of human cognition … a demand conveyed in various forms of human expression: prescriptions, vision, poetry, prayer, thought, and narrative” (Judaism, 140).

    This does not rule out in principle the possibility of the narratives happening to contain historical information in part. Scripture's narratives could at times coincide with historical facts, though whether or not this is the case would be subject to independent verification of these purported historical facts by standard epistemic criteria. But even allowing for this possibility, the historical meaning would be merely accidental. Such facts would not take on any sacred meaning in virtue of that facticity, but rather on account of imparting an ahistorical sacred message. The Torah, qua Holy Scripture, cannot be read as a repository of historical fact. To read it “from the standpoint of religious faith,” is to read it for the demands it places upon us.

    Nonetheless, given Leibowitz's views on God's transcendence, it is clear that the sacred and historical interpretations of the text are mutually exclusive when it comes to references to God's “intervention” in history or nature. And Leibowitz's particular hermeneutic allows him to deny that the Torah teaches us anything about God's actual intervention in nature or his directing of history, since apparently factual statements to this end in the Torah are not to be construed as such, but rather in terms of the normative messages that they carry. Here, the priority that Leibowitz gives to his understanding of God's transcendence appears forcefully, constraining him to take this hermeneutic stance. It does, however, raise the question of Leibowitz's understanding of the divine status of the Torah. For, if we cannot speak of it being revealed by God in any historical sense, whence its divinity? Leibowitz, fully aware of the problem, maintains that it is the Oral Torah that establishes the divine status of the Written Torah.

    Traditional Jewish teaching maintained that at the same time as he transmitted the Written Torah, God transmitted an oral teaching to Moses that was not to be written down. This Oral teaching developed into the multi-layered work that was eventually written down as the Talmud by the end of the sixth century and that was the source of the complex practical system of law—halakhah—that governed Jewish life until the nineteenth century and continues to structure the life of contemporary Orthodox Jews. Leibowitz maintains that “religiously and from a logical and causal standpoint the Oral Law, the Halakhah, is prior to the Written Teaching” (Judaism, 12), and thus it is the Oral Torah that grants divine status to the Written Torah:

    “The decision about which books to accept as Scripture was not made behind the veil of mythology or pre-history, but took place in the full light of history and in the course of halakhic negotiation… . Scripture is one of the institutions of the religion of Israel” (Judaism, 12).

    This, Leibowitz admits, yields an inescapably circular account whereby the divinity of the Written Torah is established by the Oral Torah, which only gains its own authority on the basis of the Written Torah that it is being used to support. More significantly Leibowitz emphasizes time and again that the Oral Torah is a human product. Thus we end up with human beings stipulating that the Written Torah is divine, a stipulation, however, that only has authority based upon the Written Torah's own statements to the effect that one must follow the words of the human sages.[8] Reinforcing the circularity, this reading of the relevant verses in the Torah is itself an interpretation of the sages.

    Leibowitz maintains, then, that we can say one thing about God—that he is radically transcendent, a statement the content of which is exhausted in the denial of divinity to any other reality. Allowing for this denial of any positive theology that would relate God to history or nature, we still find one thing to which we can attach divinity, and that is Scripture. However, the most basic question regarding whether or not God revealed the Torah in any historical sense must be answered negatively by Leibowitz, as noted in Statman 2005 (60) and Sagi 1997a (213), leaving him with an account of the divinity of Scripture that is circular, and that ultimately seems unable to escape its reliance on human decision.

    4. Jewish Faith and Jewish Law

    The “top-down” approach to Leibowitz's theology taken so far places extreme limits on what one can say or know about God but does not yield a constructive account of the nature of Jewish faith. His positive formulation therefore proceeds from an altogether different direction. Taking a more “bottom-up” approach methodologically speaking, Leibowitz utilizes a historical argument in defining Jewish faith, arguing that throughout history, at least until the emancipation of European Jewry beginning at the end of the eighteenth century, Judaism was defined through adherence to Jewish practice, to the commandments of the Torah itself, and the subsequent development of these commandments into the all encompassing system of Jewish law, or Halakhah. Any definition of Jewish faith must therefore centre upon Jewish practice, on the mitzvoth that governed the everyday life of Jews until modern times. Moreover, Leibowitz's concept of faith makes no allowances for any theological accretions, be they mystical or philosophical, which would purport to define it. Jewish theology through the ages has always adapted itself to prevailing philosophical or mystical winds, and is seen by Leibowitz as “episodic and fleeting” (Judaism, Cool. Whether the conceptual scaffolding was kabbalah or rationalist philosophy, Judaism “was never dependent upon some specific philosophy, ethic, world view, or theology” (Judaism, 8–9), though it is mysticism and not rationalism which, along with Reform Judaism, he classifies one of “the two great distortions of Jewish faith” (Judaism, 111).

    This historical account also melds with Leibowitz's theological starting point. Given God's transcendence, we know that the realm of natural or historical fact cannot be holy. Faith cannot therefore be “a conclusion a person may come to after pondering certain facts about the world,” and instead is “an evaluative decision that one makes, and, like all evaluations, it does not result from any information one has acquired, but is a commitment to which one binds himself.” (Judaism, 37, emphasis added). Jewish faith, therefore, rather than consisting of propositional beliefs concerning God upon which foundation halakhic observance is based, is instead founded upon the evaluative decision to commit to that very system of observance. For Leibowitz it is the mitzvoth themselves “which demarcate the realm of the sacred … [and] anything outside that realm lacks sanctity and is unworthy of religious adoration” (Judaism, 25).

    This assertion of the primacy of practice is not unique to Leibowitz, having recently been resurrected by scholars such as Menachem Kellner (2006) and Kenneth Seeskin (1990). Steven Schwarzschild memorably termed this “the Jewish twist” (Schwarzschild 1977, 139) that in his view Jewish thinkers had applied since time immemorial to the systems of thought with which they grappled in order to partially assimilate them into a Jewish philosophical context. But Leibowitz gives this idea its most extreme formulation.

    Ordinarily one might assume that the commitment to the practice of the halakhic way of life is an independently specifiable mental act and certain statements that Leibowitz makes in his earlier writings, vestiges of which remain in some less careful later formulations, might appear to suggest this.[9] Yet for Leibowitz, faith is not an independently specifiable psychological state. Indeed he castigates those who “wish to distinguish a specific psychological-conceptual content of the religious consciousness from its concrete institutionalized embodiment” (Judaism, 38). Leibowitz will not allow us to pinpoint a particular psychological state that constitutes this commitment, and correlatively is highly critical of mystical approaches to Judaism that revolve around putative religious experiences. A religion devoted to halakhic practice “does not depend upon the incidence of religious experience” (Judaism, 13), which is a mere “embellishment” to halakhic practice. Indeed, “the aim of proximity to God is unattainable” (Judaism, 16).

    Clearly for Leibowitz, the problem with specifying some psychological basis for this commitment is defining what the content of this mental act would be. To what am I committed? The natural answer is that we are committed to worshipping God. But any attempt to unpack that statement further will lead us to transgress the boundaries of human cognition according to Leibowitz. The proposition “I am committed to God” is not open to further elaboration if God is beyond our categories of language and thought. Belief in God for Leibowitz, which cannot be formulated propositionally, can only then be embodied in a commitment to a particular way of life, which can only be expressed by subordination to the actual practical regime of halakhic practice. Thus, we are thrust back to the mere practice itself as the content of our faith rather than the symptom of some independently specifiable psychological commitment. It turns out then that, “[Jewish] faith is nothing but its system of mitzvoth, which was the embodiment of Judaism” (Judaism, 38, emphasis added). Jewish faith is equivalent to the observance of mitzvoth with no remainder; the concept is exhausted by the performance of Mitzvoth.

    This contraction of faith to a behavioural definition means that halakhic observance itself constitutes a faith which cannot be identified independently of this practice, which Leibowitz concedes might create the appearance of paradox:

    “Halakhah is founded on faith, yet at the same time constitutes this faith. In other words, Judaism as a living religion creates the faith upon which it is founded. This is a logical paradox but not a religious paradox” (Judaism, 11).

    Asa Kasher, a neo-Leibowitzian, has argued that Leibowitz here does not present a paradox at all, but instead a form of the circle discussed in section 2 (A. Kasher 1976). Leibowitz in response concedes that there is no paradox, but stresses that no matter how many times one goes around the circle, the ultimate commitment to the life of mitzvoth must come from beyond the circle, from the conative — rather than cognitive — commitment that is beyond reason (see “Responses,” 277–278). The claim here ultimately for Leibowitz—that the practice of halakhah constitutes faith, while faith is the basis for practice – can be broken down into the following two claims:

    Claim 1: Faith is defined as, or constituted by halakhic practiceClaim 2: Faith, defined as halakhic practice, is the basis of faith in the practice.
    Claim 1 is simply the empirical/theological claim discussed above. In Claim 2, Leibowitz's point appears to be that while one may wish to argue that one's practice is founded on some independently specifiable faith such as the belief that God gave these commandments to the Jewish people, in fact immersion in the halakhic practice precedes any reflective version of such a belief, such that one's commitment is not based on that belief in any meaningful sense. At the point at which we are beings who are able to reflect thoughtfully about our commitment to our practices, we are already implicated in and formed by them.

    As a justificatory argument for engaging in the practice, this might indeed create an impression of circularity—though circular arguments are neither formally invalid, nor paradoxical, but “merely” unpersuasive. Leibowitz, however, emphasizes time and again that he is not attempting to “justify” the commandments. Medieval Jewish thinkers believed that it was possible to “justify” Judaism by appeal to universal standards. Thus, to take Maimonides for example, if truth is the standard, then Judaism is clearly the most rational religion since it is a superior exemplar of, or means to attaining the truth, relative to the other monotheistic alternatives. If one were to begin from a neutral perspective, a rational being insofar as he is rational, could, in principle, be convinced of the superiority of Judaism. But this idea of a neutral starting point from which we can assess all the rational alternatives is one that Leibowitz rejects. The fiction that as fully formed rational beings we cast our eye without prejudice over the various modes of practical existence and decide in favor of the most rational is dismissed by Leibowitz. When it comes to faith, in Leibowitz's words:

    “I know of no ways to faith other than faith itself… . [It] cannot be taught. One can only present it in all its might and power” (Judaism, 37).

    This is where Leibowitz admits the limits of rationalism when it is understood as the metaphysical thesis that the world is intelligible “all the way down.” The world and our commitments within it are not rational all the way down. But once we have certain commitments, as every person does at the time at which he begins to reflect on them, our rational faculties are the only tools for exploring them, though not in the expectation that such reflection can be expected to produce meanings that will convince all rational beings to commit themselves to such a practice. And if we are to ask why commit, we are asking the question too late and assuming the theoretical stance towards faith that Leibowitz contends is questioned by Judaism.

    Thus Leibowitz's contention that faith is based on halakhic practice and at the same time constituted by halakhic practice appears to be more a phenomenology of Jewish faith than a justification for faith, as one might expect from his methodological pronouncements. Much as Aristotle believed that virtuous action precedes the acquisition of the virtues, our commitment to the mitzvoth—or at least the conscious commitment that we make as reflective beings—is similarly preceded by participation in those very halakhic practices.[10] And just as for Aristotle it is only once we have acquired the virtues that those same acts becomes truly virtuous, in the same way halakhic actions only latterly become understood as acts of religious faith, in which one is conscious of a religious commitment to them. From this perspective, one might even argue that the circle becomes a virtuous circle, for the practice that is the basis of faith and yet ultimately constitutes that faith does indeed reinforce that faith—the practical circle is persuasive in a way that the circle of logical justification is not.

    There is a sense in which this renders any commitment to a value system an expression of faith, rather than a result of rational reflection. But what then marks it out as specifically religious? What marks this out as Jewish faith is simply that it is the Jewish form of life, one that derives from specifically Jewish sources and has a specifically Jewish history. But for it to be religious requires that Leibowitz, in contrast to a secular ethicist, at least retain an ontological commitment to there being an entity that we can call God, to whom halakhic practices are directed. At this point therefore, one would wish to maintain that “God is radically transcendent” remains a cognitive statement. The mitzvoth are only “holy” inasmuch as they constitute holiness through being God's commands. It is in this way that this practice can constitute faith.

    Yet as noted previously, Leibowitz cannot construe statements in the Torah regarding the event of revelation at Sinai as historical statements. So the problem remains of how a people could have been commanded and what exactly was “recognized” there if it is not the case that at some point in history the commandments were revealed by God. The problem for Leibowitz's account is that the mitzvoth are indeed enacted by human beings and thus play a role in the natural world. As a result, they must have a history. At the very least we can say that at some point they made their incursion into history. But how? If not through some miraculous revelatory event—a possibility that Leibowitz excludes[11]—then it must have been through some form of human initiative. Thus, in parallel to the attribution of divinity to Scripture, as Sagi notes, “the system is made religiously meaningful by the believers' perception of it as concerned with the worship of God,” while God collapses into a formal requirement of the system, “the supreme concept, uniting the system and endowing it with religious significance.” (Sagi 1997a, 213) Though it is not clear that this would concern Leibowitz, one ought to note that the mere institutional decision to categorize the mitzvoth as holy is not a firm basis for recovering their divinity in any sense that would pacify the religious adherents the nature of whose faith he is attempting to delineate.

    Leibowitz's attempt to exclude God from history thus leaves him apparently unable to account for the divinity of the commandments in a manner that would render their performance acts of commitment to God in the ordinary sense. Indeed, when asked directly whether the statement “I believe in God” is meaningful, Leibowitz's response was: “I do not understand these words if they are divorced from the obligations that derive from them … faith in God is not what I know about God, but what I know about my obligations to God” (Sihot, 97). Talk of divinity should not be understood cognitively but in terms of the normative demands it imposes. Even talk of the revelation at Sinai is to be construed along these lines—“The meaning of the revelation at Sinai is the recognition of the command that we have been commanded” (Emunah, 154). But the truth in this for Leibowitz, phenomenologically speaking, is that the commitment to the practice is not based on an initial belief in God. Talk of God supervenes on the commitment to the practice rather than being a justification for it. Indeed, one generally only sincerely formulates the very idea that one is serving God subsequent to practice. Thus for Leibowitz, while it seems the term must have a referent, we use it without understanding it, and without needing to. In homage to Wittgenstein, Leibowitz writes: “That which cannot be said, is said by the religion of the Torah and the Mitzvoth,” (Yahadut, 343)—or at least by a commitment to them that cannot be given a specification independent of their practice. For Leibowitz, the realization that dawns with the rise of this commitment reveals that God cannot be spoken of as an entity who can be located in history or nature and that gives commandments over to a people in any conventional sense. Indeed, “the purpose of the mitzvoth is to educate man to recognize that knowing God and cleaving to him consist in the practice of these very precepts” (Judaism, 27). Thus, when the question is posed as to whether this leaves us with a robust enough idea to ground religious commitment, Leibowitz would claim that once those within the practice ask these questions, they will already be chasing their own tails. It is only subsequent to being committed to the practice that we reflect, analyse, and even formulate the very idea that we are practicing out of a commitment to God. Leibowitz seems to end up with a “leap of faith” type theology where the leap is taken retrospectively, by which time whatever independent specification one attempts to give of this notion ends up either transgressing boundaries that Leibowitzian transcendence sets on language and thought, or collapsing back into talk of commitment to the practice. The only way one can characterize Jewish faith is through the continued commitment to the practice itself, which thus constitutes that faith.


    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:15 pm

    What if the God of the Roman Catholic Church is the God of Israel?? The Jewish people were, and are, looking for the coming of the Messiah -- yet they rejected the Historical Jesus -- and Catholicism often seems to be based upon something other than the Teachings of Jesus. Who has REALLY been running Judeo-Christianity for the past 2,000 years?? What if the "Messiah" is the One-True-God who created the Human Race -- but who was subsequently defeated (and captured?) in an Ancient Star War in Heaven?? What if the Messiah is a Prisoner of War -- and Hostage to the Devil -- who might not know who they really are?? What if nearly all religions worship and obey the God(s) who won this hypothetical war?? Would history be trustworthy?? What if the Whole World is in the process of rejecting their One-True-God One-Last-Time?? If the Messiah appeared -- would the People and the Messiah be submissive and obedient to the historical and contemporary God of This World?? How might Gabriel, Michael, Lucifer -- Isis, Horus, and Set -- fit into this theological picture?? I continue to think that all of you should study theology -- even if you don't believe in God. But don't expect this study to make you happy. If you wish to be happy -- go to a Happy-Clappy Church -- or Smoke Medical Marijuana. Yeshayahu Leibowitz continued.

    5. Worship Lishmah and the Meaning of Mitzvoth

    Leibowitz cannot make sense of the divinity of the mitzvoth by claiming that God is their source in any straightforward sense. But he would not be the first Jewish philosopher to understand the divinity of the commandments as a function of their content rather than their historical source—according to many scholars, Maimonides also based his understanding of the divinity of the commandments on their being means to human perfection rather than on any direct historical experience of God.[12] Having reduced all meaningful discourse about God and faith to halakhic practice, one might thus look to the meaning of the practice for some such mark of divinity, and indeed Leibowitz has much to say about the nature of the mitzvoth, particularly as they relate to human values, and based on a basic Talmudic distinction between two forms of religious worship—worship that is “lishmah,” or “for its own sake,” and worship that is “Not-lishmah,” or “not for its own sake.”

    Worship that is “Not-lishmah” Leibowitz characterizes in teleological terms. It begins with a set of human values and beliefs, and understands religion as the instrument for the realization of these values. Thus religious acts will be derived from this set of values, being those that best express them. These values, therefore, are prior to the religious act, much in the way utilitarian ethical theory prioritizes a definition of the good and defines right action in terms of what maximizes that good. Religious action then is at base motivated by human needs and the problem with such worship for Leibowitz is that it renders God the servant of man. It is what he terms “an endowing religion—a means of satisfying man's spiritual needs and of assuaging his mental conflicts. Its end is man, and God offers his services to man.” (Judaism, 14).

    Reflecting an ambivalence that runs through statements in the Jewish tradition regarding such worship, Leibowitz vacillates between recognizing worship “Not-lishmah” as a genuine if flawed form of worship and as not seeing it as worship at all—indeed, seeing it as idolatrous in its reduction of worship of God to worship of man, thus implying that man is holy.[13] Philosophically speaking, his negative attitude can again be traced back to his strictly scientific approach to the world and his views concerning God's transcendence. Regarding the former, Leibowitz dismisses the idea that human beings exist at some supra-natural level. As creatures of flesh and blood, we are governed by the same natural laws as the rest of nature. Human beings have no special endowment that transcends their physical nature. Given that this is the case, human needs cannot be sacred, and thus the service of human need cannot be the purpose of the mitzvoth. Coming from the opposite direction, given that God is transcendent and cannot be related to any form of concrete reality, including human reality, how could the service of our own needs, which are a function of our humanity, constitute worship of God? God must be the exclusive locus of religious value, to the exclusion of human values. Man, in comparison, is but human, and a part of nature. Thus, while Medieval Jewish philosophers usually take the statement at Genesis 1:27 that man was created “in the image of God” as placing man on a pedestal by somehow comparing him to God, Leibowitz takes the term “image” in its more prosaic, if not pejorative Platonic sense (Judaism, 90).

    In marked contrast to all of this, Leibowitz presents the idea of worship “lishmah,” which is the mark of a demanding religion. Here, the religious act is prior to any set of human needs or values. It is characterized by acts of worship demanded by God, where the demands made, and the motivations for serving, are simply that—they are Gods' demands. Here man is “an instrument for the realization of an end which transcends man … [who] serves his God lishmah—because He is worthy of worship” (Judaism, 14). Essentially, Judaism is a religion that demands the service of God, not man. Mitzvoth, for Leibowitz, are not therefore based on human needs and desires since that would subordinate God's values to human values, rendering God a slave to humanity, and placing humanity at the pinnacle of all value. Most mitzvoth for Leibowitz must therefore “be meaningless except as expressions of worship. They have no utility in terms of satisfaction of human needs” (Judaism, 16). Thus he sees much of halakhah as constitutive of religious “reality” rather than as regulating pre-existing profane reality. The dietary laws, to take an obvious example, are not there to regulate some form of pre-existing “spiritual” reality. Reality is equivalent to physical reality and the dietary laws are nothing more (nor less) than requirements of worship constituting a halakhic “reality,” which is a reality that has no referent beyond itself.

    This sui generis understanding of halakhah is important if we are to understand Leibowitz's retreat from facts to values in the realm of faith. We have seen that to speak of any factual reality as divine impugns God's transcendence for Leibowitz. But one might ask why speaking of God as a source of values within our world is any less of an intrusion upon his transcendence. Leibowitz's point is that God is not a source of values within our world, since halakhah is not a function of any human values, indeed not a function of any set of values to which we have any independent access. In this way Leibowitz retains the transcendence of God in the evaluative realm of faith commitments in a way that is not possible in the realm of facts. And if we wish then to base the divinity of the mitzvoth on their content as opposed to any historical event of revelation, the content of the mitzvoth that marks them out as divine is their very “contentless-ness.”

    5.1 Ethics and Religion

    Leibowitz's view of mitzvoth clearly has important implications for the relationship between ethics and religion in general and more specifically for the relationship between ethics and halakhah. Religious values cannot be subordinated to ethical values which, since dictated by human interests for Leibowitz, are profane by definition, and therefore he draws a sharp distinction between mitzvoth and the realm of the ethical:

    “The Torah does not recognize moral imperatives stemming from knowledge of natural reality or from awareness of man's duty to his fellow man. All it recognizes are Mitzvot, divine imperatives” (Judaism, 18).

    Leibowitz does not deny that there is a genuine realm of ethical value, writing that both the theocentric (religious) and anthropocentric (Kantian) conceptions of value are “legitimate” (Judaism, 208). But he sees ethical values as distinct from the realm of religious value and stresses the importance of not confusing the one with the other. Much like Kierkegaard, Leibowitz argues that religious values are ultimate and if one is to serve God, all other values, including ethical values, must be subordinated to serving God, as exemplified by the biblical story of Abraham's (non) sacrifice of Isaac.[14] Ethics, as he notes, is the “atheistic category par excellence” (Judaism, 18), placing man at the apex of our values in place of God.

    Much has been made of the formal similarities between Leibowitz's approach to mitzvoth and Kantian ethics, given the categorical nature of both the ethical and halakhic imperative, neither of which can be instrumental means to ends beyond the respective duties themselves. Both stress “worship lishmah”—it is just that Kantian ethics “worships” man “lishmah,” or as an end in himself, while religion worships God. Moreover, as with Kantian moral imperatives, the upshot of acting on religious imperatives for Leibowitz is autonomy. But while ethical action is autonomous for Kant inasmuch as it is a deliverance of our own practical reason, that very fact means that for Leibowitz ethical action is not an expression of human autonomy, but of our enslavement to our own nature. Recalling that for Leibowitz man is simply a part of nature like any other, when acting in accordance with that nature, man is “in effect, nothing but a robot activated by the forces of nature, just like the cattle grazing in the pasture, which are also ‘free from the Torah and Mitzvoth’; that is, from any law externally imposed” (Judaism, 21).

    Though perhaps his rhetoric gets the better of him in comparing man acting on his own nature to an animal acting on its own nature, Leibowitz's central incompatibilist point is that freedom cannot be a function of acting according to one's own nature if man's nature “is only the last link in a causal chain of the forces of inorganic and organic nature which act upon him and within him” (ibid.). If this is the case, then the ethical dictates of human reason no more render man autonomous than do the ‘acts’ of his digestive system. Man is only “free from the bondage of nature because he lives a life that is contrary to nature,” and thus “emancipation from the bondage of nature can only be brought about by the religion of the Mitzvoth” (Judaism, 22).

    Yet this apparently clear contrast with Kant actually betrays a deeper similarity. Kant sees ethical action as the route to autonomy precisely because it is through practical reason that we transcend our own nature and make contact with the noumenal realm. In effect therefore, and despite Kant's wish to keep religion and ethics apart from a motivational perspective, Kant and Leibowitz are in agreement that human autonomy requires that man transcend his phenomenal nature. The difference is that while for Kant ethics is, in a certain sense, transcendent—at least transcending man's empirical if not his rational nature—for Leibowitz ethics is nonetheless a function of human nature and therefore mired in the “phenomenal” realm destined never to escape. Leibowitz's view of autonomy appears to depend again on his thoroughgoing “naturalism” in regard to the physical and human world. Only the realm of mitzvoth can effect the sort of limited Leibowitzian transcendence that yields autonomy, which through its foundation in a primordial heteronomy—the imposition of mitzvoth by God—yields one of the fertile areas of comparison to Levinas in Fagenblat 2004, though as Fagenblat notes, for Levinas the realm of the ethical itself is a realm of transcendence beyond discursive human rationality. Unlike Leibowitz and closer again to Kant, for Levinas we need not go as far as mitzvoth to find the realm of transcendence.

    Despite all of this, it is not clear that mitzvoth could not carry some sort of ethical valence. Much as Kant does for moral value, Leibowitz locates the religious value of our acts in our intentions. Holiness, he tells us, “is nothing but halakhic observance; the specific intentional acts dedicated to the service of God” (Judaism, 24, emphasis added). Presumably then the mitzvoth could be performed for the sake of worshipping God and yet have incidental benefit to us. As long as the motivation is the worship of God, any incidental benefits would surely be legitimate, or at least not rule out the act as religiously worthy. What matters here is the hierarchy of values—observance of mitzvoth cannot be subordinated to ethical values. Yet Leibowitz's intentionalism dictates that such acts, even if they incidentally satisfy certain human needs, would still not be ethical acts given their religious motivation.

    At this point, Leibowitz's description of the religious and halakhic realms, even if disputable, appears to be consistent. Judaism is for him a deontological system of divine duties, rather than a teleological system designed to promote any form of human “good.” From a human perspective, the mitzvoth might indeed be meaningless; if they do end up promoting some form of human good, this would be accidental and not part of the essential nature of mitzvoth. But while this conception of mitzvoth works well for most ritual commandments, it comes under pressure in relation to what would ordinarily be termed ethical mitzvoth—were it not for the fact that this is now an oxymoron for Leibowitz—such that even “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” is to be regarded as a mitzvah, not as an ethical precept. The key phrase in the verse containing this commandment for Leibowitz is that which follows immediately to end the verse: “I am God.” It is a duty towards one's neighbor that is based on man's position before God, not his position before his fellow man.

    One of Leibowitz's concerns seems to be that for the imperatives to be truly categorical, they must draw their authority from something other than human needs and values, which are too weak a foundation to ground categorical imperatives. One can always excuse oneself with the claim that other people's needs are not overriding in any given situation. There is no escape, however, from the authority of a divine demand, thus locating ethical imperatives within a religious system gives them the necessary foundation. Their position as commandments transform them from “mere good counsel, a noble aspiration, or a sublime ideal,” and instead gives them “the reality of law, something one is compelled to take seriously as one must take a police ordinance seriously” (Judaism, 19). But more than that, for Leibowitz this deprives them of their ethical character. Acting for noble ideals, while legitimate, would still render acts ethical, not religious. Thus an important distinction remains, and it is not clear that it is a distinction that can do justice to the ethical prescriptions of the Torah qua ethical prescriptions. Ought I to act justly towards my neighbor out of my concern for him, or out of concern for God? While it seems clear that Leibowitz could only see the latter as a religious act, it is not clear that this sits comfortably with our ethical intuitions—though presumably Leibowitz would simply retort that this is precisely what it means to subordinate human interest to the ultimate value that is the worship of God. While a Levinasian squaring of the circle would allow that our ethical concern for the other is itself a mark of transcendence, for Leibowitz, a religious act, even if it may serve one's fellow man incidentally, can neither be motivated by such a goal, nor allow such goals to play a role in our understanding of it as a mitzvah, since this would render God the slave of human interests.

    Nonetheless, Leibowitz recognizes that beyond the realm of halakhah “flourish many good deeds and events of grandeur and sublimity” (Judaism, 25). Generally for Leibowitz, halakhah is not all-encompassing and does not govern all behavior, as he makes explicit in his interviews with Michael Shashar where he asks rhetorically whether Judaism has a perspective on the decision whether to build a bridge over a particular river (Sihot, 91). For Leibowitz then, there are clearly other aspects of human life that are necessary, indeed valuable, and that need not be dedicated to the worship of God. Religion must be the highest value for Leibowitz to which all others are subordinated in times of conflict; it need not be the only value. But in acting for the sake of one's fellow man, one must recognize that this is the performance of a noble ethical act, not a holy religious act. The question that arises, however, is whether in the case of ethically motivated acts that coincide with mitzvoth, a Jew ought to have instead performed the act for religious reasons—a position that would not leave much room for a religious person to perform an ethical action. Indeed, it would seem that if one wishes to perform the mitzvah of, for example, “loving one's neighbor,” one ought not to be acting based on ethical motives. As such, it is not clear what becomes of the legitimacy of the ethical realm for a religious Jew, since every ethically motivated act constitutes a missed opportunity for the worship of God. Each act ought to be religiously rather than ethically motivated, even when the mere act itself would be the same. While it is not as if one who is ethically motivated can sincerely transform that ethical motivation into a religious one, it seems as if becoming the type of person who naturally acts religiously in such cases would have to be the ultimate aim for Leibowitz. This would not deny all value to ethically motivated acts, but it certainly seems to render those that coincide with specific mitzvoth problematic for Jews.

    5.2 Meta-Halakhah and the Status of Women

    Leibowitz's account of halakhah is not uni-dimensional. His claim that most of the mitzvoth are meaningless according to human conceptions of value leaves an important gap that he exploits elsewhere in his writings, particularly in a short late piece on the status of women in Judaism, where he distinguishes between two types of mitzvoth in a manner that renders the picture considerably more complex.

    Thus on the one hand, we have the ritual commandments required of men and not required of women. These mitzvoth are indeed “meaningless,” having no intrinsic value beyond their status as mitzvoth that God requires in his service by men and not women. They do not reflect any exalted status for men or yield access to some sort of religious experience beyond the mere burden of performance. Given this, the desire of women to take on such practices in the name of equality reflects a fundamental misunderstanding—or at least a non-Leibowitzian understanding—of the nature of these commandments. And yet, when it comes to the highest level study of Torah and access to public office, both of which had traditionally been halakhically forbidden to women, Leibowitz takes a very different view. Barring women access to the study of Torah “is not to exempt them from a duty … but is to deprive them of a basic Jewish right … [that] renders their Jewishness inferior to that of men” (Judaism, 129). The original restriction, as well as that regarding attaining public office, reflected the prevailing socio-cultural norms of the surrounding society rather than any essential halakhic determinations. Thus Leibowitz wishes to distinguish between

    “absolute demands reflecting acceptance of the ‘yoke of the kingdom of heaven’ that are not amenable to adjustment to natural or social factors, [and] practices which reflect given circumstances and the views shaped by them; in other words, between unconditional prescriptions and proscriptions and norms reflecting a given sociocultural milieu and its prejudices” (Judaism, 131).

    We find, therefore, a realm of mitzvoth that do appear to be subservient to human values and societal change. That Leibowitz believes in such a category, independently of the highly charged gender question, is clear from the following:

    “Consider the proscription of ploughing with an ox and an ass yoked together. Does this imply a duty to base agriculture on animal power and to create the opportunity for fulfilling the prohibition? Reversing the terms, is mechanized agriculture, which obviates the use of animals as a source of energy forbidden because it removes all opportunity for observing this mitzvah? Or is it permissible to assume a hypothetical imperative: in the event that animals are used, avoid ploughing with an ox and an ass yoked together?” (Judaism, 149).

    The Torah clearly contains laws or commandments that react to political and social institutions already in place—hence laws concerning slavery for example. Thus it turns out that there are two categories of mitzvoth for Leibowitz: type1 acts without intrinsic meaning that are constitutive of a halakhic reality and not amenable to change; and type2 acts where the halakhic community has responsibility for regulating a pre-existing reality. These halakhic acts can change depending on the general sociocultural norms governing that particular aspect of reality, be it agriculture, or gender equality. Indeed, Leibowitz often notes explicitly that Judaism is not to be identified with the specific laws with which it began, but with the “recognition of a system of precepts as binding, even if their specifics were often only determined with time” (Judaism, 4)

    What is one to make of this concession? While there might be strong arguments for drawing such a distinction on both textual and common sense grounds, the question is whether Leibowitz can consistently allow such external concerns to intrude upon religion without usurping it. The meta-halakhic issue, as Leibowitz terms it, regarding the status of women in the Jewish community, drives specific halakhic changes. And ultimately what appears to be driving these changes is an ethical assumption regarding unjustified gender inequalities. But if one is allowing religious norms to be subordinated to human values, then by Leibowitz's standards one is serving man rather than God—if the motivation here is ethical or more broadly social, then surely by his intentional definition of mitzvoth, they cease to be religious acts.

    In the particular case of gender equality, however, there are broader concerns that come into play—the survival of Judaism. While this is not explicit in everything that Leibowitz writes, he makes precisely this claim regarding the gender issue in an interview with Michael Shashar—“the future of Judaism depends on it” (Sihot, 110). One might argue therefore that our being responsive to the ethical concerns presented in these cases has religious significance since it is subsumed under the overriding religious concern to maintain the existence of Judaism. Thus these acts would retain their religious significance given the more general religious motivation for the changes. It is very difficult, however, to escape the feeling that Leibowitz is driven here by his ethical impulses, and more significantly it is clear that all manner of halakhic decisions are motivated by explicit consideration of ethical principles such as “the ways of pleasantness” or “doing the right and the good.” Unless he is going to allow ethical motivation for certain mitzvoth and problematize his system then, it appears as if these areas of decision and action cannot be deemed religious in the strict sense. Leibowitz certainly recognizes that halakhic decisions are “grounded either in the Halakhah itself or in the conditions necessary for halakhic observance” (Judaism, 4), and thus it may be that these ethical halakhic decisions are “enablers” rather than direct loci of religious worship. By contracting the religious sphere in this way, Leibowitz could maintain some indirect religious value for the ethically motivated acts of a religious Jew. But the contraction that such a move necessitates would relegate enormous tracts of the Talmud to this lesser status, which seems problematic. The possible counter that all of those decisions were taken by the sages with the general motivation of “serving God,” would make it difficult to retain any form of distinction between religion and ethics of the form that Leibowitz clearly wishes to maintain. Of course many of these problems (including those discussed at the end of section 5.1) hang on the thread of Leibowitz's concept of intention—one that assumes that intentions can be clearly and exclusively identified as “ethical” or “religious.” Melzer (1976, 261), however, has argued that Leibowitz's concept of intention is impoverished.

    Setting aside the problems just identified, Leibowitz's distinction remains problematic in the context of his overall system. He explicitly categorizes the realm of synagogue ritual to type1 acts. Yet in much of contemporary orthodoxy, this is one of the most fought over issues, and one in which the inequalities for women are understood by some as tantamount to the denial of “a basic Jewish right … [that] renders their Jewishness inferior to that of men.” Should women feel so marginalized by this particular inequality that it threatens the future of Judaism, leading to sanctioning the participation of women in certain rituals, Leibowitz's type1 mitzvoth would have to be recategorized as type2 mitzvoth and we would have to conclude that the categories are fluid and that commandments can move between categories. But then the question of how we categorize the commandments seems to become dependent on human perception and values, which would be problematic for Leibowitz.

    Ultimately then, Leibowitz struggles to maintain God's radical transcendence in its most pristine form. Neither history, nor nature, including human nature, are sources of religious value. God's prescriptions alone are holy and Jewish worship, indeed Jewish faith, is simply the commitment to this behavioral regime. But while he begins with a tidy definition of religious acts as absolute commands performed with the intention of serving God, as acts that cannot be motivated by human concerns or interests, the fact that life involves other given civil and social settings requires that we deal with such interests. This yields type2 acts, with resulting questions regarding whether or not certain mitzvoth can be unequivocally placed into one or other of the categories, and whether indeed there can be movement between the categories without Leibowitz's theocentrism folding into a form of anthropocentrism. The distinction necessary to prevent this amongst halakhic decisors—that between the intention of “realizing the Torah” and the intention to “adapt Halakhah to a variety of human needs” (Judaism, 4)—is not always easy to discern, and, one imagines, could very easily fall victim to self-deception.

    6. Religion, State, and Israel

    Leibowitz was an unabashed Zionist. However, Zionism for Leibowitz was defined simply as “the endeavor to liberate Jews from being ruled by the Gentiles” (Judaism, 214), an endeavor that the state of Israel “completely satisfies.” Thus, despite being a religious Jew, Leibowitz's Zionism is avowedly secular, and his secular version of Zionism flows directly from the central tenets of his philosophy. Firstly, it is dictated by his intentional approach to religious action—the motivation for setting up the state was political and nationalistic rather than religious. Indeed, Zionism was initially a secular Jewish revolution, a political movement with nationalist aspirations. Secondly, it is directly implied by his view that the service of human needs and interests cannot be equated with the service of God. For Leibowitz, the state serves a perfectly noble political purpose, serving human needs. But again this should not be confused with its having religious value in itself:

    “Counterfeit religion identifies national interests with the service of God and imputes to the state—which is only an instrument serving human needs—supreme value from a religious standpoint” (Judaism, 226–227).

    Thus, it would seem as if religion and state cannot possibly be linked, and this indeed was a position that Leibowitz would take. Here though, it seems as if Leibowitz's thought, or at least his attitude towards what constitutes meaningful discourse, underwent significant development.

    In his earlier writings, Leibowitz challenged the religious rabbinic establishment to take the courageous steps necessary to provide a vision for a “halakhic state,” a state that could run according to Jewish law; that could accommodate, for example, the needs of a country to have a fully working police force and electrical system on the Sabbath without being parasitic on Jews who do not observe the laws forbidding such action on the Sabbath. Thus “a specific and detailed halakhic code for administering the full panoply of state functions is called for … [to give] a clear picture of how the religious parties would run the state if and when they came to power” (Judaism, 170–171).

    This would have necessitated a halakhic revolution, utilizing innovative and creative techniques of Jewish legal interpretation and application. But instead, in Leibowitz's eyes the religious parties prostituted themselves to the state to protect their own brand of religious sectarianism, subordinating religion to the machinery of the secular government. Just seven years later in recognition of this reality, Leibowitz changed his tune, presenting a call for the separation of religion and state as the only program “that would be in the religious interest in the existing situation” (Judaism, 175). Still, at this point, though reality has bitten, there is no statement that in principle religion and state must remain separate. A decade later, however, Leibowitz comes close to espousing such a view, stating that “no state whatsoever, in the past, present, or any foreseeable future, in any society, in any era, in any culture, including the Jewish culture, ever was or will ever be anything but a secular institution” (Judaism, 215–216).

    On the one hand, this should come as no surprise given that politics is concerned with human institutions that serve human needs, and Leibowitz cannot allow for acts of religious worship that are directed towards human needs. Yet, on the other hand, in noting that the state “sets the ground for the struggle for religion, which is by its very nature an eternal struggle that will never end in victory” (Judaism, 215–216), he does appear to open up the possibility of political action having religious import. Indeed, he goes on to say that the reason that Israel has no religious significance is precisely “because no such struggle is being conducted in it” (ibid.), which appears to imply the possibility of a state having such significance were it to provide for such a struggle. As mentioned earlier, Leibowitz speaks of “conditions necessary for halakhic observance” (Judaism, 4), essential conditions for individuals to worship God that would include human social and political organization. Judaism does not present any specific form of political organization as the right one, since political acts are not themselves halakhic acts. It is merely the scaffolding without which individuals would not have the capacity to engage in their individual “religious struggles,” which presumably yields this lesser category of “religious significance” to the political state that enables it. Given his intentionalism though, mere political organization can have no religious significance in itself; it can only have such significance if the political action is driven by the intention that the state be an enabling condition for religious worship. But clearly this is not the case for the current Israeli government, and the religious authorities have no jurisdiction over such political matters.

    It seems that later in his career, Leibowitz's positivistic leanings prevent him from being willing to engage in what is ultimately utopian speculation concerning a halakhic vision for the state. The earlier program is a mere pipedream when the state is catering for a nation that has no interest in Jewish observance. Were the entire population unanimously in favor of such observance, Leibowitz might once again take up the cause. But Leibowitz is unwilling to engage in such idealistic guesswork, which he dismisses as meaningless, claiming fundamentally not to understand how one is to relate seriously to such ideals (Sihot, 92). The possibility that a state might have religious significance “in principle” is not a discussion that can have any political purchase. Political action cannot be religious action in the contemporary world. In reality then—and present reality is the only reality he is willing to recognize by this point—Leibowitz wishes to keep political questions separate from religion, which in the contemporary state contracts itself to the private sphere.

    None of this is to say that religion cannot be relevant to the state in any way, even today. Though he does not wish to speak of how religion can serve the state, since this inverts the correct hierarchical relationship between the two, religion can nonetheless have a “function” within the state for Leibowitz as a “critical friend” that can “check the influence of political values and … restrain the patriotism and nationalistic enthusiasm” (Judaism, 209–210). Thus “if religion has a function, it is to place man's limited values in a true perspective” (Judaism, 210–211). Indeed, the mistaken religious significance that people do impute either to the land or to the state is nothing short of scandalous for Leibowitz, both religiously and morally.

    Religiously speaking, a physical land simply cannot be holy for Leibowitz: “The idea that a specific country or location has an intrinsic ”holiness“ is an indubitably idolatrous idea.” (Judaism, 226–227). Thus, claims that a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian problem cannot be countenanced because the land is holy to Jews are absurd in Leibowitz's eyes. Moreover, given his hermeneutic of Scripture, attempts to base the Jewish “right” to the land on the basis of historical claims in the Torah are just as baseless. Indeed, without quite using the term “nonsense on stilts” Leibowitz nonetheless evinces a Benthamite scepticism to the notion that any nation has a legal right to a land—“talk of rights is pure nonsense. No nation has a right to any land” (Judaism, 241). Rights to land for Leibowitz are a matter of historical consciousness. And the problem for Israel and the Palestinians is that both tell a story that stakes a claim on this basis such that “in consequence of centuries of history, members of each feel passionately that this is their land” (Judaism, 241).

    Moreover, imputing religious significance to the state (as opposed to the land) is no less a form of “idolatry.” It yields violence and injustice in the name of religion that is in truth the sheer willingness to commit moral atrocities in the name of the state, hiding behind an illusory cloak of religious piety.

    Leibowitz's moral critique of the actions of the state and the Israeli army, which rose to a new pitch subsequent to the Lebanon War of 1982, gives a clear indication of the significance of morality qua morality for Leibowitz in a manner that is entirely consistent with the view discussed earlier that morality must be subordinated to religion and not vice versa. It is precisely because people mistakenly impute religious value to objects or institutions that they commit moral atrocities in the name of religion for Leibowitz. And it is precisely the understanding of the state as a secular institution that for Leibowitz would prevent such actions, since we will then judge these actions correctly—i.e., morally, not religiously. And by ethical standards, Leibowitz clearly believes that they cannot be justified. Yet again, it is the ascription of holiness to profane things, to the natural world and our human needs and interests within it, that is at the root of all that he decries in religion and that has dire political and moral consequences in the contemporary political sphere. While one might disagree with his political assessment on political grounds, he would argue that it is only on such grounds that one can disagree, and that is a dispute for a political forum.


    Primary Literature

    Cited Works of Leibowitz
    Torah u-Mitzvot ba-Zeman ha-Zeh [Torah and Commandments in Our Time], Tel Aviv: Schocken, 1954. Cited as Torah u-Mitzvot.
    Yahadut, Am Yehudi u-Medinat Yisrael [Judaism, the Jewish People, and the State of Israel], Tel Aviv: Schocken, 1975. Cited as Yahadut.
    Emunah, Historiah, ve-Arakhim [Faith, History, and Values], Jerusalem: Academon, 1982. Cited as Emunah.
    Judaism, Human Values, and the Jewish State, Eliezer Goldman (ed.), Eliezer Goldman, Yoram Navon, Zvi Jacobson, Gershon Levi, and Raphael Levy (trans.), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995. Cited as Judaism. [This is a selection of articles from the above Hebrew collections, translated into English.]
    Yeshayahu Leibowitz al Olam u-Melo'o, Sihot im Michael Shashar [Yeshayahu Leibowitz On Just About Everything: Talks with Michael Shashar], Jerusalem: Keter Publishing House, 1988. Cited as Sihot
    Accepting the Yoke of Heaven: Commentary on the Weekly Torah Portion, Shmuel Himelstein (trans.), New York: Urim Publications, 2002. Cited as Accepting the Yoke. [This is a translation of radio broadcasts originally published as He'arot le-Parshiyot ha-Shavua (Notes to the Weekly Torah Reading), Jerusalem: Academon, 1988.]
    “Responses,” [Hebrew], Iyyun 26 (1976), 265–81. [Leibowitz's responses to a set of articles about his thought published in this issue of the journal Iyyun.] Cited as “Responses”

    Further Selected Publications of Leibowitz

    Study-Group Discussions
    Sihot al Pirke Avot ve-al ha-Rambam [Discourses on the Ethics of the Fathers and on Maimonides], Jerusalem: Schocken, 1979.
    Sihot al Shemoneh Perakim la-Rambam [Conversations on Maimonides' Eight Chapters], Jerusalem: Keter, 1986.
    Sihot al Mesilat Yesharim la-Ramchal [Conversations on The Paths of the Righteous of Rabbi Moses Hayyim Luzzato], Jerusalem: Greta Leibowitz, 1995.
    Sihot al Torat ha-Nevu'ah shel ha-Rambam [Conversations on Prophecy in Maimonides], Jerusalem: Greta Leibowitz, 1997.
    Sihot al Mivchar Pirkei ha-Hashgachah mitokh “Moreh Nevukhim” shel ha-Rambam [Conversations on Providence in Maimonides' Guide of the Perplexed], Jerusalem: Mira Ofran, 2003.
    Sihot al Pirkei ta'amei ha-Mitzvot mitokh “Moreh Nevukhim” shel ha-Rambam [Conversations on the Reasons for the Commandments in Maimonides' Guide of the Perplexed], Jerusalem: Mira Ofran, 2003.

    Published Broadcasts, Interviews, and Correspondence
    Guf va-Nefesh: Habe'ayah ha-Psikho-Physit [Body and Mind: The Psycho-Physical Problem], Tel Aviv: Misrad ha-Bitahon Publications, 1984.
    Emunato shel ha-Rambam [The Faith of Maimonides], Tel Aviv: Misrad ha-Bitahon Publications, 1985. Translated as The Faith of Maimonides, John Glucker (trans.), New York: Adama Books, 1989.
    Hamisha Sifrei Emunah [Five Books of Faith], Mira Ofran (ed.), Jerusalem: Keter, 1995.
    Sihot al Hagei Yisrael u-Moadav, [Discourses on the Jewish Holidays], Jerusalem: Greta Lebowitz, 1999.
    Sheva Shanim shel Sihot al Parashat ha-Shavua [Seven Years of Discourses on the Weekly Torah Reading], Jerusalem: Greta Leibowitz, 2000.
    Mah She-lema'lah u-mah she-lemattah: Dialogim im Toni Lavi [What is Above and What is Below: Dialogues with Toni Lavi], Or Yehuda: Maariv Book Guild, 1997.
    Ratziti lish'ol otcha, Professor Leibowitz: Michtavim el Yeshayahu Leibowitz u-mimenu [I Wanted to Ask You Professor Leibowitz: Letters To and From Yeshayahu Leibowitz], Jerusalem: Keter, 1999.

    Selected Secondary Literature and Works Cited
    Berlin, Isaiah, 1983. “The Conscience of Israel” [Hebrew], Ha'aretz, 4 March: 18.
    Fagenblat, Michael, 2004. “Lacking All Interest: Levinas, Leibowitz, and the Pure Practice of Religion”, Harvard Theological Review, 97: 1–32.
    Hartman, David, 1990. Conflicting Visions, New York: Schocken Books.
    Kasher, Asa, 1976. “Paradox—Question Mark” [Hebrew], Iyyun, 26: 236–41.
    Kasher, Asa and Levinger, Jacob (eds.), 1977. The Yeshayahu Leibowitz Book [Hebrew], Tel Aviv: Agudat ha-Studentim.
    Kasher, Hannah, 2000. “On Yeshayahu Leibowitz's Use of Religious Terminology”, The Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy, 10: 27–55.
    Kasher, Naomi, 1976. “Kant's Ethics and Leibowitz's View of Religion” [Hebrew], Iyyun, 26: 242–55.
    Kellner, Menachem, 2006. Must A Jew Believe Anything, 2nd edition, Oxford: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization.
    Maimonides, Moses. Guide of the Perplexed, trans. S. Pines. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963.
    Marantz, Haim, 1997. “Bearing witness: morality and religion in the thought of Yeshayahu Leibowitz”, Judaism, 46: 35–45.
    Melzer, Yehuda, 1976. “Ethics and Halakha Once Again” [Hebrew], Iyyun, 26: 256–64.
    Nadler, Steven, 2006. Spinoza's Ethics: An Introduction, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Newton, Adam Zachary, 2000. The Fence and the Neighbour, Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
    Ravitzky, Avi (ed.), 2007. Yeshayahu Leibowitz: Between Conservatism and Radicalism, Jerusalem, Hakibbutz Hameuchad Publishing House.
    Sagi, Avi, 1992. “Rabbi Soloveitchik and Professor Leibowitz as Theoreticians of the Halakhah”, Da'at, 19: 131–48.
    –––, (ed.), 1995. Yeshayahu Leibowitz: His World and Philosophy [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Keter.
    –––, 1997. “Contending with Modernity: Scripture in the Thought of Yeshayahu Leibowitz and Joseph Soloveitchik”, The Journal of Religion, 77: 421–441.
    –––, 1997a. “Yeshayahu Leibowitz—A Breakthrough in Jewish Philosophy: Religion Without Metaphysics”, Religious Studies, 33: 203–216.
    –––, 2009. Jewish Religion After Theology, Boston: Academic Studies Press.
    Schwarzschild, Steven, 1977. “Moral Radicalism and ‘Middlingness’ in the Ethics of Maimonides,” in The Pursuit of the Ideal: Jewish Writings of Steven Schwarzschild, Menachem Kellner (ed.), Albany: SUNY Press, 1990, 137–160.
    Seeskin, Kenneth, 1990. Jewish Philosophy in a Secular Age, Albany NY: SUNY Press.
    Statman, Daniel, 2005. “Negative Theology and the Meaning of the Commandments in Modern Orthodoxy”, Tradition, 39/1: 55–68.

    "What Shall We Talk About??"

    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:17 pm

    There seems to be someone at work in this world -- who is quite strange and mean -- yet who doesn't cover their tracks very well. Why couldn't an advanced civilization rule, punish, and exploit this solar system in complete secrecy?? Why couldn't a 9/11 event be planned and executed which would have absolutely no loose-ends (in contrast to all of the inconsistencies with the official story seen in 9/11)?? Whoever these people or aliens are -- they don't seem to be as concerned about secrecy as I would probably be if I were in their shoes. I sometimes wonder if someone had a grand plan for humanity which got hijacked by a Brutal Gang of Dracs (or something like that)?! I remember a preacher (Morris Venden -- who died recently) saying that Lucifer (or the Devil -- I don't remember which name he used) seemed to be out of control -- rather than being cold, calculating, and precise (or something to that effect). I had a chemistry professor who pointed out something similar to this regarding the history of the Roman Catholic Church.

    Morris Venden also told a story called "Building Under Construction" which was a parable describing the building of a church -- where the builders argued and fought over how to build the church -- while they prepared for the coming of the enemy (Antichrist, Satan, et al) -- but what no one seemed to realize was that the Enemy Had Already Come. I keep wondering if Gabriel is the Queen of Nibiru -- and if Lucifer is the God of This World?! I keep wondering if Lucifer has been out of control for a very long time -- but that things have been getting progressively worse?! Finally, I keep wondering if Nibiru and Gabriel are back -- to clean-up the mess created by Lucifer -- and to crack-down on a Humanity which seems to be waking-up and escaping their enslavement?! I get the feeling that Gabriel might be nastier toward humanity than Lucifer. I continue to get the feeling that Michael got dethroned, defanged, and declawed in antiquity -- and has been a hostage, front-man, and who knows what else -- for a very long time??!! This is just more contrarian speculation to try to understand why a Wonderful Human Race, and a Beautiful Planet Earth, have been so screwed-up for thousands of years.

    I mean no harm toward any angels or archangels. Not at this point. I hope that I would be fair if there were a trial at some point in the future. Who knows?? I might be in a helluva lot more trouble than I think Gabriel and/or Lucifer might be. There simply is not enough reliable information available in order to make proper judgments and determinations. However, I still think that it is important to consider as many possibilities as possible -- especially regarding the most important subjects imaginable. Modeling contrarian theological theories shouldn't be considered a sin, now should it??? BTW -- Val is a Man from Venus with no Navel -- but what about a __________!!!! There was a Man from Nantucket -- with a Navel so big you could __________!!!! Sorry, but I'm so overwhelmed with crazy information, that I find it difficult not to be silly. Psychologists and Psychiatrists say that's a bad sign...

    I recently suggested placing the United States Air Force Academy at the center of my ongoing online political and theological science-fiction. I further suggested that I might like to live 700 feet beneath the Cadet Chapel -- in something similar to the Resistance Base in Earth: Final Conflict. Might I suggest imagining the Taelon Mothership as being the Moon -- with Zo'or and Da'an dealing with Earth from the Dark-Side of the Moon?! I also suggested imagining the Stargate Command Underground Base as being beneath the U.S. Air Force Academy. I indicated that I liked technology, military-discipline, military-parades, war-games, and church-services -- but that I HATED War. I wondered if the USAFA might be an appropriate location for the Headquarters of the United States of the Solar System AND the University of Solar System Studies and Governance?! I suggested that the BEST aspects of Georgetown and the Jesuits might become a part of all of the above?! Does anyone understand what I am attempting to conceptualize??

    I have suggested that someone had an excellent Grand-Plan for Planet Earth and Earth Humanity -- but that they got defeated and demoted -- and that this hypothetical plan got hijacked by a Mean and Nasty Gang Who Couldn't Shoot Straight -- but that this Grand-Plan might need to be reclaimed by the original Planner(s) and run in a proper manner which benefits all concerned. I don't know if this is possible -- or even desirable. I don't know if anything I have speculated about might actually be true -- but I think it might be worth checking-out by those who have a helluva lot more brains and resources than I do. Consider Georgetown University. I find it highly interesting that Georgetown University was founded in 1789 (the same date that St. Michael's Church was founded -- in Earth: Final Conflict ) -- and is not a Pontifical University. Also, note this same date in the introduction to the Book of Common Prayer -- as well as the publication date of the Federalist Papers (1788-89). Washington D.C. is a City-State -- and is evidentally not part of the United States (as Vatican City is not part of Italy -- and the City of London is not part of England). Is there a United States of the Solar System -- University of Solar System Studies and Governance parallel with the United States of America -- and Georgetown University??!! I keep seeing both good and evil connected with the Jesuits and America. Some say that America is Latter-Day Babylon. I continue to think that the truth regarding how things REALLY work would drive a lot of us insane. I mean well -- but I am certainly NOT up to speed with the PTB -- and I'm not sure I really wish to be -- if you know what I mean...

    Georgetown University is a private research university in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1789, it is the oldest Jesuit and Catholic university in the United States. Georgetown's main campus, located in Washington's Georgetown neighborhood, is noted for Healy Hall, a National Historic Landmark in the Romanesque revival style. Georgetown operates a law center on Capitol Hill and auxiliary campuses in Italy, Turkey, and Qatar.

    Georgetown's founding by John Carroll, America's first Catholic bishop, realized efforts to establish a Roman Catholic college in the province of Maryland that were repeatedly thwarted by religious persecution. The university expanded after the American Civil War under the leadership of Patrick Francis Healy, who came to be known as Georgetown's "second founder" despite having been born a slave. Jesuits have participated in the university's administration since 1805, a heritage Georgetown celebrates, but the university has always been governed independently of the Society of Jesus and of church authorities.

    The university has around 7,000 undergraduate and over 8,000 post-graduate students from a wide variety of religious, ethnic, and geographic backgrounds, including 130 foreign countries.[5][8] The university's most notable alumni are prominent in public life in the United States and abroad. Among them are former U.S. President Bill Clinton, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, dozens of U.S. governors and members of Congress, heads of state or government of more than a dozen countries, royalty and diplomats.

    Campus organizations include the country's largest student-run business. Georgetown's athletic teams, called the Hoyas, include a men's basketball team that has won a record-tying seven Big East championships, appeared in five Final Fours, and won a national championship in 1984.

    Jesuit settlers from England founded the Province of Maryland in 1634.[9] However, the 1646 defeat of the Royalists in the English Civil War led to stringent laws against Roman Catholic education and the extradition of known Jesuits from the colony, including Andrew White, and the destruction of their school at Calverton Manor.[1] During most of the remainder of Maryland's colonial period, Jesuits conducted Catholic schools clandestinely. It was not until after the end of the American Revolution that plans to establish a permanent Catholic institution for education in the United States were realized.[10]

    John Carroll published his proposals for a school at Georgetown in 1787, after the American Revolution allowed for the free practice of religion. Because of Benjamin Franklin's recommendation, Pope Pius VI appointed former Jesuit John Carroll as the first head of the Roman Catholic Church in America, even though the papal suppression of the Jesuit order was still in effect. Carroll began meetings of local clergy in 1783 near Annapolis, Maryland, where they orchestrated the development of a new university.[11] On January 23, 1789, Carroll finalized the purchase of the property on which Dahlgren Quadrangle was later built.[12] Future Congressman William Gaston was enrolled as the school's first student on November 22, 1791, and instruction began on January 2, 1792.[11]

    During its early years, Georgetown College suffered from considerable financial strain, relying on private sources of funding and the limited profits from local lands owned by ex-Jesuits.[13] The Maryland Society of Jesus began its restoration in 1805, and Jesuit affiliation, in the form of teachers and administrators, bolstered confidence in the college.[14] The United States Congress issued Georgetown the first federal university charter in 1815, which allowed it to confer degrees, and the first Bachelor degrees were awarded two years later.[15] In 1844, the school received a corporate charter, under the name "The President and Directors of Georgetown College", affording the growing school additional legal rights. In response to the demand for a local option for Roman Catholic students, the Medical School was founded in 1851.[16]

    The U.S. Civil War greatly affected Georgetown as 1,141 students and alumni enlisted in one army or the other, and the Union Army commandeered university buildings.[10] By the time of President Abraham Lincoln's May 1861 visit to campus, 1,400 troops were living in temporary quarters there. Due to the number of lives lost, enrollment levels remained low until well after the war was over. Only seven students graduated in 1869, down from over 300 in the previous decade.[17] Lincoln assassination conspirator David Herold attended Georgetown from 1855 through 1858 and received a certificate in pharmacology in 1860. At its founding in 1876, the Georgetown College Boat Club, the school's rowing team, adopted blue, used for Union uniforms, and gray, used for Confederate uniforms, as its colors to signify the peaceful unity among students.[18] Subsequently, the school adopted these as its official colors.

    Enrollment did not recover from the war until the presidency of Patrick Francis Healy from 1873 to 1881. Born a slave by law, Healy was the first acknowledged head of a predominantly white American university with African heritage. He is credited with reforming the undergraduate curriculum, lengthening the medical and law programs, and creating the Alumni Association. One of his largest undertakings was the construction of a major new building, subsequently named Healy Hall in his honor. For his work, Healy is known as the school's "second founder."[19]

    After the founding of the Law Department in 1870, Healy and his successors hoped to bind the professional schools into a university, and focus on higher education.[14] The School of Medicine added a dental school in 1901 and the undergraduate School of Nursing in 1903.[20] Georgetown Preparatory School relocated from campus in 1919 and fully separated from the University in 1927.[21] The School of Foreign Service (SFS) was founded in 1919 by Edmund A. Walsh, to prepare students for leadership in foreign commerce and diplomacy.[14] The School of Business was created out of the SFS in 1957, and in 1998 was renamed the McDonough School of Business in honor of alumnus Robert E. McDonough.[22]

    Besides expansion of the University, Georgetown also aimed to expand its resources and student body. The School of Nursing has admitted female students since its founding, and most of the university was made available on a limited basis by 1952.[23] With the College of Arts and Sciences welcoming its first female students in the 1969–1970 academic year, Georgetown became fully coeducational.[24] Georgetown ended its bicentennial year of 1989 by electing Leo J. O'Donovan as president. He subsequently launched the Third Century Campaign to build the school's endowment.[25] In December 2003, Georgetown completed the campaign after raising over $1 billion for financial aid, academic chair endowment, and new capital projects.[26] John J. DeGioia, Georgetown's first lay president, has led the school since 2001, and has continued its financial modernization and sought to "expand opportunities for intercultural and interreligious dialogue", such as by opening a campus in Qatar.[27]

    Georgetown University was founded by former Jesuits in the tradition of Ignatius of Loyola and is a member of the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities.[12][28] Georgetown is not a pontifical university, though six Jesuits serve on the thirty-six member Board of Directors, the school's highest governance.[29] Fifty-two members of the Society of Jesus live on campus, and are mostly employed by Georgetown as professors or administrators.[30] Jesuit Heritage Week has been held every year since 2001 to celebrate the contributions of Jesuits to the Georgetown tradition.[31]

    The role that Georgetown's Catholic heritage has played in its policies has been controversial at times, even as its influence is relatively limited.[32] Stores in University-owned buildings are not allowed to sell or distribute birth control products.[33] Georgetown University Medical Center and Georgetown University Hospital, operated by MedStar Health, are prohibited from performing abortions.[34] As recently as 2004, the hospital did perform research using embryonic stem cells.[35] Georgetown has drawn criticism from religious groups such as the Cardinal Newman Society for hosting speeches from prominent pro-choice politicians, including John Kerry and Barack Obama,[36][37] and from Washington's Archbishop, Donald Wuerl, for inviting Kathleen Sebelius to be a commencement speaker.[38] The university does host the Cardinal O'Connor Conference on Life every January to discuss the pro-life movement.[39]

    Between 1996 and 1999, crucifixes were added to many classroom walls, attracting national attention.[40] Before 1996, crucifixes had hung only in hospital rooms and historic classrooms.[41] Some of these crucifixes are historic works of art, and are noted as such.[42] According to Imam Yahya Hendi, the school's on-campus Muslim cleric, pressure to remove the crucifixes comes from within the Catholic community, while he and other campus faith leaders have defended their placement.[43] The Intercultural Center is an exception to this controversy, rotating displays of various faith and culture symbols in the lobby.[44]

    As of 2010, the University has 7,553 undergraduate students, and 5,832 graduate students.[5] Bachelor's programs are offered through Georgetown College, the School of Nursing and Health Studies, the Robert Emmett McDonough School of Business, the School of Continuing Studies, and the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, which includes the Qatar campus. Some high school students from Georgetown Visitation are permitted to attend classes for Advanced Placement credit.[45]

    Georgetown University offers undergraduate degrees in forty-eight majors in the four undergraduate schools, as well as the opportunity for students to design their own individualized courses of study.[46] All majors in the College are open as minors to students in the College, the School of Nursing and Health Studies, and the School of Business. Students in the School of Foreign Service cannot receive minors, but can complete certificates instead. All courses are on a credit hour system.[14] Georgetown offers many opportunities to study abroad, and 58.7% of the undergraduate student body spends time at an institution overseas.[dated info][47]

    Master's and doctoral programs are offered through the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, the Law Center, the School of Medicine, and the School of Continuing Studies. The McDonough School of Business and the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service both offer masters programs. The Center for Contemporary Arab Studies and the Public Policy Institute are both research centers which also offer masters degrees. Masters students occasionally share some advanced seminars with undergraduates, and most undergraduate schools offer abbreviated bachelors and masters programs following completion of the undergraduate degree.

    Each graduate school offers at least one double degree with another graduate school.[48] Additionally, the Law Center offers a joint degree with the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.[49] The School of Continuing Studies includes the Center for Continuing and Professional Education, and operates four types of degree programs, over thirty professional certificates and non-degree courses, undergraduate and graduate degrees in Liberal Studies, as well as summer courses for graduates, undergraduates, and high school students.[50]

    As of 2011, Georgetown University employed 1,291 full-time and 882 part-time faculty members across its three Washington, D.C. campuses,[3] with additional staff at SFS-Qatar.[51] The faculty comprises leading academics and notable political and business leaders, and are predominantly male by a two-to-one margin.[52] Politically, Georgetown University's faculty members give more support to liberal candidates, and while their donation patterns are generally consistent with those of other American university faculties, they gave more than average to Barack Obama's presidential campaign.[53][54]

    The current faculty includes scholars such as the former President of the American Philological Association James J. O'Donnell, theologian John Haught, social activists Sam Marullo and Chai Feldblum, and preeminent hip-hop scholar Michael Eric Dyson.[55][56] Many former politicians choose to teach at Georgetown, including the former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, U.S. Agency for International Development administrator Andrew Natsios, National Security Advisor Anthony Lake, and CIA director George Tenet. Internationally, the school attracts numerous former ambassadors and heads of state, such as Saudi Ambassador Prince Turki bin Faisal Al Saud, Prime Minister of Spain José María Aznar, and President of Colombia Álvaro Uribe.[57][58][59]

    Georgetown University is a self-described "student-centered research university"[60] considered by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education to have "very high research activity."[61] As of 2002, Georgetown's libraries held 2,778,526 printed items and 73,496 serials in seven buildings, with most in Lauinger Library.[62] The Blommer Science Library, located in the Reiss Science Building on campus, houses most of the Science collection. Additionally, the Law School campus includes the nation's fifth largest law library.[63] Georgetown faculty conduct research in hundreds of subjects, but have priorities in the fields of religion, ethics, science, public policy, and cancer medicine.[64] Cross-institutional research is performed with Columbia University and Virginia Tech.

    In 2008, Georgetown spent $143 million on research, ranking it 111th nationwide.[65] In 2007, it received about $14.8 million in federal funds for research, with 64% from the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, the United States Department of Energy, and the Department of Defense.[66] In 2010, the school received $5.6 million from the Department of Education to fund fellowships in several international studies fields.[67] Georgetown University Medical Center received an additional $118.4 million from these and other government sources.[66] Georgetown's Vincent Lombardi Cancer Center is one of 41 research-intensive comprehensive cancer centers in the United States, and developed the breakthrough HPV vaccine for cervical cancer in 2006.[68]

    Centers which conduct and sponsor research at Georgetown include the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs, the Prince Alwaleed Center for Muslim–Christian Understanding and the Woodstock Theological Center. Regular publications include the Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law and Policy, the Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, the Georgetown Law Journal, the Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, and the Georgetown Public Policy Review.

    Admission to Georgetown is highly selective; In 2012, the university received over 20,100 applications [c] and admitted 16%, a record low in the university's history.[76] The Fiske Guide to Colleges states that "only Stanford and a handful of Ivy League schools are tougher to get into than Georgetown."[77] As of 2011, Georgetown's graduate schools have acceptance rates of 3.6% to the School of Medicine,[78] 19% to the Law Center,[79] 25% to the MSFS,[80] and 34.9% to the MBA program.[81] In 2004, a National Bureau of Economic Research study on revealed preference of U.S. colleges showed that Georgetown was the 16th most-preferred choice.[dated info][82]

    The undergraduate schools maintain a restrictive Early Action admissions program, as students who have applied through an Early Decision process at another school are not permitted to apply early to Georgetown.[83] 94% of students accepted for the class of 2014 were in the top 10% of their class and had SAT scores ranging from 660–760 in Critical Reading, and 670–770 in Math.[84] Georgetown accepts both the SAT and ACT, though does not consider the writing portion of either.[85] Over 55% of undergraduates receive financial aid, and the university meets 100% of demonstrated need, with an average financial aid package of $23,500 and about 70% of aid distributed in the forms of grants or scholarships.[86]

    Georgetown University has three campuses in Washington, D.C.: the undergraduate campus, the Medical Center, and the Law Center. The undergraduate campus and Medical Center are together in the Georgetown neighborhood and form the main campus. Other centers are located around Washington, D.C., including the Center for Continuing and Professional Education at Clarendon in Arlington, Virginia. Transit between these locations and the Washington Metro is supplied by a system of shuttles, known as GUTS buses.[87] Georgetown also operates a facility in Doha, Qatar, and villas in Alanya, Turkey and Fiesole, Italy. In their campus layout, Georgetown's administrators consistently used the traditional quadrangle design.[88]

    Georgetown University's undergraduate campus and medical school campus are situated on an elevated site above the Potomac River, overlooking Northern Virginia. The main gates, known as the Healy Gates, are located at the intersection of 37th and O Streets, NW. The main campus is just over 104 acres (0.4 km2) in area and includes fifty-four buildings, student residences capable of accommodating 80% of undergraduates, and various athletic facilities.[89] Most buildings employ collegiate Gothic architecture and Georgian brick architecture. Campus green areas include fountains, a cemetery, large clusters of flowers, groves of trees, and open quadrangles.[90] Georgetown received a B grade on the 2011 College Sustainability Report Card, and new buildings and major renovations are required to meet LEED Sliver criteria.[91]

    The main campus has traditionally centered on Dahlgren Quadrangle, although Red Square has replaced it as the focus of student life.[92] Healy Hall, built in Flemish Romanesque style from 1877 to 1879, is the architectural gem of Georgetown's campus, and is a National Historic Landmark.[93] Both Healy Hall and the Georgetown University Astronomical Observatory, built in 1844, are listed on the National Register of Historic Places.[94] The medical school is on the northwestern part of the main campus on Reservoir Road, and is integrated with Georgetown University Hospital.[95] The school uses many of the townhouses in the Georgetown neighborhood east of the main campus for upperclassmen housing, institutions, and alumni facilities. Additionally, the Walsh School of Foreign Service and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences both have classroom buildings in this area.[95] Georgetown Visitation, a private Roman Catholic girls high school, is northeast of campus, on land adjoining the undergraduate campus.[96]

    In late 2003, the university completed the Southwest Quadrangle Project, and brought a new 907-bed student dorm, an expansive dining hall, an underground parking facility, and new Jesuit Residence to the campus.[97] The school's first performing arts center, named for Royden B. Davis, was completed in November 2005, and the new business school building, named for Rafik Hariri, opened in Fall 2009.[98] Future construction plans include a unified sciences center and expanded athletic facilities.[99] As a location, Georgetown is ranked nationally as the second best college town by the Princeton Review.[100] Despite this, main campus "town and gown" relations are often strained by facilities construction, enlargement of the student body, as well as noise and alcohol violations.[101] Crime is also a persistent issue, with campus security responding to 257 crimes in 2008.[102]

    The Law Center campus is located in the Capitol Hill neighborhood on New Jersey Avenue, near Union Station and consists of five buildings. First-year students at the Law Center can live in the single on-campus dormitory, the Gewirz Student Center.[103] Most second- and third-year students, as well as some first-year students, live off-campus. As there is little housing near the Law Center, most are spread throughout the Washington metropolitan area.[104] The "Campus Completion Project", finished in 2005, saw the addition of the Hotung International Building and the Sport and Fitness Center. G Street and F Street are closed off between 1st and 2nd Streets to create open lawns flanking McDonough Hall, the main building on the campus.[105]

    In December 1979, the Marquesa Margaret Rockefeller de Larrain, granddaughter of John D. Rockefeller, gave the Villa Le Balze to Georgetown University.[106] The Villa is in Fiesole, Italy, on a hill above the city of Florence. The Villa is used year-round for study abroad programs focused on specialized interdisciplinary study of Italian culture and civilization.[107] The main facility for the McGhee Center for Eastern Mediterranean Studies was donated to Georgetown in 1989 by alumnus and former United States Ambassador to Turkey George C. McGhee.[108] The school is in the town of Alanya, Turkey within the Seljuq-era Alanya Castle, on the Mediterranean. The Center operates study abroad programs one semester each year, concentrating on Turkish language, architectural history, and Islamic studies.[109]

    In 2002, the Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community Development presented the School of Foreign Service with the resources and space to open a facility in the new Education City in Doha, Qatar.[110] SFS-Qatar opened in 2005 as a liberal arts and international affairs undergraduate school for regional students.[111] In December 2007, Georgetown opened a liaison office in Shanghai, China to coordinate with Fudan University and others.[112] In 2008, the Georgetown University Law Center in conjunction with an international consortium of law schools established the Center for Transnational Legal Studies in London, England.[113]

    The Georgetown undergraduate student body, at 7,590 as of 2012,[5] is composed primarily of students from outside the District of Columbia area, with 34% of new 2010 students coming from Mid-Atlantic states, 11% being international students and the remainder coming from other areas of the US.[114] The student body also represented 129 different countries, with 9% being international,[62] including over 330 undergraduate and 1,050 graduate students who chose to come to Georgetown as a study abroad destination in 2009–10.[115] As of that year, the racial diversity of the undergraduate student body was 62.3% white, 8.8% Asian, 6.3% black, and 5.9% Hispanic; Additionally, 55.2% of undergraduates are female.[62]

    Although it is a Jesuit university, only 41% of the student body identify as Roman Catholic, while 22% identify as Protestant as of 2009.[116] Georgetown employs a full-time rabbi, as 6.5% of undergraduates are Jewish.[116] It was the first U.S. college to have a full-time imam, to serve the over four-hundred Muslims on campus.[117] Georgetown also sponsors student groups for Bahá'i, Buddhist, Hindu, and Mormon traditions.[118] The student body consists of both religious and irreligious students, and more than four-hundred freshmen and transfer students attend a nonreligious Ignatian retreat annually, called ESCAPE.[119][120]

    A 2007 survey of undergraduates also suggests that 62.8% are sexually active, while 6.2% identify as LGBTQ.[116][121] Discrimination can be an issue on campus, and three-fourths of a 2009 survey considered homophobia a campus problem.[122] Newsweek, however, rated Georgetown among its top "Gay-Friendly Schools" in 2010.[123] In 2011, College Magazine ranked Georgetown as the tenth most hipster U.S. college,[124] while People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals considered it the third most vegan friendly small U.S. school.[125]

    Almost all undergraduates attend full-time.[126] A majority of undergraduates, 76%, live on-campus in several dormitories and apartment complexes, including all underclassmen.[127] As of 2011, 1255 undergraduates and 339 graduate students live off-campus, mostly in the Georgetown, Glover Park, Burleith, and Foxhall neighborhoods.[128] Although many of the University's hall directors and area coordinators attend graduate level courses, on-campus housing is not available for main campus graduate students.[129] The school hopes to build such housing by 2020.[130] All students in the Medical School live off-campus, most in the surrounding neighborhoods, with some in Northern Virginia and elsewhere through the region.[131]

    As of 2012, 92.89% of Georgetown University undergraduates are involved in at least one of the 179 registered student organizations which cover a variety of interests: student government, club sports, media and publications, performing arts, religion, and volunteer and service.[132] Students also operate campus stores, banks, and medical services. Students often find their interests at the Student Activities Commission Club Fair, where both official and unofficial organizations set up tables.[133] The Georgetown University Student Association is the student government organization for undergraduates. There are also student representatives within the schools, to the Board of Directors, and, since 1996, to the Georgetown Advisory Neighborhood Commission.[134]

    Georgetown's student organizations include one of the nation's oldest debating clubs, the Philodemic Society, founded in 1830,[135] and the oldest university theater group, the Mask and Bauble Dramatic Society.[136] Nomadic Theatre, founded in 1982 as an alternative troupe without an on-campus home, produces "plays which educate and challenge all members of the university community through thought-provoking theatre."[137] The Georgetown Improv Association, founded in 1995, performs monthly long-form improvisational shows on-campus at Bulldog Alley in addition to hosting "Improvfest", one of the oldest improv festivals in the country.[138]

    There are a total of seven a cappella groups on campus, including The Georgetown Chimes, the Phantoms, Superfood, The GraceNotes, the Chamber Singers, Essence, Harmony, the service-oriented Saxatones, and the all-male Capitol G's.[139] These groups perform annually at the "D.C. A Cappella Festival", held since 1991, and the "Cherry Tree Massacre" concert series, held since 1974.[140][141] The Georgetown University Band is composed of the Georgetown Pep Band and the Georgetown Wind Ensemble, and performs on campus, in Washington, D.C., and at post-season basketball tournaments.[142]

    In addition to student organizations and clubs, Georgetown University is home to the nation's largest entirely student-owned and -operated corporation, Students of Georgetown, Inc. Founded in 1972, "The Corp" operates three coffee shops and two grocery stores, and runs storage and airport shuttles for students.[143] The business has annual revenues of over $1.3 million, which are directly re-invested into the Georgetown student body through Corp Philanthropy, which gave out over $50,000 in scholarships and donations to Georgetown groups in 2010–11.[144] Georgetown University Alumni & Student Federal Credit Union is the oldest and largest all student-run financial institution, with over $16 million in assets and 12,000 members.[145] The Georgetown University Student Investment Fund is one of a few undergraduate-run investment funds in the United States, and hosted CNBC's Jim Cramer to tape Mad Money in September 2006.[146]

    Another student-run group, the Georgetown Emergency Response Medical Service, "GERMS", is an all-volunteer ambulance service founded in 1982 that serves campus and the surrounding communities. Georgetown's Army Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) unit, the Hoya Battalion, is the oldest military unit native to the District of Columbia,[147] and was awarded the top ranking among ROTC programs in 2012.[148] The proportion of ROTC students at Georgetown was the 79th highest among universities in the United States as of 2010.[149] GUGS, the Georgetown University Grilling Society, has been a Georgetown tradition since 2002, selling half-pound hamburgers in Red Square on most Fridays.[150]

    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:19 pm

    I continue to be HIGHLY Conflicted regarding the relationship between Human Freedom and the Sovereignty of God. What about Man's Law v God's Law?? What Would Georgetown Law Say?? Do Gabriel and Lucifer lay down the law?? Remember that creepy episode in the second season of 'V' (Unholy Alliance) when Anna lays down the law to Vatican officials?? Remember the scene where Anna, Chad, and Marcus (Isis, Horus, Set?? Gabriel, Michael, Lucifer??) stand in the door of the shuttle-craft before the faithful?? I'm sure that episode REALLY angered a lot of Catholics -- and I can understand why. On the other hand, I suspect some real-life similarities to that particular episode. Did the Jesuit Order force Benedict out?? I suspect they did. I don't even wish to think much about how Vatican politics REALLY work. I continue to be VERY conflicted regarding how things should work in this solar system. Please do not call my speculative internet activities "hate-speech". I am simply trying to understand -- and possibly assist a few others in understanding. I don't make a big-deal about this sort of thing -- and I never will -- unless it becomes absolutely necessary at a much later date -- which is highly unlikely IMHO.

    Georgetown University continued. Georgetown University student organizations include a diverse array of groups focused on social justice issues, including organizations run through both Student Affairs and the Center for Social Justice. Oriented against gender violence, Take Back the Night coordinates an annual rally and march to protest against rape and other forms of violence against women.[151] Georgetown Solidarity Committee is a workers' rights organization whose successes include ending use of sweatshops in producing Georgetown-logoed apparel, and garnering pay raises for both university cleaning staff and police.[152] Georgetown Students for Fair Trade successfully advocated for all coffee in campus cafeterias to be Fair Trade Certified.[153]

    Georgetown has many additional groups representing national, ethnic, and linguistic interests. Georgetown's has the second most politically active student body in the United States according to the Princeton Review.[100] Groups based on local, national, and international issues are popular, and political speech is protected on campus. Student political organizations are active on campus and engage their many members in local and national politics. The Georgetown University College Republicans represent their party, while the Georgetown University College Democrats, the largest student organization on campus in 2008, represent theirs.[154]

    The reproductive rights organization H*yas for Choice is not officially recognized by the University as its positions on abortion are in opposition to University policy, prompting the asterisk in "Hoyas."[155] While not financially supported by the school, the organization is permitted to meet and table in university spaces.[156] The issue contributes to Georgetown's 'red light' status on free speech under the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education rating system.[157] In 2010, the "Plan A: Hoyas for Reproductive Justice" campaign led several protests against the school policy against the sale of birth control on campus,[158] and in 2007, Georgetown University Law Center students protested the University's decision to cease funding for a student's internship at Planned Parenthood's litigation department despite funding it previous years.[159] Law Center student Sandra Fluke petitioned the university to change its health insurance policy to include coverage for contraception for three years prior to addressing the issue before the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee in 2012. Though the remarks Rush Limbaugh subsequently directed at Fluke were criticized by Georgetown administrators as both misogynist and vitriolic,[160] the school remains opposed to the coverage of contraception.[161]


    Georgetown University has several student-run newspapers. The Hoya is the University's oldest newspaper. It has been in print since 1920, and since 1987, has been published twice weekly.[162] The Georgetown Voice, known for its weekly cover stories, is a newsmagazine that was founded in March 1969 to focus more attention on citywide and national issues.[163] The Georgetown Independent is a monthly journal of news, commentary and the arts.[164] Founded in 1966, the Georgetown Law Weekly is the student-run paper on the Law Center campus, and is a three time winner of the American Bar Association's Best Newspaper award.[165] The Hoya and The Georgetown Voice both run online blogs, and there are other popular blogs written about the school and its sports teams.

    The Georgetown Academy, restarted in 2008 after a hiatus, targets traditionalist Catholic readers, and the Georgetown Federalist, founded in 2006, purports to bring a conservative and libertarian viewpoint to campus.[166][167] Other political publications include the Georgetown Progressive, an online publication run by the Georgetown University College Democrats, and Counterpoint Magazine, a liberal monthly founded in the spring of 2011.[168] The Fire This Time is Georgetown's minority newssource.[169] The Georgetown Heckler is a humor magazine founded on the Internet in 2003 by Georgetown students, releasing its first print issue in 2007.[170] The Gonzo was a former student humor magazine, published from 1993 to 1998.

    The University has a campus-wide television station, GUTV, which began broadcasting in 1999. The station hosts an annual student film festival in April for campus filmmakers.[171] WGTB, Georgetown's radio station, is available as a webcast and on 92.3 FM in certain dormitories. The station was founded in 1946, and broadcast on 90.1 FM from 1960 to 1979, when university president Timothy S. Healy gave away the frequency and broadcast capabilities to the University of the District of Columbia because of WGTB's far left political orientation.[172]

    Greek life

    Although Jesuit schools are not obliged to disassociate from Greek systems, many do, and Georgetown University officially recognizes and funds only one of the many Greek organizations on campus, Alpha Phi Omega, the national co-ed community service fraternity. Despite this, other Greek organizations also persist on campus, although none requires members to live in fraternal housing.[173] Additionally, Georgetown University students are affiliated, in some cases, with fraternities at other nearby universities and colleges.[174]

    Active fraternities at Georgetown include Delta Phi Epsilon, a professional foreign service fraternity and sorority; Alpha Kappa Psi, a professional co-ed business fraternity; Alpha Phi Omega, a national co-ed community service fraternity; Alpha Epsilon Pi, a Jewish social fraternity; and social fraternities Sigma Phi Epsilon, Zeta Psi, Sigma Alpha Epsilon, and Zeta Beta Tau. Delta Phi Epsilon was founded at Georgetown in 1920, and members of their Alpha Chapter include Jesuits and several deans of the School of Foreign Service.[175] The Delta Phi Epsilon foreign service sorority, founded in 1973, is the only sorority active at Georgetown.[176] Georgetown's chapter of Alpha Epsilon Pi, affiliated with the campus Hillel, was established in 2002.[177] Sigma Phi Epsilon chartered its chapter as a general social fraternity in 2007.[178] The Omega Lambda chapter of professional business fraternity Alpha Kappa Psi replaced Delta Sigma Pi, which lost its charter in 2006.[179] The Zeta Psi chapter, named Gamma Epsilon, was chartered in March 2009 after a year as a colony.[180]


    Annual events on campus celebrate Georgetown traditions, culture, alumni, sports, and politics. In late April, Georgetown University celebrates Georgetown Day.[181] Besides the full-day carnival, the day rewards the best professor of the year with the Dorothy Brown Award, as voted by students. Halloween is celebrated with public viewings of alumnus William Peter Blatty's film The Exorcist, which takes place in the neighborhood surrounding the university.[182]

    Homecoming coincides with a home football game, and festivities such as tailgating and a formal dance are sponsored by the Alumni Association to draw past graduates back to campus.[183] The largest planned sports related celebration is the first basketball practice of the season. Dubbed Midnight Madness, this event introduces the men's and women's basketball teams shortly after midnight on the first day the teams are allowed by NCAA rules to formally practice together.[184] In 2013, Georgetown will again host the east regional finals round of the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament.[185]

    Georgetown University hosts notable speakers each year, largely because of the success of the Georgetown Lecture Fund and the Office of Communications.[186] These are frequently important heads of state who visit Georgetown while in the capital, as well as scholars, authors, U.S. politicians, and religious leaders. The Office of the President hosts numerous symposia on religious topics, such as Nostra Ætate, Pacem in Terris, and the Building Bridges Seminar.[187]


    Basketball stars like Roy Hibbert have led the Hoyas to seven Big East championships.
    Georgetown fields 23 varsity teams and the Club Sports Board supports an additional 23 club teams. The varsity teams participate in the NCAA's Division I. The school generally competes in the Big East Conference, although the football team competes in the Division I FCS Patriot League, the sailing team in Middle Atlantic Intercollegiate Sailing Association, and the rowing teams in the Eastern Association of Rowing Colleges. U.S. News & World Report listed Georgetown's athletics program among the 20 best in the nation.[188] Georgetown's student athletes have a 94% graduation success rate,[189] and over one-hundred have gone on to play professionally.[190]

    The school's teams are called "Hoyas", a name whose origin is uncertain. Sometime before 1893, students well versed in classical languages invented the mixed Greek and Latin chant of "Hoya Saxa", translating roughly as "what (or such) rocks." The school's baseball team, then called the Stonewalls, began in 1870, and football in 1874, and the chant likely refers to one of these teams.[191] By the 1920s, the term "Hoyas" was used to describe groups on campus, and by 1928, campus sports writers started using it instead of the older team name, the "Hilltoppers."[192][193] The name was picked up in the local publications, and became official shortly after. Jack the Bulldog has been the mascot of Georgetown athletics programs since 1962, and the school fight song is There Goes Old Georgetown.

    The men's basketball team is particularly noteworthy as it won the NCAA championship in 1984 under coach John Thompson. The current coach is his son, John Thompson III, who coached the team to the Final Four in the 2007 NCAA tournament. The team is tied for the most Big East conference tournament titles with seven, and has made twenty-seven NCAA tournament appearances.[194][195] Well-known team alumni include Sleepy Floyd, Patrick Ewing, Dikembe Mutombo, Alonzo Mourning, Allen Iverson, Jeff Green, and Roy Hibbert.[196] Georgetown's NBA alumni are collectively among the highest earners from a single program.[197]

    Besides basketball, Georgetown has been nationally successful in both cross country and track and field,[198] and in 2011, the women's cross country team won Georgetown's only other NCAA Championship.[199] The sailing teams have also won eight Intercollegiate Sailing Association national championships since 2001,[200] while the rowing teams are perennial contenders.[201] The men's and women's lacrosse teams have both been ranked in the top ten nationally,[202][203] as have both soccer teams, with the men making the national championship game in 2012,[204] and the women making the national quarterfinals in 2010.[205] The rugby club team also made it to the Division II Final Four in 2005 and 2009.[206]


    Georgetown graduates have found success in a wide variety of fields, and have served at the heads of diverse institutions both in the public and private sector. Immediately after graduation, around 54–61% of undergraduates enter the workforce, while others go on to additional education.[207] Georgetown graduates have been recipients of 23 Rhodes Scholarships, 19 Marshall Scholarships, and 24 Truman Scholarships. Georgetown is also one of the top-ten yearly producers of Peace Corps volunteers as of 2010,[208] with 35 active and 866 total volunteers since 1961.[209] Georgetown alumni have a median starting salary of $55,000 with a median mid-career salary of $110,000.[207] NNDB, the Notable Names Database, lists 364 notable alumni as of 2013.[210]

    Twelve current or former heads of state are alumni. Former President of the United States Bill Clinton is a 1968 graduate of the School of Foreign Service, and others include Laura Chinchilla, current President of Costa Rica, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, former President of the Philippines, Saad Hariri, former Prime Minister of Lebanon, and Alfredo Cristiani former President of El Salvador.[211][212][213] Six alumni serve in the United States Senate, and thirteen in the House of Representatives. Current congressional alumni include Dick Durbin, Senate majority whip, and Steny Hoyer, House minority whip.[214] Governors include Pat Quinn of Illinois, John Lynch of New Hampshire, and Luis Fortuño, of Puerto Rico.[215] On the U.S. Supreme Court, alumni include current Associate Justice Antonin Scalia and former Chief Justice Edward Douglass White.[210]

    Prince Guillaume of Luxembourg, Don Felipe de Borbón, Prince of Asturias (Crown Prince of Spain), King Abdullah II of Jordan, Prince Turki bin Faisal Al Saud of the Saudi Arabia royal family, and Prince Philippos of Greece and Denmark are among the royals who attended Georgetown. Besides numerous members of the senior diplomatic corps, graduates have also headed military organizations on both the domestic and international level, such as former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and former National Security Advisor General James L. Jones.[216] Notable alumni in business include Patricia Russo, former Alcatel-Lucent CEO, William J. Doyle of the Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan, and Ted Leonsis, owner of the Washington Capitals, Wizards, and Mystics franchises and former America Online executive.[217][218] Leonsis is among four other undergraduate alumni who own professional sports teams, making Georgetown the most popular undergraduate university for major North American sports franchise owners.[219] Actor Bradley Cooper, People Magazine's Sexiest Man Alive 2011, is also a Georgetown graduate.[220]


    a Utraque Unum is Latin from Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians 2:14. See official explanation. Other translations available.

    b While Patrick Francis Healy inherited African ancestry from his mother and was consequently classified as racially black according to the "one-drop rule" of 19th century American society, he self-identified racially as white and ethnically as Irish American.

    c The undergraduate class of 2016 are students who begin school in August 2012, as the expected matriculation is four years.


    1.^ a b Nevils 1934, pp. 1–25
    2.^ As of June 30, 2012. "U.S. and Canadian Institutions Listed by Fiscal Year 2012 Endowment Market Value and Percentage Change in Endowment Market Value from FY 2011 to FY 2012" (PDF). 2012 NACUBO-Commonfund Study of Endowments. National Association of College and University Business Officers.
    3.^ a b "Georgetown Key Facts". Georgetown University. Retrieved 2012-07-12.
    4.^ "Services and Administration". Georgetown University. 2009. Retrieved February 15, 2009.
    5.^ a b c d "College Search - Georgetown University". College Board. 2012. Retrieved December 9, 2012.
    6.^ "Georgetown Facts". Office of Communications. Georgetown University. 2009. Retrieved August 24, 2009.
    7.^ "Georgetown University Sports".
    8.^ "International Students, Faculty, and Researchers". Office of International Programs. Georgetown University. 2012. Retrieved December 9, 2012.
    9.^ Fitzpatrick, Edward A.; Nevils, William Coleman (January 1936). "Miniatures of Georgetown, 1634 to 1934". The Journal of Higher Education (Ohio State University Press) 7 (1): 56–57. doi:10.2307/1974310. JSTOR 1974310.
    10.^ a b Devitt, E.I. (1909). "Georgetown University". Catholic Encyclopedia. Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved July 10, 2007.
    11.^ a b Curran 1993, pp. 33–34
    12.^ a b "Georgetown's Catholic and Jesuit Identity". Georgetown University. February 15, 2008. Retrieved March 24, 2009.
    13.^ O'Neill & Williams 2003, p. 12
    14.^ a b c d Curran, Robert Emmett (July 7, 2007). "Georgetown: A Brief History". Undergraduate Bulletin. Georgetown University. Retrieved August 27, 2007.
    15.^ "The Federal Charter". About Georgetown. Archived from the original on January 3, 2008. Retrieved March 6, 2007.
    16.^ "History" (PDF). Georgetown University School of Medicine. March 23, 2008. Retrieved March 24, 2009.
    17.^ O'Neill & Williams 2003, pp. 36–39
    18.^ "Georgetown Traditions: The Blue & Gray". August 17, 2005. Retrieved April 26, 2007.
    19.^ "Patrick Francis Healy Inaugurated". Library of Congress American Memory. July 31, 2006. Retrieved July 9, 2007.
    20.^ Spindle, Lindsey (July 30, 2003). "Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies Appoints New Director of Development". Office of Communications (Georgetown University). Retrieved April 26, 2007.
    21.^ "Third Grammar Class, Second Section, on the steps of Healy Hall at Georgetown University". Loyola Notre Dame Library. Retrieved September 6, 2007.
    22.^ Lyons, Emily (October 9, 1998). "GSB Takes New Name". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    23.^ "Georgetown University history: Co-Ed". About Georgetown. Archived from the original on January 3, 2008. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
    24.^ Timiraos, Nick (April 1, 2003). "Areen Outlines Women's Role". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    25.^ Sullivan, Tim (February 16, 2001). "DeGioia Named Next GU President". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    26.^ Timiraos, Nick (September 12, 2003). "Capital Campaign Close to $1 Billion". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    27.^ "Biography". Office of the President. Georgetown University. February 2005. Retrieved August 12, 2008.
    28.^ "Jesuit Ideals Drive Daily Life at Georgetown". Blue & Gray. November 5, 2007. Retrieved November 7, 2007.
    29.^ "Board of Directors". Georgetown University. July 2, 2009. Retrieved January 3, 2013.
    30.^ "Jesuit Community Members". Jesuit Community. Georgetown University. 2012. Retrieved December 9, 2012.
    31.^ Fasoranti, Oluseyi (February 2, 2010). "GU Celebrates Jesuit Heritage Week". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    32.^ Wildes, Kevin (February 13, 2004). "Shades of Gray Define Catholic Complexities". The Hoya. Retrieved August 15, 2011.
    33.^ "Chains Effective for Georgetown Protesters". NBC Washington. March 29, 2010. Retrieved June 20, 2011.
    34.^ Haggerty, Tim (February 25, 2000). "University, MedStar Agree to Hospital Sale". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    35.^ Argetsinger, Amy and Avram Goldstein (January 30, 2004). "GU to Continue Controversial Research". The Washington Post. Retrieved September 17, 2012.
    36.^ Murugesan, Vidhya (September 9, 2005). "Catholic Group Criticizes GU Profs". The Hoya. Retrieved 2011-04-26.
    37.^ Sahrmann, Marie (April 14, 2009). "Protests Come to Campus Alongside Obama". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    38.^ Boorstein, Michelle (May 15, 2012). "Washington's Catholic archbishop, Georgetown president spar over graduation invitation to Kathleen Sebelius". The Washington Post. Retrieved May 16, 2012.
    39.^ Kaplan, Sarah (January 25, 2011). "Anti-Abortion Summit at GU". The Hoya. Retrieved April 13, 2012.>
    40.^ Burke, Heather (October 8, 1999). "The Catholic Question". The Hoya. Archived from the original on October 24, 2007. Retrieved August 15, 2007.
    41.^ Fuchs, Marek (June 12, 2004). "At One Catholic College, Crucifixes Make a Comeback". The New York Times. Retrieved August 19, 2007.
    42.^ Fiore, Liz; Jim Rowan, Jon Soucy (April 20, 1999). "Crucifix Leaders Angry at University". The Hoya. Archived from the original on May 6, 2004. Retrieved August 19, 2007.
    43.^ Allen Jr., John L (May 14, 2004). "Muslim chaplain sees value in crucifixes". National Catholic Reporter. Archived from the original on November 9, 2007. Retrieved August 15, 2007.
    44.^ "Crucifixes and Religious Symbolism". Georgetown's Catholic and Jesuit Identity. Georgetown University. June 16, 2005. Retrieved August 15, 2007.
    45.^ "Application Checklist". Admissions. Georgetown Visitation Preparatory School. 2007. Retrieved October 7, 2007.
    46.^ "Undergraduate Bulletin". Georgetown University. 2006–2007. Retrieved July 3, 2007.
    47.^ Brienza, Laura (February 23, 2007). "Yearlong Study Abroad Enrollment Declines". The Hoya. Archived from the original on September 26, 2007. Retrieved July 8, 2007.
    48.^ "Listing of Joint / Dual Degrees Offered". Georgetown University Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. 2007. Archived from the original on August 14, 2007. Retrieved September 20, 2007.
    49.^ Castronuovo, Jenny (December 1, 2000). "Joint Public Health Center Launched". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    50.^ "About SCS". The School of Continuing Studies. Georgetown University. June 11, 2007. Retrieved July 26, 2007.
    51.^ Blazey, Elizabeth (October 3, 2008). "Student Life Begins to Boom in SFS-Q's Infant Years". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    52.^ Sahrmann, Marie (October 17, 2008). "Faculty Gender Ratio Favors Males". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    53.^ Heberle, Robert (September 21, 2004). "Faculty Funds Favor Kerry". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    54.^ Hu, Dawn (November 21, 2008). "GU Faculty Among Highest Donors to Obama Campaign". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    55.^ "List all faculty experts". Faculty Experts. Georgetown University. 2007. Retrieved July 14, 2007.
    56.^ "Faculty and Administration". Georgetown University Law Center. 2009. Retrieved November 23, 2009.
    57.^ "Colombia Reports". September 8, 2010. Retrieved September 8, 2010.
    58.^ Sarubbi, Andrea E. (March 7, 2006). "Former President of Poland Joins Georgetown Faculty as Distinguished Scholar". Georgetown University Department of Communications. Retrieved February 15, 2009.
    59.^ Heller, Chris (August 11, 2010). "Former Colombian President to teach at Georgetown". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved August 11, 2010.
    60.^ "University Mission Statement". Office of the President. Georgetown University. Retrieved July 24, 2007.
    61.^ "Georgetown University". The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. 2010. Retrieved September 17, 2012.
    62.^ a b c "Characteristics". National Center for Education Statistics. 2009. Retrieved February 20, 2012.
    63.^ "Library Resident Program". Georgetown Law Library. 2007. Retrieved July 9, 2007.
    64.^ "Research centers, institutes and programs". Research & Scholarship. Georgetown University. 2007. Retrieved July 13, 2007.
    65.^ de Vise, Daniel (October 16, 2009). "Hopkins Still Top School For Research Spending". The Washington Post. Retrieved October 16, 2009.
    66.^ a b Ponder, Meredith; Anna Cheimets (February 27, 2008). "Science at Georgetown: Research and the Real World". The Georgetown Independent. Retrieved December 13, 2010.
    67.^ Weber, Lauren (September 10, 2010). "Georgetown Receives $5.6 Million Department of Education Grant". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    68.^ "Georgetown Research Leads To First Cancer Vaccine". Science Daily. June 9, 2006. Retrieved August 18, 2007.
    69.^ "Academic Ranking of World Universities: National". Institute of Higher Education, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. 2012. Retrieved August 15, 2012.
    70.^ "America's Best Colleges". Forbes. 2012. Retrieved August 29, 2012.
    71.^ "National Universities Rankings". U.S. News & World Report. September 13, 2011. Retrieved September 25, 2011.
    72.^ "The Washington Monthly National University Rankings". The Washington Monthly. 2012. Retrieved November 11, 2012.
    73.^ "Academic Ranking of World Universities: Global". Institute of Higher Education, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. 2012. Retrieved August 15, 2012.
    74.^ "QS World University Rankings". QS Quacquarelli Symonds Limited. 2012. Retrieved September 11, 2012.
    75.^ "World University Rankings 2012-2013". The Times Higher Education. 2012. Retrieved October 11, 2012.
    76.^ "Undergraduate Applications Largest in Georgetown History". Georgetown University. April 2, 2012. Retrieved April 13, 2012.
    77.^ Fiske 2010, p. 66
    78.^ "10 Medical Schools With Lowest Acceptance Rates". USNWR. April 5, 2011. Retrieved 2011-06-22.
    79.^ "ABA Law School Data". American Bar Association. Retrieved 2011-06-19.
    80.^ "Statistical Profiles of Admitted Students 2007–2010 – MSFS". Georgetown University. Retrieved 2011-06-21.
    81.^ "Full-Time MBA Profile". McDonough School of Business. 2008. Retrieved June 22, 2011.
    82.^ Avery, Christopher, Glickman, Mark E., Hoxby, Caroline Minter and Metrick, Andrew (December 2005). "A Revealed Preference Ranking of U.S. Colleges and Universities" (PDF). Retrieved May 14, 2007.
    83.^ "College Search Georgetown University". College Board. 2008. Retrieved October 10, 2008.
    84.^ "First Year Accepted Students' Profile". Georgetown University. 2010. Retrieved March 6, 2011.
    85.^ "Preparation Process for First Year Applicants". Georgetown University. 2011. Retrieved September 20, 2011.
    86.^ "Undergraduate Financial Aid". Georgetown Facts. Georgetown University. August 31, 2009. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    87.^ "Georgetown University Transportation Shuttle (GUTS)". Georgetown University. 2011. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    88.^ Bachman, Jessica (May 1, 2007). "Years After Blueprint Ditched, Some Lament Missed Chance". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    89.^ "Georgetown Key Facts". Georgetown University. 2011. Retrieved February 7, 2011.
    90.^ "Georgetown Goes Greener". Blue & Gray. July 5, 2007. Retrieved July 18, 2007.
    91.^ "Georgetown University". College Sustainability Report Card. 2011. Retrieved January 5, 2012.
    92.^ Simpao, Bernadette. "Red Square". The Hoya. Archived from the original on April 1, 2004. Retrieved July 24, 2007.
    93.^ George, Hardy (October 1972). "Georgetown University's Healy Building". The Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians (Society of Architectural Historians) 31 (3): 208. doi:10.2307/988766. JSTOR 988766.
    94.^ "District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites" (PDF). District of Columbia: Office of Planning. September 28, 2009. Retrieved December 13, 2010.
    95.^ a b "Georgetown Map Directory". Georgetown University. 2011. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    96.^ "About Visitation: Map & Directions". Georgetown Visitation. Retrieved March 28, 2007.
    97.^ Timiraos, Nick (August 22, 2003). "From Hole to Home, Southwest Quad Completed". The Hoya. Archived from the original on October 24, 2007. Retrieved May 7, 2007.
    98.^ "$20 Million Gift to Benefit New MSB Building". Office of Communications (Georgetown University). July 10, 2009. Retrieved July 10, 2009.
    99.^ Timiraos, Nick (October 14, 2005). "Building The Hilltop's Future". The Hoya. Retrieved April 26, 2011.
    100.^ a b Bellmore, Ryan (August 2, 2011). "Princeton Review justifies its existence, ranks colleges". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved August 2, 2011.
    101.^ Cho, Ah-Hyun (February 21, 2008). "Not Always a Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood". The Hoya. Archived from the original on March 1, 2008. Retrieved August 12, 2008.
    102.^ Burke, Brian (October 7, 2009). "Campus Crime Rose 7% in 2008, DPS Report Says". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    103.^ "Frequently Asked Questions". On-Campus Housing. Georgetown University Law Center. January 10, 2007. Retrieved August 2, 2007.
    104.^ "Washington Neighborhoods". Office of Housing and Residential Life. Georgetown University. May 3, 2007. Retrieved August 2, 2007.
    105.^ Mlyniec, Wally (October 26, 2004). "Construction Notes". Campus Completion Project. Georgetown University. Retrieved July 8, 2007.
    106.^ "Welcome to the Villa". Villa le Balze. Georgetown University. April 23, 2008. Retrieved July 26, 2007.
    107.^ "Study Abroad in Italy". Villa le Balze. Georgetown University. April 23, 2008. Retrieved August 12, 2008.
    108.^ "About". McGhee Center for Eastern Mediterranean Studies. Georgetown University. December 18, 2007. Retrieved April 26, 2008.
    109.^ "Fall 2008: Semester Abroad". McGhee Center for Eastern Mediterranean Studies. Georgetown University. February 22, 2008. Retrieved April 26, 2008.
    110.^ Heberle, Robert (May 20, 2005). "SFS to Establish Qatar Campus". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    111.^ "Studying International Affairs". Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar. Retrieved July 26, 2007.
    112.^ "乔治敦大学联络办公室 Georgetown University Liaison Office". Georgetown University Office of the Provost. 2009. Retrieved February 4, 2009.
    113.^ Parks, Ann W. (November 3, 2008). "The Center for Transnational Legal Studies Kicks off in London". Georgetown University Law Center. Retrieved July 12, 2009.
    114.^ "Student Profile — Class of 2015". Office of Undergraduate Admissions. Georgetown University. 2010. Retrieved September 20, 2011.
    115.^ "Statistics on Georgetown's International Community". Office of International Programs. Georgetown University. June 30, 2010. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    116.^ a b c "Final Report and Recommendations". Student Commission for Unity. Georgetown University. January 2009. Retrieved December 2, 2009.
    117.^ Heneghan, Tom (July 9, 2007). "U.S. imam questions if "American" Islam exists". Reuters. Retrieved July 24, 2007.
    118.^ "Other Traditions". Campus Ministry. Georgetown University. Retrieved August 2, 2010.
    119.^ "Volunteerism and Service at Georgetown". Georgetown Facts. June 16, 2005. Archived from the original on February 14, 2008. Retrieved July 24, 2007.
    120.^ "Georgetown's Great Escape". Georgetown Magazine. February 27, 2006. Archived from the original on August 25, 2007. Retrieved July 24, 2007.
    121.^ Norton, Chris (April 26, 2007). "Suggestive figures, Grading on curves, Georgetown gets down". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved July 24, 2007.
    122.^ Salinas, Anna (January 30, 2009). "SCU Report Prescribes Change, Inclusion". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    123.^ Heller, Chris (September 16, 2010). "Newsweek ranks Georgetown among the nation's most diverse and LGBTQ-friendly schools". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved September 16, 2010.
    124.^ Farra, Emily (December 8, 2011). "The 10 Most Hipster Campuses". College Magazine. Retrieved December 12, 2011.
    125.^ "Most Vegan-Friendly College Contest 2011". December 2011. Retrieved December 12, 2011.
    126.^ "COOL: College Opportunities Online Locator". National Center for Education Statistics. 2005. Retrieved July 11, 2007.
    127.^ Marush, Gabrielle (June 13, 2011). "Neighbors ask Georgetown to house all students on campus". The GW Hatchet. Retrieved October 3, 2011.
    128.^ Koester, Anne Y. (June 13, 2011). "Spring 2011 Semester Report" (PDF). Off Campus Student Life. Georgetown University. Retrieved October 3, 2011.
    129.^ "Frequently Asked Questions". Prospective Students. Georgetown University. Archived from the original on July 2, 2007. Retrieved July 25, 2007.
    130.^ Mac Neal, Caitlin (November 13, 2009). "2010–2020 Campus Plan Drafted". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    131.^ "Student Life". Georgetown University School of Medicine. 2009. Retrieved July 15, 2009.
    132.^ "Student Life Report 2012" (PDF). Georgetown University Student Association. February 24, 2012. Retrieved March 1, 2012.
    133.^ Palko, Ian (September 21, 1999). "SAC Fair Is Opportunity for Most, Exclusion for Some". The Hoya. Archived from the original on October 24, 2007. Retrieved July 27, 2007.
    134.^ Giblin, Adam (October 1, 2002). "Support Your Neighborhood, Vote in D.C.". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    135.^ "Philodemic Society". Georgetown University. March 19, 2007. Retrieved May 3, 2007.
    136.^ "Poulton Hall Stage 3". The Washington Post. 2008. Retrieved September 15, 2012.
    137.^ "About Us". Nomadic Theatre. Georgetown University. 2008. Retrieved April 26, 2008.
    138.^ "About". The Georgetown Improv Association. Georgetown University. 2010. Retrieved June 20, 2010.
    139.^ "Collegiate-Acappella Directory of College A Cappella Groups A-G". Retrieved 2011-03-20.
    140.^ Bayer, Michael (November 5, 2003). "A capella abounds at DCAF". The Georgetown Independent. Archived from the original on September 27, 2007. Retrieved August 19, 2007.
    141.^ "History of The Chimes". Georgetown Chimes. August 5, 2008. Archived from the original on May 15, 2008. Retrieved August 12, 2008.
    142.^ "Pep Band Homepage". Georgetown University. 2008. Retrieved February 24, 2008.
    143.^ "About The Corp". The Corp. April 29, 2007. Archived from the original on 2007-06-29. Retrieved July 9, 2007.
    144.^ Hu, Dawn (April 27, 2011). "Profits Take Hit as The Corp Gives Back". The Hoya. Retrieved May 25, 2011.
    145.^ Heller, Chris (September 8, 2010). "GUASFCU manages more than $16 million in assets". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved September 8, 2010.
    146.^ Swan, John (October 3, 2006). "GU Goes 'Mad' for Financial Advice". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    147.^ "Battalion History". The HOYA Battalion. August 4, 2010. Retrieved December 13, 2010.
    148.^ Goldberg, Roxanne (February 27, 2012). "ROTC ranked nation's best". GW Hatchet. Retrieved February 27, 2012.
    149.^ "National University Rankings 2010". Washington Monthly. 2010. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    150.^ "Georgetown University Grilling Society (GUGS): About". 2003-02-20. Retrieved 2011-05-01.
    151.^ Baldwin, Leslie (November 8, 2001). "Events educate GU on violence against women". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved July 10, 2007.
    152.^ Amend, Andy (February 9, 1999). "Compromise Reached". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    153.^ Somers, Bailey (March 6, 2003). "Cafeterias to offer only Fair Trade coffee". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved July 10, 2007.
    154.^ Toporek, Bryan (May 2008). "Georgetown Students Struggle to Endorse Candidates". Georgetown Journalism. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University. Retrieved April 18, 2012.
    155.^ Walters, Anne K. (May 12, 2006). "Gimme an 'O'!". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved December 13, 2010.
    156.^ Johnson, Andrew (November 6, 2003). "Jesuit colleges lack pro-choice groups". Marquette Tribune. Retrieved April 25, 2007.
    157.^ Rosier, Kevin (September 14, 2002). "FIRE group gives GU 'red light'". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
    158.^ "Chains Effective for Georgetown Protesters". WRC-TV. March 29, 2010. Retrieved April 13, 2010.
    159.^ Harbourt, Sam (April 13, 2007). "Law Center Divided Over Denial Of Funds for Abortion Rights". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    160.^ Viator, Margaret (March 1, 2012). "Law Student Mired in Birth Control Debate". The Hoya. Retrieved March 13, 2012.
    161.^ Waddell, Justin (April 19, 2012). "Sandra Fluke, 780 law students to Georgetown: comply with contraception mandate in 2012". Georgetown Law Weekly. Retrieved April 24, 2012.
    162.^ "The Hoya: A Brief History". Digital Georgetown. Retrieved March 25, 2010.
    163.^ Zumbrun, Josh (January 14, 2005). "How Georgetown Found a Different Voice". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    164.^ "About The Georgetown Independent". November 10, 2008. Retrieved March 25, 2010.
    165.^ Free, Elissa (October 21, 2004). "Georgetown Law Weekly Wins ABA's Best Newspaper Award Three Years Running". Georgetown University Law Center. Retrieved November 25, 2009.
    166.^ Redden, Molly (October 23, 2008). "Controversial Catholics...and the third coming of The Georgetown Academy". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved October 27, 2008.
    167.^ Santulli, Stephen (November 7, 2006). "The Right's Fight to Write". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    168.^ "Students start progressive political magazine". Georgetown Voice. March 30, 2011. Retrieved June 27, 2011.
    169.^ "The Fire This Time". Georgetown University. Retrieved April 21, 2012.
    170.^ "The Georgetown Heckler". January 23, 2007. Retrieved April 19, 2007.
    171.^ Cho, Ah-Hyun (January 27, 2006). "The Revolution Will Be Televised". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    172.^ Dillon, Liam (October 17, 2002). "Finding a Place for Campus Radio". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved August 19, 2007.
    173.^ Singh, Suma (September 19, 2000). "Greek Life: Alive and Well At Georgetown". The Hoya. Archived from the original on November 22, 2005. Retrieved March 10, 2007.
    174.^ Boyle, Terrence (December 2, 2007). "The Other Georgetown Fraternities". Delta Phi Epsilon. Retrieved December 2, 2007.
    175.^ "Frequently Asked Questions". Delta Phi Epsilon. November 22, 2006. Retrieved August 16, 2007.
    176.^ "Sorority". Delta Phi Epsilon. April 16, 2007. Retrieved August 16, 2007.
    177.^ Glick, Michael (October 29, 2002). "AEPi Fosters Greek and Jewish Life". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    178.^ Haviland, Erica (April 27, 2007). "SigEp Receives National Charter". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    179.^ Washington, Vanessa (April 21, 2006). "Weakly Greek". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    180.^ Johnson, Lindsay (March 26, 2009). "Life of a Frat on a Greek-Free Campus". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    181.^ "Schedule of Events". Georgetown Day. Retrieved October 8, 2009.
    182.^ Skeehan, Patrick (October 31, 2003). "Exorcist Showings, Pumpkin Carving Highlight Activities". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    183.^ Mellott, Sarah (October 25, 2005). "Parties, Pageantry Mark Homecoming". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    184.^ Tarnow, George (October 21, 2004). "Clock strikes midnight, basketball stars come out". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved July 27, 2007.
    185.^ Bonesteel, Matt (May 16, 2012). "Verizon Center to host 2013 NCAA tournament East Regional". The Washington Post. Retrieved May 16, 2012.
    186.^ Alolod, Gerard P. (May 3, 2005). "Lecture Fund Brings Diversity to Georgetown". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    187.^ "Initiatives, projects and lecture series". Office of the President. Georgetown University. 2008. Retrieved August 12, 2008.
    188.^ Witkin, Gordon and Jodi Schneider (March 10, 2002). "Why they're not just about winning and losing anymore". U.S. News and World Report. Retrieved July 26, 2007.
    189.^ "Graduation Rates Report" (PDF). NCAA. October 21, 2011. Retrieved February 10, 2012.
    190.^ Shoup-Mendizabal, Jon (January 23, 2004). "Glory Days". The Hoya. Archived from the original on March 14, 2007. Retrieved August 27, 2007.
    191.^ O'Neill & Williams 2003, pp. 54, 62–63
    192.^ "What's A Hoya?". August 17, 2005. Retrieved April 30, 2007.
    193.^ Reynolds, Jon K. (September–October 1983). "The Dogs of Georgetown". Georgetown Magazine. Georgetown University Library. Retrieved June 30, 2008.
    194.^ "Hoyas claim their 1st Big East tourney title since 1989". Associated Press. Retrieved July 10, 2007.
    195.^ "Rams hope to charge past Hoyas in Southwest Regional clash". 9news. The Sports Network. March 18, 2011. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    196.^ Goode, Harlan and Brenna McGee (February 13, 2007). "Former Greats Celebrate Hoops at 100 Years Gala". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    197.^ Diamond, Jared (February 8, 2012). "Basketball's Alumni Loot Index". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved February 7, 2012.
    198.^ Jammet, Nicolas (November 23, 2004). "Georgetown's Track Program Quietly Dominates". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    199.^ Owings, Matt (November 21, 2011). "Wisconsin men, Georgetown women earn cross country titles". USA Today. Retrieved February 10, 2012.
    200.^ Hollander, Evan (June 14, 2012). "Hoyas Win Eighth National Title". The Hoya. Retrieved June 15, 2012.
    201.^ Mendoza, Moises (May 20, 2005). "Experience, Leadership and Vision Propel Hoya Crew to National Prominence". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    202.^ "Georgetown Men's Lacrosse Moves Up to No. 4 in National Rankings". Georgetown University Official Athletic Site. April 24, 2007. Retrieved April 26, 2007.
    203.^ Bohbot, Samantha (April 21, 2009). "Ford, Hubschmann Lead GU to Big East Crown". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    204.^ Goff, Steven (December 9, 2012). "Indiana soccer defeats Georgetown in College Cup final". The Washington Post. Retrieved January 10, 2013.
    205.^ El-Bashir, Tarik (November 26, 2010). "Georgetown women's soccer has reached new heights". The Washington Post. Retrieved January 10, 2013.
    206.^ Finn, Dave (November 17, 2009). "Hoyas Finish Off Undefeated Season". The Hoya. Retrieved February 10, 2012.
    207.^ a b Chiang, Jessie (November 20, 2008). "Georgetown Grads Earn Top Salaries". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    208.^ "Peace Corp Top Colleges 2011" (PDF). Peace Corps News Releases. September 30, 2010. Retrieved February 7, 2012.
    209.^ Westergaard, Lily (February 3, 2012). "GU Ranked 10th Among Peace Corps Volunteers". The Hoya. Retrieved February 7, 2012.
    210.^ a b "Georgetown University". NNDB. 2013. Retrieved January 10, 2013.
    211.^ "Profile: Gloria Arroyo". BBC News. February 24, 2006. Retrieved March 24, 2009.
    212.^ Yazbeck, Natacha (June 28, 2009). "Lebanon's new PM pledges unity". Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved June 27, 2009.
    213.^ Long, Chrissie; Llana, Sara Miller (February 8, 2010). "Costa Rica elects first woman president, inspiring the region". The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved May 11, 2010.
    214.^ "Hoyas Serving the Nation". Office of Federal Relations. Georgetown University. 2010. Retrieved August 23, 2011.
    215.^ "Prominent SFS Alumni". Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. 2011. Retrieved August 23, 2011.
    216.^ "Civic Engagement and National Service". Quarterly Reports. Georgetown University. Spring 2009. Retrieved August 23, 2011.
    217.^ "Alcatel-Lucent (ALUA): Executive Profile". BusinessWeek. 2007. Retrieved December 3, 2007.
    218.^ Wilson, Craig (January 18, 2008). "AOL exec and Capitals owner Leonsis' estate isn't just for show". USA Today. Retrieved October 27, 2009.
    219.^ Diamond, Jared (December 13, 2011). "Where the People in Charge Went to School". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved February 1, 2012.
    220.^ "Bradley Cooper, Sexiest Man Alive?". The Boston Globe. November 17, 2011. Retrieved December 7, 2011.


    Curran, Robert Emmett (1993). The Bicentennial History of Georgetown University. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. ISBN 0-87840-485-6.
    Fiske, Edward B. (2010). Fiske Guide to Getting Into the Right College. Sourcebooks, Inc. ISBN 1-4022-4309-X.
    Nevils, William Coleman (1934). Miniatures of Georgetown: Tercentennial Causeries. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. OCLC 8224468.
    O'Neill, Paul R.; Williams, Paul K. (2003). Georgetown University. Charleston, South Carolina: Arcadia Publishing. ISBN 0-7385-1509-4.

    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:22 pm

    Take a look at this very cool watch advertisement!! Perhaps I should go into an Accentuate the Positive Mode (APM) after dealing with so much speculation and negativitiy?! At some point, the struggle must climax in an Orgasmic Eureka Phenomenon (OEP)!!! But it must always be remembered that the Agony must precede the Ecstasy!! The more I examine the madness -- the less I wish to discuss it. In some respects -- Everything is Fine!! In other respects -- Everything Sucks!! As I have asked previously -- "is there really a neat and clean way to run a solar system?" Perhaps it has been absolutely necessary for this world to go through hell on its way to heaven. I continue to think that if I were briefed by the best and the brightest (human and otherwise) on the Dark-Side of the Moon -- that my editorial slant might be completely different. In retrospect, I might've been much better-off if I had researched silently by reading books from used-book stores -- with no credit-cards, no phone-calls, no internet-forums, no controversial-videos, no messy-house, etc, etc, etc. I really don't know if we're on the verge of heaven or hell. We seem to be in purgatory presently. I still think the elites were promised goods which were never intended to be delivered. I still like the theory of human-physicality and responsible-freedom -- yet the reality seems to fall way-short of the intended-ideal. In many ways, I don't know if the Archangels are good or bad. I suspect they are BOTH. If someone else had been running the show in this solar system over the last few thousand years -- things might've turned-out a lot worse than they did. I don't know. I simply wish for us to make the next steps the right ones -- as we seem to be entering a galactic minefield of sorts. Anyway, here's some more reposting of vintage orthodoxymoron.

    Here is another what if. What if it's Gabriel vs Lucifer + Michael - with Gabriel and Lucifer being the big-guns - and Michael being highly pure, but relatively powerless compared with the other two? Might Lucifer and Michael be co-mediators between Gabriel and Humanity? Might Gabriel be God/Satan? Might Lucifer be Mary/Holy Spirit? Might Michael be Jesus? Once again - don't get mad at me - this is just more speculation. My goal is to make you face yourselves - and think. Could Gabriel have been disfunctional in Heaven (Orion?)? Could Lucifer and Michael have rebelled against Gabriel? Did Humanity aka Fallen Angels aka Nephilim aka Us - follow (fall) Lucifer and Michael to Earth? Did we steal Fire (advanced technology, hybridization genetics, and spiritual wisdom) from Gabriel? Was this the Original Sin? Are Lucifer and Michael at odds regarding how to deal with Gabriel? Is Gabriel the leader of the Incoming Annunaki? Is Lucifer the leader of the Local Annunaki? Is Michael the leader of Humanity (as we know humans to be)? I keep feeling incredible tension and looming fate - as I comtemplate our situation. Earth really does seem to be a Planet in Rebellion - and it feels as though the rebellion is about to be put down - once and for all. But what if ALL parties are wrong? What if an innovative solution needs to be pursued? I keep mentioning a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System. I like the concept - but I am clueless regarding the details and implementation aspects. I'll just keep passively pursuing this line of reasoning - and hope that the Big Gun Gods and Goddesses call off Armageddon, Retribution, Annihilation, Damnation, Utter Destruction, etc. - and declare some sort of a conditional truce - to work things out in a reasonable, rational, and peaceful manner. Hope springs eternal - but don't hold your breath - hoping for hell to freeze over...

    Here is another piece of evidence which seems to place ancient Aryans in India - right next door to Tibet. If a Sovereign Queen of the Air from Sirius (Lucifer?) was Aldebaran/Sirius/Aryan - and came to Tibet 12,000 to 14,000 years ago in the Moon - to conduct a hybridization program on Earth - this would be highly interesting - wouldn't it? Is it possible for Aryans to be pigmented? Again - I don't know a damn thing about this subject. All roads may lead to Rome - but the most important roads might originate in Tibet. What if Earth became Nazified thousands of years ago? What if Babylon, Medo-Persia, Egypt, Greece, and Rome - were essentially Nazi in nature? Please don't stone me - this was just a random thought. What if Gizeh Intelligence has been running Earth for thousands of years? What if Gizeh Intelligence continues to run Earth? Are we dealing with Annunaki Masons (Gabriel) vs Annunaki Nazis (Lucifer) vs Human Magicians (Michael)? Or - are they the same? We are all one? Three sides of the same pyramid? Trilateral Commission? Trinity? Godhead? If someone has been in charge for thousands of years - they could genetically engineer all manner of races - human, grey, and reptilian - and create all manner of mythologies, theologies, religions, empires, and nations. Do we all come from the goddess? Rewatch Alex Collier's 1994 interview - and his 1995 lecture - with this thread in mind.

    Many years ago - there was a TV show called 'Queen for a Day' - and my grandmother was on it. Can you imagine being 'Queen of Heaven for a Day?' I keep getting the image of someone looking a lot like my avatar (for special occasions anyway) - travelling around the world on magneto-leviton trains - and interacting with most of the political, religious, scientific, business, and financial leaders of the world - each and every day. But it is unclear to me whether Earth is completely their show - or whether they are an administrator for - or are in conflict with - an even more powerful being, or group of beings. This, of course, is merely speculation. If I could prove this - I would cease to exist. I wouldn't have to wait for the rocks to fall on me...

    I would love to shadow the key players in this solar system as sort of a neutral observer. Is this sort of thinking a form of mental illness - or is it the proper way to think about solar system issues? Should I get all wrapped-up in the local political mudslinging - or should I mostly think of responsible principles and concepts relative to the politics, religion, psychology, and ethics of doing business in this solar system? I'm beginning to think in terms of competing with an Anna or Katesh version of the Queen of Heaven - who I think might be the chief administrator of this solar system. Again - is this a form of mental illness - or is this a reasonable modality of getting a handle on what's really going on? Is there a legitimate place for a Solar System Administrator? Would things be even more chaotic if none existed? I'm thinking that a Solar System Observer (or Observers) - who had access to everyone and everything - with no authority - might be a good thing - but I don't really know. Thinking about all of this makes me shaky. Is anyone else thinking in this manner? I'm sure there is - but who are they? Where are they? What are they doing?

    I keep thinking that all proposed solutions and attempted implementations will be highly problematic. No matter how we attempt to put the puzzle together - it will always be wrong. There will always be discord and conflict. However - we really should seek more sane ways to manage the insanity. All of this should probably proceed in an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary manner. Top-down would probably be better than bottom-up - but both would be optimal. Talking softly and carrying a big stick would be splendiferous!

    In light of this thread - and current events - might it be wise to take a closer look at India, Tibet, China, Iran, and the Medo-Persian Empire? I'm sensing a hugely destructive looming fate in our immediate future - which needs to be defused. The problem is - I don't really know what the threat is - or how to defuse it. Perhaps this is why I am seeking a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System - based upon Responsibility and the U.S. Constitution (in broad and general terms) - so as to give all factions a fair shake. War is Hell - with very little compassion or reason. I don't expect things to be really happy in this solar system - for a long, long time. However - I would like to see everyone survive - and to continue to evolve ethically and spiritually. I'm presently watching 'Battlestar Galactica - The Plan' - and I'm finding it to be quite depressing. What really bothers me about all of this - is that We the Goyim don't really know what the hell is going on. I mean well - but I'm clueless and powerless - and it seems that the real ptb in this solar system would like all of us to stay that way. I guess I'm really trying to get up to speed with the ptb - without getting involved in the corruption and nastiness. Someone please give my threads a careful study. I don't claim to have the answers or inside knowledge - but I do think that the areas I have covered, and the questions I have raised, really need to be closely examined and answered. I feel like I am operating at about 20% of the 10% of my brain capacity. All is not well emotionally, spiritually, and intellectually - which is why I am not doing anything more than posting random thoughts on the internet. But I predict that someone will be reading these thoughts 100 years from now - and asking themselves why these thoughts were not taken seriously.

    BTW - what is the Kali Rama Step Back - which Ashayana Deane speaks of at 08:00 of the Camelot interview? I find this third and final part of the interview to be quite interesting. I find Ashayana to be quite interesting - even though I think I believe about 20% of what she says. I think she knows a helluva lot - but that she speaks in riddles - and only reveals bits and pieces of what she really knows. Her manner of speaking and body language is fascinating. Her name is even interesting. Ashayana = Ash Anna = Black Anna? Think of Ashtar Command. Ash Tar = Black. Come to think of it - what color is a Raven? Sometimes I think I need a good shrink. One who has worked in Underground Bases and Secret Mental Institutions. Don't laugh. Those people may know more than just about anyone else - because they have worked with people who knew so much that it drove them insane. I tend to think that the people who know the most about the creepy and esoteric subjects are those who are in the process of going insane - and who can't handle the truth about what has been going on - and what is currently going on - with all of the disturbing implications and ramifications. I wish I were kidding - but I think the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth - will drive most people insane. I so hope that I'm wrong. I'm just saying this as a precautionary warning to those who are happily and naively searching for the truth - and the happiness which they expect will accompany the truth. I am simultaneously optimistic and pessimistic. My threads are designed to lead one on a journey which is revealing - yet which does not lead one down the primrose path to destruction.

    The fact that the Unholy Trinity of Power, Sex, and Money is a reality - leads me to believe that we need to transcend this trinity - rather than resisting it. We need to engage in the Responsible Pursuit of Power, Sex, and Money. Why should the bad boys and girls have all the good times - and rule the world???? Think about THAT!!!! What if Truly Responsible Businessmen and Businesswomen starting kicking the XXXX out of the Irresponsible Businessmen and Businesswomen???? Then the good guys and good gals would have a monopoly on Power, Sex, and Money - and the world would improve exponentially. I'm just on the verge of stopping this posting. I'm running out of pearls. I have not been tending to business - and my lifestyle makes this obvious. I'm about to pursue business with a vengeance - but in a highly ethical and responsible manner. I'm tired of wading through all of the bs. OK - now I'm going to finish watching the BSG DVD. The horror!!! Then I might try to finish the Courtney Brown books - which scared the hell out of me...

    I think that the Brown books reveal something of substance - but I'm not sure that it is the absolute truth. It could be a mixture of truth and deception. I assume that nearly everything we discussed on AV1 - and currently discuss on MOA - is a mixture of truth, error, and outright deception. I trust nothing and no one. I found out the hard way that I couldn't trust God - so now I don't even trust myself - let alone Courtney Brown. His RVing experiences could be manipulated or contrived supernaturally by nepharious entities. He could have hidden agendas. But I do find the books to be highly interesting - and reveal possibilities which I had never considered. However - I am truly a New Age Agnostic (a new label I have given myself). Sorry to be so blunt - but I'm in sort of a mood...

    I'm in less of a mood today. The Brown material was quite compelling - and the lack of a sales-pitch - gave it the ring of truth - which is probably what scared me. It quite literally blew me away. I will take another look at it later today. But still - I've gotten very paranoid and wary. My speculations have been quite wild - but also quite vivid, to me at least - so I really don't know which way to jump. Is this a sign of instability - or is it simply due dilligence? What do you think about all of this goddess, Kali, Tibet, China, India, Persia, Queen of Heaven stuff? I really feel as though this is playing with fire - but I'm hoping that considering all of the possibilities will help to unite all factions in the solar system - in a constructive manner, which does not involve peace at any price, or any Trojan Horse scenarios.

    Here is some more Queen of Heaven material.

    Mary has appeared under many names over the centuries, here are but a few:

    Mary, Queen of Heaven (Rome)
    Arianrhod (Welsh) Goddess of fertility
    Aprodite (Greek) Goddess of fertility
    Ashteroth (Phoenicians and Canaanites) Goddess of fertility
    Astarte (Eastern Mediterranean/Bronze Age) Goddess of fertility
    Anahita (Persian) Goddess of fertility
    Anu (Celtic) Goddess of fertility
    Aveta (Gaulish) Goddess of fertility
    Brigit (Irish) Goddess of fertility
    Ceres (Rome) Goddess of fertility
    Corn Mother (Native American) Earth Goddess/Goddess of fertility
    Cybele (Rome) Goddess of fertility
    Demeter (Greek) Goddess of fertility
    Freya (Scandinavian) Goddess of fertility
    Frigg (Scandinavian) Goddess of fertility
    Gaia (Greek) Mother goddess
    Hathor (Egyptian) Goddess of fertility
    Haumea (Hawaiian) Mother goddess
    Inanna (Sumerian) Goddess of fertility
    Ishtar (Babylonian/Assyrian) Goddess of fertility
    Isis (Egyptian) Goddess of fertility
    Juno (Rome) Goddess of fertility
    Kali (Indian) – Black earth mother/Goddess of fertility
    Kostroma (Slavic) Goddess of fertility
    Mylitta (Sumerian) Goddess of fertility
    Oshun (Afro/Cuban) Goddess of fertility
    Rainbow Snake (Aborigine) – Earth Goddess/Goddess of fertility
    Rhea (Greek) Mother goddess
    Tlalteutli (Aztec) Goddess of creation
    Venus (Rome) Goddess of fertility
    Vasudhara (Tibetan) Goddess of fertility

    One Nation Under Satan? In Goddess We Trust? Might M-42, Aldebaran, and Sirius be 'home' for most of us? Are we really the 'Orion Group' which Alex Collier refers to? Are our souls interdimensional reptilian in nature? Are all of us human/reptile hybrids with varying percentage differentials? Do most of us have a very low reptile percentage (reptilian brain + reptilian soul) - greys an intermediate percentage - and reptilians a high percentage? Please don't laugh - this is just a wild theory. I tend to think that the Queen of Heaven has been conducting a hybridization program on Earth for thousands of years - starting in Tibet. Some of this is based upon a visit to Tibet by Nicholas Roerich - where he saw strange grey people, and learned of a 'Sovereign Queen of the Air' who had come to Tibet from Sirius to conduct hybridization experiments. Lucis Creator? I am obviously a fan of an organized decentralism solar system government. I'm thinking that a one world government or one solar system government has existed for thousands of years - and that whoever is in power (The Queen of Heaven?) wishes to remain in power - rather than gaining power. I do think that numerous states are an essential ingredient in a world government or solar system government which maximizes responsible freedom over an extended time period.

    I've said this before, but I'm going to say it in a slightly different way - what if we are dealing with a 3 way family feud - namely God/Satan/Father/Gabriel/Amen Ra/Annunaki vs Holy Spirit/Mother/Lucifer/Lilith/Hathor/Isis/Mary/Annunaki vs Son/Michael/Horus/Jesus/Human - fighting over the Human Race? What if we need a little bit of each faction, to make this solar system operate properly? How does Gizeh Intelligence fit into all of this? What would Oedipus say? That mother!! Is anybody out there??

    Why exactly is Obama in India - to the tune of $200,000,000/day? Is this visit significant - especially in light of this particular thread? Does Kali have anything to do with this visit? I have speculated - with others - that the United States is experiencing the first stages of a controlled demolition. I have also speculated - with others - that India, Tibet, and China may be at the center of disclosure. India recently bought a huge amount of gold. China seems to own the U.S. What the hell is going on? I really hate to say this - but I think I'm going to start listening to Alex Jones again. I never really listened to him much - and then I stopped - but I think we may be in for a VERY long, hard winter. (that sounds kinda sexy!) - and I'd sort of like to hear a blow by blow report on the madness - before the wall of water hits - or before the greys take me to a FEMA camp. Could we be in for a perfect storm of NWO ALIEN BS??? Some think so. I don't know.

    Thank-you Carol. Part of your comment piqued my curiosity: "However, I strongly suspect that the male forces are going to undergo major changes as the Queen of Heaven is going to show her hand sooner then later. Why? Because the earth changes are ramping up and will continue for the next 4 years. Two before the crossing and two after the crossing." I will check out the links after I finish listening to Alex Jones. I just want to add that I don't have a problem with highly spiritual, ethical, and powerful women. In fact - I think they may be the way of the future. I'm just worried about the possibility of an unethical and cruel shadowy underworld of black projects, hybridization genetics, tyrannical rule, oppressive religions, compromised and controlled religious and political leaders, etc and et al - with a Queen of Heaven administrator. Once again - I don't know if any of this is true. I'm just trying to make sense out of the chaos and confusion. I'm too passive - which is why I probably need to move in the direction of Alex Jones. I don't wish to end up where he is - but maybe halfway between where I am and where he is. I'm just too burned-out to take off the gloves - just yet. I really don't wish to do anything. I just wish for this solar system to be run properly. I don't know the details of history. I don't know the details of what is presently going on. But I do know that history is a mess - and that the world is a mess presently. I simply wish for the mess to get cleaned up - and there is no better time to do this than right now.

    I'd still like to meet the Queen of Heaven - if she exists - and I would be quite polite - but I wouldn't kneel - kiss her ring - and say 'My Queen'. I might ask her the sort of questions I have asked on AV1 and MOA. Gods and Goddesses don't impress me much...even if they have 500 IQ's...and I don't know that they do...but it wouldn't surprise me. Please get DVD's of the old and new 'V' series - and watch them carefully - reading between the script-lines, in light of AV1 and MOA. That goes for 'Star Wars', 'Battlestar Galactica', and 'Stargate'. I wish to keep everything good, and eliminate everything bad - without hurting or killing anyone - treating everyone and everysoul, with dignity and respect. I stand by everything I have posted on AV1 and MOA - especially regarding a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System. The Queen of Heaven might even approve - once she gets used to the idea. I have hinted at it before - but I am actually trying to emulate the best aspects of Anna ('V') - in a male sort of way. But actually - the Anna in my mind's eye - is quite different than the one in the series. The series is just the starting point. It's only the beginning of a bright new day! Do you see my point? It sounds strange - and I am mad - but I do have a method. Queen of Heaven = Anna from Heaven. Who knows - she might actually like me. I continue to think that 'earth-changes' will be deliberately inflicted - and that an 'alien-invasion' or a 'second-coming' will be staged with hybrids and advanced technology - coming out of sub-surface bases throughout the solar system. I so hope that I'm wrong. BTW - the links rock - especially Cliff High on the Veritas Show! Here are a couple of links to a story about Shakira playing Kali in an Indian movie. 1. 2. Why on Earth are they making a Bollywood movie on the Warrior Goddess Kali - at this particular time? Is this simply a coincidence? In light of this thread - I tend to think not. But what do I know?

    Don't be frightened. I mean no harm. Thank-you Carol and Raven. I'm hearing somewhat of an acknowledgement regarding some of my Queen of Heaven theorizing. This part of the first link from you, Raven, particularly interested me. "When the Universe was born in Archetypes, then it was LILITH, the Dark Queen of Heaven, also known as Inanna and the Screech Owl and Isis and Mary; who PRECEDED EVE as the 'First Wife' for ADAM and NOT being made from one of Adam's Ribs." What if disclosure will occur during Obama's India trip? What if Obama is going to go down into an underground base in India (under the Taj Mahal?), Tibet, or China - and do a disclosure press conference with Kali aka The Queen of Heaven? Could this be an official announcement of the New World Order? Could this announce or trigger a worldwide financial collapse? Could Obama end up remaining in India, Tibet, or China? Just wondering. This post is more wild than most of my other wild posts. Also - the 'V' series will be resuming in the next couple of months. Might this series contain a lot of follow-up disclosure information? Sorry if I spoiled the surprise - but no one seems to listen to me anyway. Probably nothing will happen - but just in case, you might wish to buy some extra food. I don't do the gun thing - but I do have some extra food. Lastly - and oppositely - what if the India trip signals the end of the corrupt NWO and PTB? Now that the bright-lights are being turned-on - are the rats starting to run away? Just more wild speculation and random thoughts.

    Once again - I simply wish for things to work out well for everyone - including the bad guys and gals. I think that a lot of us good guys and gals might be bad guys and gals - if we had the opportunity. Think long and hard about That! You know what I'm talking about - don't you Lucifer??!! I bet you wish that I would just shut-up!! I still want to share some fine French wine with you Lucifer (Kali?) - and listen to you improvise at St. Ouen, St. Sulpice, or Notre Dame de Paris. I feel as though I am your best friend and worst enemy. Come - let us reason together. Is it time to reprogram and reboot this solar system? I want to wish Satan, Lucifer, Kali, Gods, Goddesses, Angels, Demons, Archangels, Illuminati, Megalomaniacs, Reptilians, Greys, et al a terrific rest of the century. I think we can clean up this mess - without enslavement, extermination, Star Wars, or Masters of the Universe. Imagine 10,000 very competent humans engaging in Constitutional Global and Solar System Governance, with advisors which might include all of the above. I continue to attempt to think Lucifer's (Kali's?) thoughts after her. See you at Mork and Ork's Grey Bar, Kali! Well - now I'm going to re-watch another episode of 'V'. I am of peace. Always.

    The following is six years old - but it's still relevant to this thread: India to annouce UFO's are REAL - India Daily News

    New Delhi is in the middle of a big secret internal debate. On one side the largest democracy of the world is eager to explain to its citizens and to the world about the ongoing contacts with the UFOs and extra-terrestrials. On the other hand there are invisible untold international protocols that prohibit doing anything that may cause worldwide fear and panic.

    It is well accepted between the UFO and extra-terrestrial experts that all the five nuclear powers are in contact with the beings from other stars for quite some time. Recently India has seen enormous news on UFO contacts and secret UFO bases in Himalayas near the Chinese bases. In Ladak, for example the locals clearly point out the everyday phenomenon of large triangular spacecrafts coming out below the ground and Indian security forces protecting them. Military officials and politicians have confessed the fact that India has been contacted. India has been told the rules of the Universe.

    The current debate is on whether to keep it secret like other countries are doing or in tradition of a total transparent society come out and tell the truth. India is so open and democratic; it is very difficult to keep a secret for long. The biggest concern of the Government today is that unlike in other countries, it will be very difficult to keep it secret for long. If the information comes out through unofficial channels first and then the authorities are pressed against the wall to confess, two bad things can happen. First, it can really cause a panic in the country as well as the world. Second, the way the Indian politics is run, the ruling party will be thrown out of power in no time i it is ever found that the Government withheld such information from the public.

    The recent rush of world leaders to India is remarkable. Starting from Russian President Putin to major Senators from America have visited or are planning to visit India. European Union is in deep discussion with India on cooperation. All sanctions against India’s nuclear programs and Indian Space Research Organization are in the process of being lifted. India is cooperating with Europeans and the Americans in space explorations and technology research program. India is also part of World Trade Organization. India is receiving major outsourcing contracts in IT and call-center service work from America and Europe. India’s Forex reserve is at a level never imagined before because of international direct investments from Western nations, Japan, Korea and others. Interestingly, China the arc rival of India changed its posture in the last few years to make India’s friendship and trade a priority. India is slowly getting to the point when it is accepted as a permanent member of the Security Council. All the five Security Council members China, America, Russia, France and UK support India’s inclusion.

    When all these factors are added together and analyzed, it seems like India is being told by the world to abide by the hidden protocols and in exchange be recognized as a major emerging superpower. The debate the country is facing internally is whether to abide by the laws of the world and the Universe to be recognized as a superpower or be truthful to its citizens and the world. According to sources close to the Government, the UFO contacts is known by quite a few politicians in the opposition and of course by those who are in power. The military has legitimate concern of not letting the secrets out either.

    Recently, India’s foreign affairs minister Mr. Natwar Singh came out and said that for India it was not necessary to become a nuclear power. He is a strong supporter of Mrs. Indira Gandhi, India’s former Prime Minister who initiated the nuclear program in the mid sixties. India first exploded a nuclear device in Pokhran in early seventies. The whole country including people from his own party questioned Mr. Singh for such an irresponsible statement. But on analyzing his statements, it is evident, that based on what he knows now, being a nuclear power really does not matter much because the technologies controlled by the extra-terrestrials are so advanced that all our technologies mean really nothing. But importantly he may be irritated with this controversial ongoing secret debate and what he really meant was that if India was not a nuclear power, the debate on UFO and extra-terrestrials will never be there in India.

    Take a look at these images of the Nagas:

    Take a look at these images of Kali:

    What is the reality behind the mythology?

    Kala = Chronos = Time? Should the Goddess of Destruction be glorified? Are the killing, blood, severed heads, and severed hands really good things? What if the god of this world - or the administrator of this world - is a black (or pigmented) woman - who is a mixture of good and evil - genius and insanity? Has anyone seen the current cover of Newsweek magazine - with President Obama portrayed as Kali? Could there be an Obama - Kali connection? Just more speculation. I'm just scratching the surface of this whole goddess thing. It really is new to me - but so far, I think there is a good side and a bad side to it. Once again - I recommend buying the DVD's of the first twelve episodes of the 2009-10 version of 'V'. Go carefully through my 'Lucifer' and 'Kali' threads before watching it. Then, please tell me what you think. I'm still in limbo on this subject - but if you go through the material which I just posted on orthodoxymoron threads - you'll get a pretty good idea of where I'm coming from. As I try to solve my problems - I keep creating more perplexities. I don't think I have the answers - but I really wish to discuss this (and other) subjects - on an ongoing basis - as an ongoing research project. Namaste.

    I can relate to the best aspects of Anna in 'V' - and to the smart and pretty Rachael (White House lady in charge) in 'Contact' - as well as to the spiritual leader of the Navi in 'Avatar'. I can scarcely imagine what it might have been like to meet Nefertiti. Unfortunately - what I am faced with, is attempting to understand the wreckage of human history on Planet Earth. It's not a pretty picture. I'm really trying to accentuate the positive - but I'm also attempting to uncover the negative - and I don't really care about Mr. In Between. I'm simply trying to make my research more interesting - by placing it in the context of science fiction. Are there huge anti-gravity spaceships, or not? Are there human/reptile hybrids, or not? Is there a New World Order, which involves beings who are not altogether human (as we know human to be)? Who really runs this solar system? Which science fiction movies or tv series is the closest to the truth? And back to Pilate's question to Jesus, 'What is Truth?' I'm still interested in 'V' particularly - because I think it might be revealing some of what's really going on - in an entertainment format. I have qualified my recommendation to watch it - by suggesting that people bring what they have learned in AV1 and MOA into the context of that particular sci-fi show.

    Take this post with two boatloads of salt. This sounds way beyond belief. Has anyone heard anything about a ritual on November 8 involving President Obama (being incarnated by Amen Ra)? I hesitated to ask the question - because of who was allegedly involved. But the question fits in with this thread - and the presidential trip to India and Asia. Look for a Daniel Ott - Sherry Shriner - Greg Rinchich interview (half-way down the page) of this linked website: Skip to 01:20:00 for the relevant portion. This is one of the most bizarre interviews/debates I have ever heard in my life! I don't doubt that there is intense spiritual warfare - but how much of this is reality - and how much is just more deception? But really - is there a connection between Obama, Akhenaten, and Kali? Just wondering...

    Incidentally, in 'V' - did anyone notice the older priest praying to the Black Madonna (shortly after Jack gets stabbed)? Is this coincidental - or is this a hidden message? Is Anna really the Black Madonna? I risk sounding racist in this thread - but I truly am not. I find strong, black, female royalty to be quite irresistable - but I continue to be wary of too much power in too few hands - whether those hands are black, white, male, or female.
    Raven wrote:
    Kali The Dark Mother

    Awesome Symbols!

    Kali's fierce form is strewed with awesome symbols. Her black complexion symbolizes her all-embracing and transcendental nature. Says the Mahanirvana Tantra: "Just as all colors disappear in black, so all names and forms disappear in her". Her nudity is primeval, fundamental, and transparent like Nature — the earth, sea, and sky. Kali is free from the illusory covering, for she is beyond the all maya or "false consciousness." Kali's garland of fifty human heads that stands for the fifty letters in the Sanskrit alphabet, symbolizes infinite knowledge.

    Her girdle of severed human hands signifies work and liberation from the cycle of karma. Her white teeth show her inner purity, and her red lolling tongue indicates her omnivorous nature — "her indiscriminate enjoyment of all the world's 'flavors'." Her sword is the destroyer of false consciousness and the eight bonds that bind us.Her three eyes represent past, present, and future, — the three modes of time — an attribute that lies in the very name Kali ('Kala' in Sanskrit means time). The eminent translator of Tantrik texts, Sir John Woodroffe in Garland of Letters, writes, "Kali is so called because She devours Kala (Time) and then resumes Her own dark formlessness."

    Kali's proximity to cremation grounds where the five elements or "Pancha Mahabhuta" come together, and all worldly attachments are absolved, again point to the cycle of birth and death. The reclined Shiva lying prostrate under the feet of Kali suggests that without the power of Kali (Shakti), Shiva is inert.
    Well Raven! Things were just starting to get interesting! I really enjoyed our conversation - including the post where you cussed me out! I think I deserved a lot of that - and I took what you said seriously. I actually miss you. You obviously know a helluva lot. I sensed some dark spirituality - but that may go with the territory. I sometimes wondered if you might be the modern incarnation of Kali - or at least a goddess-type of person with some sort of connection to Kali, Mary, the Goddess of This World, or the Queen of Heaven. I'm not a scholar or an experiencer - so I don't really know. I really and truly am an ignoramus. My egotistical posting style is really a cover for my rather substantial insecurities. Sounds kinda sexy - doesn't it?! I actually liked the porno part of all of this! I am more repressed than you can imagine - but I do like to joke around - and I am not easily offended - especially online! In person - things would be entirely different. I suspect that the real Queen of Heaven is highly intelligent and highly refined - yet very, very tough, decisive, harsh, reprobate - and able to swear like a trooper! You'd be amazed at the mental picture I have of the Queen of Heaven! But this is merely a hypothesis and a figment of my diseased imagination. I will probably continue to work with this subject for years - or at least until disclosure occurs. Anyway - regardless of who you really are, Raven - it's been a pleasure. Perhaps we can share a bottle of fine French wine someday! Namaste.

    Disclaimer time. I ran across something on the internet which seems to fit with this thread. I don't wish to mention where I found it, for fear of endorsing a site which seems sort of hokey. But anyway, President Obama supposedly carries (or carried) four charms - an American Eagle, a Poker-Chip, the Madonna, and the Hindu Monkey God 'Hanuman'. This may be complete BS. I am looking for the primary source, which is supposedly 'The Chicago Tribune' of August 20, 2008. But could this point in the direction of Kali - in a round about way? Darned if I know. I just brainstorm and speculate - but I freely admit that this is exactly what I'm doing. I mostly ask questions - and this post is a question. Has anyone heard anything which could add to this subject? This is all the more interesting when considering the recent presidential trip to India and Asia. Please rewatch the video series upon which this thread is based. If nothing else - this is an interesting and entertaining journey. As many of you know - I am trying to treat most of what we discuss as being nothing more than science-fiction and entertainment. I am doing my best to not take any of this fringe research too seriously. I really do think that at least 80% of it is BS. Enjoy.

    Check this out. I have a strange fascination with black female royalty. This is a recent attraction. There is so much information to wade through - but this subject should not be neglected - especially regarding Kemet. Unfortunately, it's hard to deal with this subject without it becoming a racial issue of sorts. We are so programmed to fight with each other - rather than trying to understand and appreciate each other.



    I tend to just want to know the truth - while embracing all races (including hybrids and et's) - and then sorting things out, without anger or prejudice. It just seems as though things are purposely kept hidden, and things are deliberately kept in a destructive turmoil - with no resolution desired. I want resolution. Kali, Kemet, Anunnaki, Gizeh Intelligence, North Africa, Tibet, and Sirius - all seem to be near the top of my interest list - but not my fecal list. I don't have a fecal list - not yet, anyway. There always seems to be reprehensible activities transpiring in high places -- with the general public always behaving like a bunch of lunatics (on the evening-news anyway). Might this be by design?? Again, I am speculating that ALL factions (including the corrupt-politicians and the lunatic-fringe Have the SAME BOSS -- even if they don't know it. But once again, perhaps this is the way things need to be. I keep getting the sinking-feeling that after we expose each and every evil-deed (throughout history) that we'll discover that things have been the way they've had to be -- and that the future will be more of the same -- only different. Perhaps we are stuck with Living in Purgatory (While We Live in Sin) -- with the Promise of Heaven -- and the Threat of Hell -- to Keep We the Peons in Line.

    If All of Us Were Hermaphrodites (Chicks with Dicks aka Dixie Chicks) -- None of Us Would Need a Man!! If We Are All Reptilian-Human Hybrids (With Various Percentage Differentials) -- What is the Ultimate Reptilian to Human Ratio?? Why Are Females SO Much Better-Looking Than Males?? Why Have Males Ended Up Doing the Nastiest Tasks Imaginable Throughout History?? Why Can Females Usually Out-Talk Males?? Why Are Good-Girls Better Than Good-Boys?? Why Are Bad-Girls Badder Than Bad-Boys?? I'm Sorry for Being So Blunt and Non-PC -- But Some of Us Must Consider ALL of the Possibilites -- and Ask ALL of the Hard Questions. BTW -- Fredrick Wilhelm Nietzsche said "The Role of Man is Warrior -- and the Role of Woman is Recreation for the Warrior" -- but Fred couldn't stand the sight of blood.

    If Someone Created Heaven on Earth -- What Would We Do for Excitement?? How Good is Too Good?? Was the Garden of Eden Too Good?? Was Our Creator-God Too Good?? If There Were No Crime or War or Lawsuits or Medical-Emergencies or Constitutional-Crisis or Bankster-Bailouts or Nuclear-Threats or False-Flags or Killer-Asteroids or Genocide or Extinction-Level Events or Acts of God or False-Gods or Angry-Aliens or Stupid-Humans or Corrupt-Politicians or Pornography or Prostitution or Gambling or Crystal-Meth or Alex Jones or Rush Limbaugh or Completely Ignorant Fools -- How Much Fun Would THAT Be????? If the True and Living God Actually Came to Earth -- We Might Hate Them More Than We Can Possibly Imagine. They Might NOT Be Satisfactory. They Might NOT Do Things OUR WAY. Appearances are Everything -- and the Bottom-Line is the Bottom-Line. Right?! Have We Chosen Gods Who Think Like We Do?? Have We Been Paying the Price for Thousands of Years?? Will We Continue to Pay the Price for Thousands of Years?? This is Enough to Drive a Man to Drink. What Would Bill Cooper Say?? What Would the Friends of Bill Say??

    Here are some of my favorite goddesses!

    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:25 pm

    What if the Military-Industrial Complex morphed into the International and Interplanetary Transportation and Security Complex -- complete with International and Interplanetary War-Games -- but NO MORE WAR?? Consider Boeing. Refuse Toulouse. BTW -- Was S.R. Hadden's Jet really a Space-Craft?? He rarely landed for anyone -- remember?? Has a real-life S.R. Hadden been milking Earth-Humanity for thousands of years??

    The Boeing Company (pronounced /ˈboʊ.ɪŋ/ BOH-ing) (NYSE: BA) is an American multinational aerospace and defense corporation. Founded in 1916 by William E. Boeing in Seattle, Washington, the company has expanded over the years, and merged with McDonnell Douglas in 1997. Boeing moved its corporate headquarters from Seattle to Chicago, Illinois, in 2001.[2] Boeing is made up of multiple business units, which are Boeing Commercial Airplanes (BCA); Boeing Defense, Space & Security (BDS); Engineering, Operations & Technology; Boeing Capital; and Boeing Shared Services Group.

    Boeing is among the largest global aircraft manufacturers, and the second largest aerospace and defense contractor in the world based on defense-related revenue from 2011.[3] The company is the largest exporter by value in the U.S.,[4] and its stock is a component of the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

    In March 1910, William E. Boeing bought Heath's shipyard in Seattle on the Duwamish River, which later became his first airplane factory.[5] Boeing was incorporated in Seattle by William Boeing, on July 15, 1916, as "Pacific Aero Products Co.". Boeing, who studied at Yale University, worked initially in the timber industry, where he became wealthy and learned about wooden structures. This knowledge would prove invaluable in his subsequent design and assembly of airplanes. The company stayed in Seattle to take advantage of the local supply of Spruce wood.[6]

    William Boeing founded his company a few months after the June 15 maiden flight of one of the two "B&W" seaplanes built with the assistance of George Conrad Westervelt, a U.S. Navy engineer. Boeing and Westervelt decided to build the B&W seaplane after having flown in a Curtiss aircraft. Boeing bought a Glenn Martin "Flying Birdcage" seaplane (so called because of all the guy-wires holding it together) and was taught to fly by Glenn Martin himself. Boeing soon crashed the Birdcage and when Martin informed Boeing that replacement parts would not become available for months, Boeing realized he could build his own plane in that amount of time. He and his friend Cdr. G.C. Westervelt agreed to build a better airplane and soon produced the B&W Seaplane.[7] This first Boeing airplane was assembled in a lakeside hangar located on the northeast shore of Seattle's Lake Union. Many of Boeing's early planes were seaplanes.

    On May 9, 1917, the company became the "Boeing Airplane Company". In late 1917, the U.S. entered World War I and Boeing knew that the U.S. Navy needed seaplanes for training. So Boeing shipped two new Model Cs to Pensacola, Florida where the planes were flown for the Navy. The Navy liked the Model C so much that they ordered fifty more.[8] The company moved its operations to a larger former shipbuilding facility known as Boeing Plant 1, located on the lower Duwamish River.

    When World War I ended in 1918, a large surplus of cheap, used military planes flooded the commercial airplane market, and this prevented aircraft companies like Boeing from selling any new airplanes. Because of this, many airplane companies went out of business, but other companies, including Boeing, started selling other products. Boeing built dressers, counters, and furniture, along with flat-bottom boats called Sea Sleds.[8]

    In 1919 the Boeing B-1 made its first flight. It was a flying boat that accommodated one pilot and two passengers and mail. Over the course of eight years, it made international airmail flights from Seattle to Victoria, British Columbia.[9] On May 24, 1920, the Boeing Model 8 made its first flight. It was the first plane to fly over Mount Rainier.[10]

    In 1923, Boeing began a competition against Curtiss for a contract to develop a pursuit fighter for the U.S. Army Air Service. Although Curtiss finished its design first and was awarded the contract, Boeing continued to develop its PW-9 fighter. That plane, along with the Boeing P-12/ F4B fighter,[11] made Boeing a leading manufacturer of fighters over the course of the next decade.

    In 1925, Boeing built its Model 40 mail plane for the U.S. government to use on airmail routes. In 1927, an improved version of this plane was built, the Model 40A. The 40A won the U.S. Post Office's contract to deliver mail between San Francisco and Chicago. The 40A also had a passenger cabin that accommodated two passengers.[12]

    That same year, Boeing created an airline named Boeing Air Transport, which merged a year later with Pacific Air Transport and the Boeing Airplane Company. The first airmail flight for the airline was on July 1, 1927.[12] The company changed its name to United Aircraft and Transport Corporation in 1929 and acquired Pratt & Whitney, Hamilton Standard Propeller Company, and Chance Vought. United Aircraft then purchased National Air Transport in 1930.

    On July 27, 1929, the 12-passenger Boeing 80 biplane made its first flight. With three engines, it was Boeing's first plane built with the sole intention of being a passenger transport. An upgraded version, the 80A, carrying eighteen passengers, made its first flight in September 1929.[12]

    In 1930, the Monomail, a low-wing monoplane that carried mail, was built. Built entirely out of metal, it was very fast and aerodynamic, and it also had retractable landing gear. In fact, its design was so revolutionary that the engines and propellers of the time could not handle the plane. By the time controllable pitch propellers were developed, Boeing was building its Model 247 airliner. Two Monomails were built. The second one, the Model 221, had a 6-passenger cabin.[13][14]

    In 1933 the Boeing 247 was introduced, the first truly modern airliner. The 247 was an all-metal low-wing monoplane that was much faster, safer, and easier to fly than other passenger aircraft. For example, it was the first twin engine passenger aircraft that could fly on one engine. In an era of unreliable engines, this vastly improved flight safety. Boeing built the first sixty aircraft exclusively for its own United Airlines subsidiary's operations. This badly hurt competing airlines, and was typical of the anti-competitive corporate behavior that the U.S. government sought to prohibit at the time.

    The Air Mail Act of 1934 prohibited airlines and manufacturers from being under the same corporate umbrella, so the company split into three smaller companies – Boeing Airplane Company, United Airlines, and United Aircraft Corporation, the precursor to United Technologies. As a result, William Boeing sold off his shares and left Boeing. Claire Egtvedt, who had become Boeing's president in 1933, became the chairman as well. He believed the company's future was in building bigger planes.[15] Work began in 1936 on Boeing Plant 2 to accommodate the production of larger modern aircraft.

    Shortly after, an agreement with Pan American World Airways (Pan Am) was reached, to develop and build a commercial flying boat able to carry passengers on transoceanic routes. The first flight of the Boeing 314 Clipper was in June 1938. It was the largest civil aircraft of its time, with a capacity of 90 passengers on day flights, and of 40 passengers on night flights. One year later, the first regular passenger service from the U.S. to the UK was inaugurated. Subsequently other routes were opened, so that soon Pan Am flew with the Boeing 314 to destinations all over the world.

    In 1938, Boeing completed work on its Model 307 Stratoliner. This was the world's first pressurized-cabin transport aircraft, and it was capable of cruising at an altitude of 20,000 feet (6,100 m) – above most weather disturbances. It was based on the B-17, using the same wings, tail and engines.

    During World War II, Boeing built a large number of B-17 and B-29 bombers. Many of the workers were women whose husbands had gone to war. In the beginning of March 1944, production had been scaled up in such a manner that over 350 planes were built each month. To prevent an attack from the air, the manufacturing plants had been covered with greenery and farmland items. During these years of war the leading aircraft companies of the U.S. cooperated. The Boeing-designed B-17 bomber was assembled also by Lockheed Aircraft Corp. and Douglas Aircraft Co., while the B-29 was assembled also by Bell Aircraft Co. and by Glenn L. Martin Company.

    After the war, most orders of bombers were canceled and 70,000 people lost their jobs at Boeing.[citation needed] The company aimed to recover quickly by selling its Stratocruiser (the Model 377), a luxurious four-engine commercial airliner developed from the B-29. However, sales of this model were not as expected and Boeing had to seek other opportunities to overcome the situation.[citation needed] The company successfully sold military derivatives of the Stratocruiser, such as the C-97 adapted for troop transportation and the KC-97 for aerial refueling.[citation needed]

    Boeing developed military jets such as the B-47 Stratojet and B-52 Stratofortress bombers in the late-1940s and into the 1950s. During the early 1950s, Boeing used company funds to develop the 367–80 jet airliner demonstrator that led to the KC-135 Stratotanker and Boeing 707 jetliner.

    In the mid-1950s technology had advanced significantly, which gave Boeing the opportunity to develop and manufacture new products. One of the first was the guided short-range missile used to intercept enemy aircraft. By that time the Cold War had become a fact of life, and Boeing used its short-range missile technology to develop and build an intercontinental missile.

    In 1958, Boeing began delivery of its 707, the United States' first commercial jet airliner, in response to the British De Havilland Comet, French Sud Aviation Caravelle and Soviet Tupolev Tu-104, which were the world's first generation of commercial jet aircraft. With the 707, a four-engine, 156-passenger airliner, the U.S. became a leader in commercial jet manufacture. A few years later, Boeing added a second version of this aircraft, the 720, which was slightly faster and had a shorter range.

    Boeing was a major producer of small turbine engines during the 1950s and 1960s. The engines represented one of the company's major efforts to expand its product base beyond military aircraft after World War II. Development on the gasoline turbine engine started in 1943 and Boeing's gas turbines were designated models 502, 520, 540, 551 and 553. Boeing built 2,461 engines before production ceased in April 1968. Many applications of the Boeing gas turbine engines were considered to be firsts, including the first turbine-powered helicopter and boat.[16]

    The 707 and 747 formed the backbone of many major airline fleets through the end of the 1970s. Vertol Aircraft Corporation was acquired by Boeing in 1960,[17] and was reorganized as Boeing's Vertol division. The twin-rotor CH-47 Chinook, produced by Vertol, took its first flight in 1961. This heavy-lift helicopter remains a work-horse vehicle up to the present day. In 1964, Vertol also began production of the CH-46 Sea Knight.

    In December 1960, Boeing announced the model 727 jetliner, which went into commercial service about three years later. Different passenger, freight and convertible freighter variants were developed for the 727. The 727 was the first commercial jetliner to reach 1,000 sales, and a few years later the 1,500 mark was reached.[citation needed]

    Boeing won a contract in 1961 to manufacture the S-IC stage of the Saturn V rocket, manufactured at the Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans, Louisiana.

    In 1966, Boeing president William M. Allen asked Malcolm T. Stamper to spearhead production of the new 747 airliner on which the company's future was riding. This was a monumental engineering and management challenge, and included construction of the world's biggest factory in which to build the 747 at Everett, Washington, a plant which is the size of 40 football fields.[18]

    In 1967, Boeing introduced another short- and medium-range airliner, the twin-engine 737. It has become since then the best-selling commercial jet aircraft in aviation history.[citation needed] The 737 is being produced as of 2013, and continuous improvements are made. Several versions have been developed, mainly to increase seating capacity and range.

    The roll-out ceremonies for the first 747–100 took place in 1968, at the massive new factory in Everett, about an hour's drive from Boeing's Seattle home. The aircraft made its first flight a year later. The first commercial flight occurred in 1970. The 747 has an intercontinental range and a larger seating capacity than Boeing's previous aircraft.

    Boeing also developed hydrofoils in the 1960s. The screw-driven USS High Point (PCH-1) was an experimental submarine hunter. The patrol hydrofoil USS Tucumcari (PGH-2) was more successful. Only one was built, but it saw service in Vietnam and Europe before running aground in 1972. Its innovative waterjet[citation needed] and fully submersed flying foils were the model for the later Pegasus-class patrol hydrofoils and the model 929 Jetfoil ferries in the 1980s. The Tucumcari and later boats were produced in Renton. While the Navy hydrofoils were withdrawn from service by the end of the 1980s, the swift and smooth Boeing Jetfoils are still in service in Asia.

    In the early 1970s Boeing suffered from the simultaneous decline in Vietnam War military spending, the slowing of the space program as Project Apollo neared completion, the recession of 1969-1970,[19]:291 and the company's $2 billion in debt as it built the new 747 airliner.[19]:303 Boeing did not receive any orders for more than a year. Its bet for the future, the 747, was delayed in production by three months because of problems with its Pratt & Whitney engines. Another problem was that in 1971, the U.S. Congress decided to stop the financial support for the development of the supersonic 2707, Boeing's answer to the British-French Concorde, forcing the company to discontinue the project.

    Commercial Airplane Group, by far the largest unit of Boeing, went from 83,700 employees in 1968 to 20,750 in 1971. Each unemployed Boeing employee cost at least one other job, and unemployment rose to 14 percent, the highest in the United States.[citation needed] Housing vacancy rates rose to 16 percent from 1 percent in 1967.[citation needed] U-Haul dealerships ran out of trailers because so many people moved out. A billboard appeared near the airport:[19]:303-304

    In January 1970, the first 747, a four-engine long-range airliner, flew its first commercial flight with Pan American World Airways. The 747 would change the airline industry, providing much larger seating capacity than any other airliner in production. The company has delivered nearly 1,400 Boeing 747s. The 747 has undergone continuous improvements to keep it technologically up-to-date. Larger versions have also been developed by stretching the upper deck. The 747 is production as of 2013, with its newest version 747-8.

    Boeing launched three Jetfoil 929-100 hydrofoils that were acquired in 1975 for service in the Hawaiian Islands. When the service ended in 1979 the three hydrofoils were acquired by Far East Hydrofoil for service between Hong Kong and Macau.[20]

    During the 1970s, Boeing also developed the US Standard Light Rail Vehicle which was used in San Francisco, Boston and Morgantown, WV.

    In 1983, the economic situation began to improve. Boeing assembled its 1,000th 737 passenger aircraft. During the following years, commercial aircraft and their military versions became the basic equipment of airlines and air forces. As passenger air traffic increased, competition was harder, mainly from Airbus, a European newcomer in commercial airliner manufacturing. Boeing had to offer new aircraft, and developed the single-aisle 757, the larger, twin-aisle 767, and upgraded versions of the 737. An important project of these years was the Space Shuttle, to which Boeing contributed with its experience in space rockets acquired during the Apollo era. Boeing participated also with other products in the space program, and was the first contractor for the International Space Station program.

    During the decade several military projects went into production, including Boeing support of the stealth B-2 bomber. As part of an industry team led by Northrop, Boeing built the outboard portion of the B-2 stealth bomber wing, the aft center fuselage section, landing gears, fuel system and weapons delivery system. At its peak in 1991, the B-2 was the largest military program at Boeing, employing about 10,000 people. The same year, the National Aeronautic Association of the USA awarded the B-2 design team the Collier Trophy for the greatest achievement in aerospace in America. The first B-2 rolled out of the bomber's final assembly facility in Palmdale, California, in November 1988 and it flew for the first time on July 17, 1989.[21]

    The Avenger air defense system and a new generation of short-range missiles also went into production. During these years, Boeing was very active in upgrading existing military equipment and developing new ones. Boeing also contributed to wind power development with the experimental MOD-2 Wind Turbines for NASA and the United States Department of Energy, and the MOD-5B for Hawaii.[22]

    Boeing was one of seven competing companies that bid for the Advanced Tactical Fighter. Boeing agreed to team with General Dynamics and Lockheed, so that all three companies would participate in the development if one of the three companies design was selected. The Lockheed design was eventually selected and developed into the F-22 Raptor.[23]

    In April 1994, Boeing introduced the most modern commercial jet aircraft at the time, the twin-engine 777, with a seating capacity of approximately 300 to 370 passengers in a typical three-class layout, in between the 767 and the 747. The longest range twin-engined aircraft in the world, the 777 was the first Boeing airliner to feature a "fly-by-wire" system and was conceived partly in response to the inroads being made by the European Airbus into Boeing's traditional market. This aircraft reached an important milestone by being the first airliner to be designed entirely by using computer-aided design (CAD) techniques.[24] The 777 was also the first airplane to be certified for 180 minute ETOPS at entry into service by the FAA.[25] Also in the mid-1990s, the company developed the revamped version of the 737, known as the 737 "Next-Generation", or 737NG. It has since become the fastest-selling version of the 737 in history, and on April 20, 2006 sales passed those of the "Classic 737", with a follow-up order for 79 aircraft from Southwest Airlines.

    In 1995 Boeing announced that the headquarters complex on East Marginal Way South would be demolished instead of being upgraded to match new seismic standards. Boeing scheduled demolition of the facility in 1996 and moved the headquarters to an adjacent building.[26] In 1997 Boeing's headquarter was located on East Marginal Way South, by King County Airport, in Seattle.[27]

    In 1996, Boeing acquired Rockwell's aerospace and defense units. The Rockwell business units became a subsidiary of Boeing, named Boeing North American, Inc. In August 1997, Boeing merged with McDonnell Douglas in a US$13 billion stock swap under the name The Boeing Company. However this name had actually been Boeing's official name previously adopted on May 21, 1961.[28] Following the merger, the McDonnell Douglas MD-95 was renamed the Boeing 717, and the production of the MD-11 was limited to the freighter version. Boeing introduced a new corporate identity with completion of the merger, incorporating the Boeing logo type and a stylized version of the McDonnell Douglas symbol, which was derived from the Douglas Aircraft logo from the 1970s.

    Scott Hamilton heavily criticized the CEO and his deputy, Philip M. Condit and Harry Stonecipher, for thinking of their personal benefit first, and with it causing the problems hitting Boeing many years later. Instead of investing the huge cash reserve to build new airplanes, they initiated a program to buy back own stock for more than US$10 billion.[29][importance?]

    In September 2001, Boeing moved its corporate headquarters from Seattle to Chicago. Chicago, Dallas and Denver – vying to become the new home of the world's largest aerospace concern – all had offered packages of multimillion-dollar tax breaks.[30] Its offices are located in the Fulton River District, Chicago just outside the Loop, Chicago.[2]

    On October 10, 2001, Boeing lost to its rival Lockheed Martin in the fierce competition for the multi-billion dollar Joint Strike Fighter contract. Boeing's entry, the X-32, was rejected in favor of Lockheed's X-35 entrant. Boeing continues to serve as the prime contractor on the International Space Station and has built several of the major components.

    After several decades of success, Boeing lost ground to Airbus and subsequently lost its lead in the airliner market in 2003. Multiple Boeing projects were pursued and then canceled, notably the Sonic Cruiser, a proposed jetliner that would travel just under the speed of sound, cutting intercontinental travel times by as much as 20 percent. It was launched in 2001 along with a new advertising campaign to promote the company's new motto, "Forever New Frontiers", and to rehabilitate its image. However, the plane's fate was sealed by the changes in the commercial aviation market following the September 11 attacks and the subsequent weak economy and increase in fuel prices.

    Subsequently, Boeing streamlined its production and turned its attention to a new model, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, using much of the technology developed for the Sonic Cruiser, but in a more conventional aircraft designed for maximum efficiency. The company also launched new variants of its successful 737 and 777 models. The 787 proved to be highly popular choice with airlines, and won a record number of pre-launch orders. With delays to Airbus' A380 program several airlines threatened to switch their A380 orders to Boeing's new 747 version, the 747-8.[31] Airbus's response to the 787, the A350, received a lukewarm response at first when it was announced as an improved version of the A330, and then gained significant orders when Airbus promised an entirely new design. The 787 has encountered delays in coming to production, with the first flight not occurring until late 2009, more than two years late. Production will be increased to 10 Boeing 787s per month by 2013.[32]

    In 2004, Boeing ended production of the 757 after 1,050 aircraft were produced. More advanced, stretched versions of the 737 were beginning to compete against the 757, and the new 787-3 filled much of the top end of the 757 market. Also that year, Boeing announced that the 717, the last civil aircraft to be designed by McDonnell Douglas, would cease production in 2006. The 767 was in danger of cancellation as well, with the 787 replacing it, but orders for the freighter version extended the program.

    In May 2005, Boeing announced its intent to form a joint venture, United Launch Alliance with its competitor Lockheed Martin. The new venture will be the largest provider of rocket launch services to the U.S. government. The joint venture gained regulatory approval and completed the formation on December 1, 2006.[33]

    On August 2, 2005, Boeing sold its Rocketdyne rocket engine division to Pratt & Whitney. On May 1, 2006, Boeing announced that it had reached a definitive agreement to purchase Dallas, Texas-based Aviall, Inc. for $1.7 billion and retain $350 million in debt. Aviall, Inc. and its subsidiaries, Aviall Services, Inc. and ILS formed a wholly owned subsidiary of Boeing Commercial Aviation Services (BCAS).[34]

    On August 18, 2007, NASA announced that Boeing would be the manufacturing contractor for the liquid-fueled upper stage of the Ares I rocket.[citation needed] The stage, based on both Apollo-Saturn and Space Shuttle technologies, was to be constructed at NASA's Michoud Assembly Facility near New Orleans; Boeing constructed the S-IC stage of the Saturn V rocket at this site in the 1960s.

    In May 2003, the U.S. Air Force announced it would lease 100 KC-767 tankers to replace the oldest 136 of its KC-135s. In November 2003, responding to critics who argued that the lease was more expensive than an outright purchase, the DoD announced a revised lease of 20 aircraft and purchase of 80. In December 2003, the Pentagon announced the project was to be frozen while an investigation of allegations of corruption by one of its former procurement staffers, Darleen Druyun (who began employment at Boeing in January) was begun. The fallout of this resulted in the resignation of Boeing CEO Philip M. Condit and the termination of CFO Michael M. Sears.[35] Harry Stonecipher, former McDonnell Douglas CEO and Boeing COO, replaced Condit on an interim basis. Druyun pleaded guilty to inflating the price of the contract to favor her future employer and to passing information on the competing Airbus A330 MRTT bid. In October 2004, she received a jail sentence for corruption.[citation needed]

    In March 2005, the Boeing board forced President and CEO Harry Stonecipher to resign. Boeing said an internal investigation revealed a "consensual" relationship between Stonecipher and a female executive that was "inconsistent with Boeing's Code of Conduct" and "would impair his ability to lead the company".[36] James A. Bell served as interim CEO (in addition to his normal duties as Boeing's CFO) until the appointment of Jim McNerney as the new Chairman, President, and CEO on June 30, 2005.

    In June 2003, Lockheed Martin sued Boeing, alleging that the company had resorted to industrial espionage in 1998 to win the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) competition. Lockheed Martin claimed that the former employee Kenneth Branch, who went to work for McDonnell Douglas and Boeing, passed nearly 30,000 pages of proprietary documents to his new employers. Lockheed Martin argued that these documents allowed Boeing to win 19 of the 28 tendered military satellite launches.[37][38]

    In July 2003, Boeing was penalized, with the Pentagon stripping seven launches away from the company and awarding them to Lockheed Martin.[37] Furthermore, the company was forbidden to bid for rocket contracts for a twenty-month period, which expired in March 2005.[38] In early September 2005, it was reported that Boeing was negotiating a settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice in which it would pay up to $500 million to cover this and the Darleen Druyun scandal.[39]

    Until the late 1970s the U.S. had a near monopoly in the Large Civil Aircraft (LCA) sector.[40] The Airbus consortium (created in 1969) started competing effectively in the 1980s. At that stage the U.S. became concerned about the European competition and the alleged subsidies paid by the European governments for the developments of the early models of the Airbus family. This became a major issue of contention, as the European side was equally concerned by subsidies accruing to U.S. LCA manufacturers through NASA and Defense programs.

    The EU and the U.S. started bilateral negotiations for the limitation of government subsidies to the LCA sector in the late 1980s. Negotiations were concluded in 1992 with the signature of the EC-US Agreement on Trade in Large Civil Aircraft which imposes disciplines on government support on both sides of the Atlantic which are significantly stricter than the relevant World Trade Organization (WTO) rules: Notably, the Agreement regulates in detail the forms and limits of government support, prescribes transparency obligations and commits the parties to avoiding trade disputes.[41]

    In 2004 the EU and the U.S. agreed to discuss a possible revision of the 1992 EU-US Agreement provided that this would cover all forms of subsidies including those used in the U.S., and in particular the subsidies for the Boeing 787; the first new aircraft to be launched by Boeing for 14 years. October 2004, the U.S. began legal proceedings at the WTO by requesting WTO consultations on European launch investment to Airbus. The U.S. also unilaterally withdrew from the 1992 EU-US Agreement.[42]

    In October 2004, Boeing filed a complaint at the WTO, claiming that Airbus had violated a 1992 bilateral accord when it received what Boeing deems as "unfair" subsidies from several European governments. Airbus retaliated by filing another complaint, contesting that Boeing had also violated the accord when it received tax breaks from the U.S. Government. Moreover, the EU also complained that the investment subsidies from Japanese airlines violated the accord.

    On January 11, 2005, Boeing and Airbus agreed that they would attempt to find a solution to the dispute outside of the WTO. However, in June 2005, Boeing and the United States government reopened the trade dispute with the WTO, claiming that Airbus had received illegal subsidies from European governments. Airbus has also retaliated against Boeing, reopening the dispute and also accusing Boeing of receiving subsidies from the U.S. government.[43]

    On September 15, 2010, the WTO ruled that Boeing had received billions of dollars in illegal government subsidies.[44] Boeing responded that the ruling was a fraction of the size of the ruling against Airbus and would require few changes in its operations.[45]

    On November 17, 2011, it was reported that Lion Air has committed to ordering 201 Boeing 737MAX and 29 737-900ER airliners. This order, when finalized is worth $21.7 billion at list prices. This would be larger than any of Boeing's previous commercial aircraft sales. The deal includes options for a further 150 airliners.[46][47]

    On January 5, 2012, Boeing announced plans to close its facilities in Wichita, Kansas with 2,160 workers before 2014, more than 80 years after it was established. Boeing had employed as many as 40,000 people there.[48][49]

    President Obama visited Boeing's factory in Everett, Washington on February 17, 2012 to deliver a speech on his economic policy.

    Boeing has achieved several consecutive launches, beginning with the formal launch of the 787 for initial delivery to All Nippon Airways. Rollout of the first 787 occurred on July 8, 2007, with the first flight taking place on December 15, 2009.

    Boeing also received the launch contract from the U.S. Navy for the P-8 Poseidon Multimission Maritime Aircraft, an anti-submarine warfare patrol aircraft. It has also received some orders for the 737 AEW&C "Wedgetail" aircraft.

    Boeing launched the 777 Freighter in May 2005 with an order from Air France. The freighter variant is based on the −200LR. Other customers include FedEx and Emirates. Boeing has achieved above projected orders for its 787 Dreamliner, outselling the rival Airbus A350.

    Boeing officially announced in November 2005 that it would produce a larger variant of the 747, the 747-8, in two models, commencing with the Freighter model for two cargo carriers with firm orders for the aircraft. The second model, dubbed the Intercontinental, would be produced for passenger airlines that Boeing expected would place orders in the near future. Both models of the 747-8 would feature a lengthened fuselage, new, advanced engines and wings, and the incorporation of other technologies developed for the 787.

    Boeing has also introduced new extended range versions of the 737. These include the 737-700ER and 737-900ER. The 737-900ER is the latest and will extend the range of the 737–900 to a similar range as the successful 737–800 with the capability to fly more passengers, due to the addition of two extra emergency exits.

    The 777-200LR Worldliner embarked on a well-received global demonstration tour in the second half of 2005, showing off its capacity to fly farther than any other commercial aircraft. On November 10, 2005, the 777-200LR set a world record for the longest non-stop flight. The plane, which departed from Hong Kong traveling to London, took a longer route, which included flying over the U.S. It flew 11,664 nautical miles (21,601 km) during its 22-hour 42-minute flight. It was flown by Pakistan International Airlines pilots and PIA was the first airline to fly the 777-200LR Worldliner.

    On August 11, 2006, Boeing announced an agreement to form a joint-venture with the large Russian titanium producer, VSMPO-Avisma for the machining of titanium forgings. The forgings will be used on 787 program.[50] On December 27, 2007 Boeing and VSMPO-Avisma created a joint venture Ural Boeing Manufacturing and signed a contract on titanium products deliveries until 2015, with Boeing planning to invest $27 billion in Russia over the next 30 years.[51]

    Realizing that increasing numbers of passengers have become reliant on their computers to stay in touch, Boeing introduced Connexion by Boeing, a satellite based Internet connectivity service that promised air travelers unprecedented access to the World Wide Web. The company debuted the product to journalists in 2005, receiving generally favorable reviews. However, facing competition from cheaper options, such as cellular networks, it proved too difficult to sell to most airlines. In August 2006, after a short and unsuccessful search for a buyer for the business, Boeing chose to discontinue the service.[52][53]

    Boeing also developed the KC-767 aerial refueling tanker. Italy ordered four KC-767s in December 2002, with the first one scheduled to be delivered in November 2008. Boeing and Italy are negotiating on the penalty for the late deliveries. Boeing stated the delay is due to such factors as design changes, expanded U.S. flight testing, greater-than-expected challenges to software integration, and the complexity of getting the tanker ready for certification by the Federal Aviation Administration.[54] Boeing's late delivery of a tanker to Japan in 2007 incurred a penalty "well under $5 million" according to Boeing.[54] Boeing delivered the third aircraft to Japan in March 2009 and the last aircraft was delivered in January 2010.[55][56]

    In February 2011, Boeing received a contract for 179 KC-46 U.S. Air Force tankers at a value of $35 billion.[57] The KC-46 tankers are based on the KC-767.

    Boeing jointly with Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), were the prime contractors in the U.S. military's Future Combat Systems program.[58] The FCS program was canceled in June 2009 with all remaining systems swept into the BCT Modernization program.[59] Boeing works jointly with SAIC in the BCT Modernization program like the FCS program but the U.S. Army will play a greater role in creating baseline vehicles and will only contract others for accessories.

    Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates' shift in defense spending to, "make tough choices about specific systems and defense priorities based solely on the national interest and then stick to those decisions over time"[60] hit Boeing especially hard, because of their heavy involvement with canceled Air Force projects.[61]

    In 2010, Boeing completed its acquisition of Argon ST Inc. Argon ST, based in Fairfax, Va., develops C4ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance) and combat systems. Boeing on June 30, 2010 announced its intent to acquire Argon ST as part of the company's strategy to expand its capabilities to address the C4ISR, cyber and intelligence markets.[62]

    In May 2006, four concept designs being examined by Boeing were outlined in The Seattle Times based on corporate internal documents. The research aims in two directions: low-cost airplanes, and environmental-friendly planes. Codenamed after the well-known Muppets, a design team known as the Green Team concentrated primarily on reducing fuel usage. All four designs illustrated rear-engine layouts.[63]

    "Fozzie" employs open rotors and would offer a lower cruising speed.[63]
    "Beaker" has very thin, long wings, with the ability to partially fold-up to facilitate easier taxiing.
    "Kermit Kruiser" has forward swept wings over which are positioned its engines, with the aim of lowering noise below due to the reflection of the exhaust signature upward.[63]
    "Honeydew" with its delta wing design, resembles a marriage of the flying wing concept and the traditional tube fuselage.[63]

    As with most concepts, these designs are only in the exploratory stage, intended to help Boeing evaluate the potentials of such radical technologies.[63]

    Researchers at the University of Massachusetts Amherst had listed Boeing as the thirteenth-largest corporate producer of air pollution in the United States based on 2002 data,[64] although data from 2008 shows that they have dropped off the list.[65] According to the Center for Public Integrity, the United States Environmental Protection Agency has linked Boeing to more than twenty Superfund toxic waste sites.[66]

    In 2006, the UCLA Center for Environmental Risk Reduction released a study showing that Boeing's Santa Susana Field Laboratory, in the Simi Hills of eastern Ventura County in Southern California, had been contaminated with toxic and radioactive waste. The study found that air, soil, groundwater, and surface water at the site all contained radionuclides, toxic metals, and dioxins; air and water additionally contained perchlorate, TCE, and hydrazines, while water showed the presence of PCBs as well.[67] Clean up studies and lawsuits are in progress.[68][69]

    The airline industry is responsible for about 11 percent of greenhouse gases emitted by the U.S. transportation sector.[70] Aviation's share of the greenhouse gas emissions is poised to grow, as air travel increases and ground vehicles use more alternative fuels like ethanol and biodiesel.[70] Boeing estimates that biofuels could reduce flight-related greenhouse-gas emissions by 60 to 80 percent.[70] The solution would be blending algae fuels with existing jet fuel.[70]

    Boeing executives said the company is informally collaborating with leading Brazilian biofuels maker Tecbio, Aquaflow Bionomic of New Zealand and other fuel developers around the world. So far, Boeing has tested six fuels from these companies, and will probably have gone through 20 fuels "by the time we're done evaluating them."[70] Boeing is joining[when?] other aviation-related members in the Algal Biomass Organization (ABO).[71]

    Air New Zealand and Boeing are researching the jatropha plant to see if it is a sustainable alternative to conventional fuel.[72] A two-hour test flight using a 50–50 mixture of the new biofuel with Jet A-1 in the number one position Rolls Royce RB-211 engine of 747–400 ZK-NBS, was successfully completed on December 30, 2008. The engine was then removed to be scrutinised and studied to identify any differences between the Jatropha blend and regular Jet A1. No effects to performances were found.

    On August 31, 2010, Boeing worked with the U.S. Air Force to test the Boeing C-17 running on 50 percent JP-8, 25 percent Hydro-treated Renewable Jet fuel and 25 percent of a Fischer–Tropsch fuel with successful results.[73]

    For NASA's N+3 future airliner program, Boeing has determined that hybrid electric engine technology is by far the best choice for its subsonic design. Hybrid electric propulsion has the potential to shorten takeoff distance and reduce noise.[74]

    In both 2009 and 2008 Boeing was second on the list of Top 100 US Federal Contractors, with contracts totalling $22 billion and $23 billion respectively.[75][76] Since 1995, the company has agreed to pay $1.6 billion to settle 39 instances of misconduct, including $615 million in 2006 in relation to illegal hiring of government officials and improper use of proprietary information.[77][78]

    Boeing's 2010 lobbying expenditure by the third quarter was $13.2 million (2009 total: $16.9 million).[79][80] In the 2008 presidential election, Barack Obama "was by far the biggest recipient of campaign contributions from Boeing employees and executives, hauling in $197,000 – five times as much as John McCain, and more than the top eight Republicans combined."[81]

    Boeing has a corporate citizenship program centered on charitable contributions in five areas: education, health and human services, environment, the arts and culture, and civic engagement.[82][better source needed] In 2011, Boeing spent $147.3 million in these areas through charitable grants and business sponsorships.[83] In February 2012, Boeing Global Corporate Citizenship partnered with the Insight Labs to develop a new model for foundations to more effectively lead the sector they serve.[84][better source needed]

    The company is a member of the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition, a Washington D.C.-based coalition of over 400 major companies and NGOs that advocates for a larger International Affairs Budget, which funds American diplomatic and development efforts abroad.[85] A series of U.S. diplomatic cables show how U.S. diplomats and senior politicians intervene on behalf of Boeing to help boost the company's sales.[86]

    In 2007 and 2008 the company benefited from over $10 billion of long-term loan guarantees, helping finance the purchase of their commercial aircraft in countries including Brazil, Canada, Ireland and the United Arab Emirates, from the Export-Import Bank of the United States, some 65 percent of the total loan guarantees the bank made in the period.[87]

    In December 2011, the non-partisan organization Public Campaign criticized Boeing for spending $52.29 million on lobbying and not paying taxes during 2008–2010, instead getting $178 million in tax rebates, despite making a profit of $9.7 billion, laying off 14,862 workers since 2008, and increasing executive pay by 31 percent to $41.9 million in 2010 for its top five executives.[88]

    The two largest divisions are Boeing Commercial Airplanes and Boeing Defense, Space & Security (BDS).[89]
    Boeing Capital
    Boeing Commercial Airplanes
    Boeing Defense, Space & Security Phantom Works

    Engineering, Operations & Technology Boeing Research & Technology
    Boeing Test & Evaluation
    Intellectual Property Management
    Information Technology
    Environment, Health, and Safety[89]

    Boeing Shared Services Group Boeing Realty
    Boeing Travel Management Company
    Boeing Supplier Management

    Approximately 1.5 percent of Boeing employees are in the Technical Fellowship program, a program through which Boeing's top engineers and scientists set technical direction for the company.[91] The average salary at Boeing is $76,784, reported by former employees.[92] On January 4, 2012 Boeing announced plans to close its Wichita, Kansas plant by 2013.[93]

    Board of directors
    W. James McNerney, Jr. – Chairman, President & CEO
    Admiral Edmund P. Giambastiani, Jr., U.S. Navy (ret)
    Arthur D. Collins, Jr.
    Linwood M. Coburn
    Linda Cook
    Kenneth M. Duberstein
    John Bryson
    John H. Biggs
    John McDonnell
    Mike S. Zafirovski
    Susan C. Schwab
    William M. Daley


    1.^ a b c d e f "2012 annual report, The Boeing Company". Boeing. Retrieved May 24, 2012.
    2.^ a b "Contact Us." Boeing. Retrieved on May 12, 2009.
    3.^ "Defense News Top 100 for 2011". Defense News, June 21, 2012.
    4.^ "Boeing says it's flying high despite recession". USA Today, March 27, 2009.
    5.^ "Boeing History". Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    6.^ Howe, Sam (October 2, 2010). "The tale of Boeing's high-risk flight into the jet age". The Seattle Times. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    7.^ Boeing History Narrative – Beginnings – Biplanes by the Sea, Retrieved November 4, 2010.
    8.^ a b "Boeing History: Beginnings – World War I". Boeing. Retrieved November 4, 2010.
    9.^ Boeing History – Products – Boeing B-1 Seaplane, Retrieved November 5, 2010.
    10.^ "Boeing History-- Beginnings...Growing Pains". Retrieved November 5, 2010.
    11.^ Boeing P-12/ F4B Fighter, Retrieved November 5, 2010.
    12.^ a b c Boeing History—Beginnings... Mail and Boa abroad Retrieved November 5, 2010.
    13.^ "Boeing History-Early Years...Metal Monomail". Boeing. August 5, 2005. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    14.^ "Boeing History-Products- Monomail". Boeing. May 6, 1930. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    15.^ "Boeing History". Boeing.
    16.^ Boeing History: Model 502 Gas Turbine Engine. Retrieved June 13, 2011.
    17.^ "Boeing History 1957–1970". Boeing. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    18.^ Boyer, Tom (June 17, 2005). "Boeing legend Malcolm Stamper dies". The Seattle Times.
    19.^ a b c d Heppenheimer, T.A. (1998). The Space Shuttle Decision. NASA.
    20.^ "Classic Fast Ferries" (PDF). Retrieved August 14, 2010.
    21.^ "History – Products – B-2 Spirit". Boeing. Retrieved August 14, 2010.
    22.^ "MOD-2/MOD-5B Wind Turbines". Boeing. Retrieved June 30, 2009.
    23.^ Miller, Jay. Lockheed Martin F/A-22 Raptor, Stealth Fighter. Aerofax, 2005. ISBN 1-85780-158-X.
    24.^ Norris, Guy and Mark Wagner. Boeing 777: The Technological Marvel. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Zenith Imprint, 2001. ISBN 0-7603-0890-X.
    25.^ Pandey, Mohan (2010). How Boeing Defied the Airbus Challenge. Createspace. p. 86. ISBN 978-1-4505-0113-2. Retrieved July 1, 2011.
    26.^ "Boeing to Raze Company Headquarters Building; Will Relocate to Adjacent Building." Boeing. August 4, 1995. Retrieved on May 13, 2009.
    27.^ "Revises meeting arrangements and map for the Executive committee Meeting". Gas Industry Standards Board. April 30, 1999. Retrieved May 13, 2009.
    28.^ "The Boeing Log Book", various volumes, published by Boeing Historical Archives.
    29.^ MISSMANAGEMENT: Himmel, hilf!, DIE ZEIT, 2011-09-20 (de). Means: mismanagement, heaven help!
    30.^ Pae, Peter (May 10, 2001). "Boeing Expected to Reveal New Home". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved February 9, 2009.
    31.^ Robertson, David (October 4, 2006). "Airbus will lose €4.8bn because of A380 delays". London: The Times Business News.
    32.^ "Boeing 787 first flight announced". BBC News Online, August 27, 2009.
    33.^ "Boeing and Lockheed Martin Complete United Launch Alliance Transaction (news release)". The Boeing Company. December 1, 2006. Retrieved January 28, 2007.
    34.^ "Concludes Purchase of Aviall, Inc". Boeing. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    35.^ "Ex-Boeing CFO Pleads Guilty in Druyun Case", The Washington Post, November 16, 2004.
    36.^ "Boeing CEO Stonecipher Resigns press release". Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    37.^ a b Fleischauer, Eric (23 JANUARY 2005). "Anatomy of a corporate espionage scandal". The Decatur Daily (Decatur, Alabama). Retrieved March 31, 2013.
    38.^ a b Bowermaster, David (9 January 2005). "Boeing probe intensifies over secret Lockheed papers". The Seattle Times (Seattle). Retrieved March 31, 2013.
    39.^ "Boeing, DOJ may reach settlement". St. Louis Business Journal ( September 9, 2005. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    40.^ Newquist, Don E. "Global Competitiveness of U.S. Advanced-Technology Manufacturing Industries: Large Civil Aircraft". U.S. International Trade Commission. Retrieved 16 January 2013.
    41.^ "Top margin 1" (PDF). Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    42.^ [dead link]Commissioner Mandelson
    43.^ "Industrial Subsidies and the Politics of World Trade: The Case of the Boeing 7e7" (PDF). Canada-United States Trade Center. p. 17. Retrieved July 1, 2011.
    44.^ "Illinois tax breaks in WTO ruling against Boeing". September 15, 2010. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    45.^ "Boeing Response to Public Reports Regarding the WTO's Interim Decision in DS 353" (Press release). Boeing. September 15, 2010. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    46.^ Ostrower, Jon (November 17, 2011). "Lion Air commits to up to 380 Boeing 737s". Flight International.
    47.^ "Indonesia's Lion Air to Buy 230 New Boeing 737s in $21.7b Deal". Jakarta Globe. November 17, 2011.
    48.^ "Boeing Betrayal Stirs Wichita After City Helped Win Tanker Bid, Mayor Says". Bloomberg. January 5, 2012. Retrieved January 6, 2012.
    49.^ Peterson, Kyle (January 4, 2012). "Boeing to close Wichita plant, cites defense cuts". Reuters. Retrieved February 3, 2012.
    50.^ "Boeing and VSMPO-AVISMA Announce Titanium Agreement", Boeing, August 11, 2006.
    51.^ (Russian) Корпорация ВСМПО-АВИСМА
    52.^ "Boeing exits in-flight broadband". BBC News Online. August 17, 2006. Retrieved January 28, 2007.
    53.^ "Boeing to Discontinue Connexion by Boeing Service (news release)". The Boeing Company. August 17, 2006. Retrieved January 28, 2007.
    54.^ a b Capaccio, Tony, and Toko Sekiguchi, "Boeing Delay On Italy, Japan Tankers May Harm Bid For U.S. Work", Bloomberg, August 12, 2008.
    55.^ "Boeing KC-767J Aerial Refueling Tankers Join Active Air Wing in Japan". Boeing, May 26, 2009.
    56.^ "Boeing Delivers 4th KC-767 Tanker to Japan Ministry of Defense". Boeing, January 12, 2010.
    57.^ Donna Cassata, Lolita C. Baldor (February 24, 2011). "Boeing gets $35 billion Air Force tanker order". Associated Press. Retrieved February 26, 2011.
    58.^ Klein, Alec (December 7, 2007). "The Army's $200 billion Makeover". The Washington Post. Retrieved April 26, 2010.
    59.^ "Future Combat System (FCS) Program to Army Brigade Combat Team Modernization". U.S. DoD, June 23, 2009.
    60.^ Drew, Christopher (April 6, 2009). "Military Budget Reflects a Shift in U.S. Strategy". The New York Times. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    61.^ "Pentagon budget cuts slam Boeing, raise stakes on tanker win". April 8, 2009. Retrieved June 7, 2011.
    62.^ "Boeing: Boeing Successfully Completes Acquisition of Argon ST" (Press release). Boeing. August 5, 2010. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    63.^ a b c d e Dominic Gates (May 18, 2006). "Clean engines, wings that fold: Boeing dreams of futuristic jets". The Seattle Times.
    64.^ "Top Corporate Air Polluters in the United States". Political Economy Research Institute. 2002. Retrieved July 1, 2011.
    65.^ "Top Corporate Air Polluters in the United States". Political Economy Research Institute. 2010. Retrieved July 1, 2011.
    66.^ Center for Public Integrity[dead link]
    67.^ "Center for Environmental Risk Reduction, UCLA". February 2, 2006. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    68.^ "SSFL". Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    69.^ "State DTSC-SSFL info website". Retrieved October 28, 2011.
    70.^ a b c d e Ángel González (August 30, 2007). "To go green in jet fuel, Boeing looks at algae". The Seattle Times. Retrieved January 27, 2009.
    71.^ First Airlines and UOP Join Algal Biomass Organization, Green Car Congress, June 19, 2008.
    72.^ Air NZ sees biofuel salvation in jatropha.
    73.^ "C-17 uses biofuel for flight tests". August 31, 2010. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    74.^ "Boeing Feature Story: Envisioning tomorrow's aircraft". Boeing. August 16, 2010. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    75.^ "Top 100 Contractors Report – Fiscal Year 2009". Retrieved January 4, 2011.
    76.^ "Top 100 Contractors Report – Fiscal Year 2008". Retrieved January 4, 2011.
    77.^ "Contractor Case – Boeing Company". Project on Government Oversight. Retrieved January 5, 2011.
    78.^ "Federal Contractor Misconduct Database". Project on Government Oversight. Retrieved January 5, 2011.
    79.^ "Boeing Co Lobbying Expenditure". Center for Responsive Politics. Retrieved January 5, 2011.
    80.^ "Lobbying Disclosure Act Database". United States Senate. Retrieved January 5, 2011.
    81.^ Carney, Timothy (2011-04-24) Boeing lives by big government, dies by big government, Washington Examiner
    82.^ "Boeing Corporate Citizenship Report 2011". Boeing. Retrieved 19 September 2012.
    83.^ "Boeing Corporate Citizenship Report 2011". Retrieved September 19, 2012.
    84.^ "Blessed are the Grantmakers". Insight Labs. February 3, 2012. Retrieved September 19, 2012.
    85.^ "U.S. Global Leadership Coalition, Global Trust members". Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    86.^ Lipton, Eric; Clark, Nicola; Lehren, Andrew W. (January 2, 2011). "Diplomats Help Push Sales of Jetliners on the Global Market". The New York Times. Retrieved January 5, 2011.
    87.^ "Pew Analysis Shows More than 60 percent of Export-Import Bank Loan Guarantees Benefitted Singe Company". The Pew Charitable Trusts. Retrieved January 5, 2011.
    88.^ Portero, Ashley. "30 Major U.S. Corporations Paid More to Lobby Congress Than Income Taxes, 2008–2010". International Business Times. Retrieved December 26, 2011.
    89.^ a b "Boeing in Brief". Boeing. Retrieved January 16, 2011.
    90.^ a b As of Apr. 28, 2011 from Boeing Employment Numbers page
    91.^ "Go To Gang Boeing Frontiers Magazine" (PDF). Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    92.^ "Top 10 Best Companies for U.S. Veterans: Boeing". Retrieved June 14, 2011.
    93.^ "Wichita facility's closing will affect 2,160 Boeing workers".
    94.^ Clairmont L. Egtvedt biography, Boeing.
    95.^ Frank Shrontz biography, Boeing.
    96.^ Edgar N. Gott biography, Boeing.

    Further reading
    Cloud, Dana L. We Are the Union: Democratic Unionism and Dissent at Boeing. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2011.
    Greider, William. One World, Ready or Not: The Manic Logic of Global Capitalism. London: Penguin Press, 1997.

    Carol wrote:

    Falcon Hypersonic Test Vehicle 2
    Let’s start this story off with the fastest aircraft ever developed by the American military. The Falcon Hypersonic Test Vehicle 2 is an experimental rocket glider piloted by remote control that is designed to push the envelope of faster-than-sound travel to the tune of Mach 22. The idea is to create a craft that can reach any target in the world and deliver an explosive strike within a single hour, and to do so DARPA has developed a tough, lightweight glider.
    read more:

    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:27 pm

    Consider the Stock Market (aka Equity Market). Is the Stock Market the World's Biggest Casino?? Does the Stock Market Benefit Humanity?? Is the Stock Market Rigged?? Is Insider Trading Rampant?? Can Black-Boxes Out-Trade Hong Kong Day-Traders?? Would We be Better-Off Without a Stock Market?? Who REALLY Wins with the Stock Market?? How might my Five-Percent Point of Sale Taxation Proposal (instead of tax-forms) impact the Stock Market?? Does Satan Have an Office at Goldman-Sachs?? What Would George Soros Say?? Do Aliens Participate in the Stock Market?? Ever Heard of Grey-Traders Using Grey-Supercomputers on the Dark-Side of the Moon????? How Much Earth Stock Market Money Ends-Up in the Bank of Sirius???? What Would S.R. Hadden Say?? What Would St. Germain Say?? What if St. Germain is NO Saint?? What Would the Rothschilds Say?? Does China Own America?? Will China Claim America Through Eminent-Domain?? Are Chinese Soldiers in American Deep Underground Military Bases?? What Would Sherry Shriner Say?? Who is Sherry Shriner?? Really?? You'd be Shocked at Who I Think She Might Be -- but I'm NOT Talking. I have said repeatedly that I think we are fundamentally actors, actresses, game-players, and risk-takers. This might be our strength -- and our undoing. We seem to lack the discipline and responsibility to properly manage these traits. Do we psychologically need things such as the Stock-Market -- whether it helps or hurts us?? Are the Dracs and Greys taking advantage of Human Greed and Fear?? I Don't Know -- But Whatever the Real Truth Is -- I Suspect That It Will Drive Many of Us Insane. I Keep Saying This Over and Over.


    A stock market or equity market is a public entity (a loose network of economic transactions, not a physical facility or discrete entity) for the trading of company stock (shares) and derivatives at an agreed price; these are securities listed on a stock exchange as well as those only traded privately.

    The size of the world stock market was estimated at about $36.6 trillion at the beginning of October 2008.[1] The total world derivatives market has been estimated at about $791 trillion face or nominal value,[2] 11 times the size of the entire world economy.[3] The value of the derivatives market, because it is stated in terms of notional values, cannot be directly compared to a stock or a fixed income security, which traditionally refers to an actual value. Moreover, the vast majority of derivatives 'cancel' each other out (i.e., a derivative 'bet' on an event occurring is offset by a comparable derivative 'bet' on the event not occurring). Many such relatively illiquid securities are valued as marked to model, rather than an actual market price.

    The stocks are listed and traded on stock exchanges which are entities of a corporation or mutual organization specialized in the business of bringing buyers and sellers of the organizations to a listing of stocks and securities together. The largest stock market in the United States, by market capitalization, is the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). In Canada, the largest stock market is the Toronto Stock Exchange. Major European examples of stock exchanges include the Amsterdam Stock Exchange, London Stock Exchange, Paris Bourse, and the Deutsche Börse (Frankfurt Stock Exchange). In Africa, examples include Nigerian Stock Exchange, JSE Limited, etc. Asian examples include the Singapore Exchange, the Tokyo Stock Exchange, the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, the Shanghai Stock Exchange, and the Bombay Stock Exchange. In Latin America, there are such exchanges as the BM&F Bovespa and the BMV. Australia has a national stock exchange, the Australian Securities Exchange, due to the size of its population.

    Market participants include individual retail investors, institutional investors such as mutual funds, banks, insurance companies and hedge funds, and also publicly traded corporations trading in their own shares. Some studies have suggested that institutional investors and corporations trading in their own shares generally receive higher risk-adjusted returns than retail investors.[4]

    Participants in the stock market range from small individual stock investors to large hedge fund traders, who can be based anywhere in the world. Their orders usually end up with a professional at a stock exchange, who executes the order of buying or selling.

    Some exchanges are physical locations where transactions are carried out on a trading floor, by a method known as open outcry. This type of auction is used in stock exchanges and commodity exchanges where traders may enter "verbal" bids and offers simultaneously. The other type of stock exchange is a virtual kind, composed of a network of computers where trades are made electronically via traders.

    Actual trades are based on an auction market model where a potential buyer bids a specific price for a stock and a potential seller asks a specific price for the stock. (Buying or selling at market means you will accept any ask price or bid price for the stock, respectively.) When the bid and ask prices match, a sale takes place, on a first-come-first-served basis if there are multiple bidders or askers at a given price.

    The purpose of a stock exchange is to facilitate the exchange of securities between buyers and sellers, thus providing a marketplace (virtual or real). The exchanges provide real-time trading information on the listed securities, facilitating price discovery.

    The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) is a physical exchange, also referred to as a listed exchange – only stocks listed with the exchange may be traded, with a hybrid market for placing orders both electronically and manually on the trading floor. Orders executed on the trading floor enter by way of exchange members and flow down to a floor broker, who goes to the floor trading post specialist for that stock to trade the order. The specialist's job is to match buy and sell orders using open outcry. If a spread exists, no trade immediately takes place—in this case the specialist should use his/her own resources (money or stock) to close the difference after his/her judged time. Once a trade has been made the details are reported on the "tape" and sent back to the brokerage firm, which then notifies the investor who placed the order. Although there is a significant amount of human contact in this process, computers play an important role, especially for so-called "program trading".

    The NASDAQ is a virtual listed exchange, where all of the trading is done over a computer network. The process is similar to the New York Stock Exchange. However, buyers and sellers are electronically matched. One or more NASDAQ market makers will always provide a bid and ask price at which they will always purchase or sell 'their' stock.[5]

    The Paris Bourse, now part of Euronext, is an order-driven, electronic stock exchange. It was automated in the late 1980s. Prior to the 1980s, it consisted of an open outcry exchange. Stockbrokers met on the trading floor or the Palais Brongniart. In 1986, the CATS trading system was introduced, and the order matching process was fully automated.

    From time to time, active trading (especially in large blocks of securities) have moved away from the 'active' exchanges. Securities firms, led by UBS AG, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Credit Suisse Group, already steer 12 percent of U.S. security trades away from the exchanges to their internal systems. That share probably will increase to 18 percent by 2010 as more investment banks bypass the NYSE and NASDAQ and pair buyers and sellers of securities themselves, according to data compiled by Boston-based Aite Group LLC, a brokerage-industry consultant.[6]

    Now that computers have eliminated the need for trading floors like the Big Board's, the balance of power in equity markets is shifting. By bringing more orders in-house, where clients can move big blocks of stock anonymously, brokers pay the exchanges less in fees and capture a bigger share of the $11 billion a year that institutional investors pay in trading commissions.

    Market participants include individual retail investors, institutional investors such as mutual funds, banks, insurance companies and hedge funds, and also publicly traded corporations trading in their own shares. Some studies have suggested that institutional investors and corporations trading in their own shares generally receive higher risk-adjusted returns than retail investors.[4]

    A few decades ago, worldwide, buyers and sellers were individual investors, such as wealthy businessmen, usually with long family histories to particular corporations. Over time, markets have become more "institutionalized"; buyers and sellers are largely institutions (e.g., pension funds, insurance companies, mutual funds, index funds, exchange-traded funds, hedge funds, investor groups, banks and various other financial institutions).

    The rise of the institutional investor has brought with it some improvements in market operations. There has been a gradual tendency for "fixed" (and exorbitant) fees being reduced for all investors, partly from falling administration costs but also assisted by large institutions challenging brokers' oligopolistic approach to setting standardised fees.

    In 12th century France the courretiers de change were concerned with managing and regulating the debts of agricultural communities on behalf of the banks. Because these men also traded with debts, they could be called the first brokers. A common misbelief is that in late 13th century Bruges commodity traders gathered inside the house of a man called Van der Beurze, and in 1309 they became the "Brugse Beurse", institutionalizing what had been, until then, an informal meeting, but actually, the family Van der Beurze had a building in Antwerp where those gatherings occurred;[7] the Van der Beurze had Antwerp, as most of the merchants of that period, as their primary place for trading. The idea quickly spread around Flanders and neighboring counties and "Beurzen" soon opened in Ghent and Rotterdam.

    In the middle of the 13th century, Venetian bankers began to trade in government securities. In 1351 the Venetian government outlawed spreading rumors intended to lower the price of government funds. Bankers in Pisa, Verona, Genoa and Florence also began trading in government securities during the 14th century. This was only possible because these were independent city states not ruled by a duke but a council of influential citizens. Italian companies were also the first to issue shares. Companies in England and the Low Countries followed in the 16th century.

    The Dutch East India Company (founded in 1602) was the first joint-stock company to get a fixed capital stock and as a result, continuous trade in company stock occurred on the Amsterdam Exchange. Soon thereafter, a lively trade in various derivatives, among which options and repos, emerged on the Amsterdam market. Dutch traders also pioneered short selling - a practice which was banned by the Dutch authorities as early as 1610.[8]

    There are now stock markets in virtually every developed and most developing economies, with the world's largest markets being in the United States, United Kingdom, Japan, India, China, Canada, Germany (Frankfurt Stock Exchange), France, South Korea and the Netherlands.[9]

    The stock market is one of the most important sources for companies to raise money. This allows businesses to be publicly traded, or raise additional financial capital for expansion by selling shares of ownership of the company in a public market. The liquidity that an exchange affords the investors gives them the ability to quickly and easily sell securities. This is an attractive feature of investing in stocks, compared to other less liquid investments. Some companies actively increase liquidity by trading in their own shares.[10][11]

    History has shown that the price of shares and other assets is an important part of the dynamics of economic activity, and can influence or be an indicator of social mood. An economy where the stock market is on the rise is considered to be an up-and-coming economy. In fact, the stock market is often considered the primary indicator of a country's economic strength and development.[citation needed]

    Rising share prices, for instance, tend to be associated with increased business investment and vice versa. Share prices also affect the wealth of households and their consumption. Therefore, central banks tend to keep an eye on the control and behavior of the stock market and, in general, on the smooth operation of financial system functions. Financial stability is the raison d'être of central banks.[citation needed]

    Exchanges also act as the clearinghouse for each transaction, meaning that they collect and deliver the shares, and guarantee payment to the seller of a security. This eliminates the risk to an individual buyer or seller that the counterparty could default on the transaction.[citation needed]

    The smooth functioning of all these activities facilitates economic growth in that lower costs and enterprise risks promote the production of goods and services as well as possibly employment. In this way the financial system is assumed to contribute to increased prosperity.[citation needed]

    The financial system in most western countries has undergone a remarkable transformation. One feature of this development is disintermediation. A portion of the funds involved in saving and financing, flows directly to the financial markets instead of being routed via the traditional bank lending and deposit operations. The general public interest in investing in the stock market, either directly or through mutual funds, has been an important component of this process.

    Statistics show that in recent decades shares have made up an increasingly large proportion of households' financial assets in many countries. In the 1970s, in Sweden, deposit accounts and other very liquid assets with little risk made up almost 60 percent of households' financial wealth, compared to less than 20 percent in the 2000s. The major part of this adjustment is that financial portfolios have gone directly to shares but a good deal now takes the form of various kinds of institutional investment for groups of individuals, e.g., pension funds, mutual funds, hedge funds, insurance investment of premiums, etc.

    The trend towards forms of saving with a higher risk has been accentuated by new rules for most funds and insurance, permitting a higher proportion of shares to bonds. Similar tendencies are to be found in other industrialized countries. In all developed economic systems, such as the European Union, the United States, Japan and other developed nations, the trend has been the same: saving has moved away from traditional (government insured) bank deposits to more risky securities of one sort or another.

    From experience it is known that investors may 'temporarily' move financial prices away from their long term aggregate price 'trends'. (Positive or up trends are referred to as bull markets; negative or down trends are referred to as bear markets). Over-reactions may occur—so that excessive optimism (euphoria) may drive prices unduly high or excessive pessimism may drive prices unduly low. Economists continue to debate whether financial markets are 'generally' efficient.

    According to one interpretation of the efficient-market hypothesis (EMH), only changes in fundamental factors, such as the outlook for margins, profits or dividends, ought to affect share prices beyond the short term, where random 'noise' in the system may prevail. (But this largely theoretic academic viewpoint—known as 'hard' EMH—also predicts that little or no trading should take place, contrary to fact, since prices are already at or near equilibrium, having priced in all public knowledge.) The 'hard' efficient-market hypothesis is sorely tested and does not explain the cause of events such as the stock market crash in 1987, when the Dow Jones index plummeted 22.6 percent—the largest-ever one-day fall in the United States.[13]

    This event demonstrated that share prices can fall dramatically even though, to this day, it is impossible to fix a generally agreed upon definite cause: a thorough search failed to detect any 'reasonable' development that might have accounted for the crash. (But note that such events are predicted to occur strictly by chance, although very rarely.) It seems also to be the case more generally that many price movements (beyond that which are predicted to occur 'randomly') are not occasioned by new information; a study of the fifty largest one-day share price movements in the United States in the post-war period seems to confirm this.[13]

    , a 'soft' EMH has emerged which does not require that prices remain at or near equilibrium, but only that market participants not be able to systematically profit from any momentary market 'inefficiencies'. Moreover, while EMH predicts that all price movement (in the absence of change in fundamental information) is random (i.e., non-trending), many studies have shown a marked tendency for the stock market to trend over time periods of weeks or longer. Various explanations for such large and apparently non-random price movements have been promulgated. For instance, some research has shown that changes in estimated risk, and the use of certain strategies, such as stop-loss limits and Value at Risk limits, theoretically could cause financial markets to overreact. But the best explanation seems to be that the distribution of stock market prices is non-Gaussian (in which case EMH, in any of its current forms, would not be strictly applicable).[14][15]

    Other research has shown that psychological factors may result in exaggerated (statistically anomalous) stock price movements (contrary to EMH which assumes such behaviors 'cancel out'). Psychological research has demonstrated that people are predisposed to 'seeing' patterns, and often will perceive a pattern in what is, in fact, just noise. (Something like seeing familiar shapes in clouds or ink blots.) In the present context this means that a succession of good news items about a company may lead investors to overreact positively (unjustifiably driving the price up). A period of good returns also boosts the investor's self-confidence, reducing his (psychological) risk threshold.[16]

    Another phenomenon—also from psychology—that works against an objective assessment is group thinking. As social animals, it is not easy to stick to an opinion that differs markedly from that of a majority of the group. An example with which one may be familiar is the reluctance to enter a restaurant that is empty; people generally prefer to have their opinion validated by those of others in the group.

    In one paper the authors draw an analogy with gambling.[17] In normal times the market behaves like a game of roulette; the probabilities are known and largely independent of the investment decisions of the different players. In times of market stress, however, the game becomes more like poker (herding behavior takes over). The players now must give heavy weight to the psychology of other investors and how they are likely to react psychologically.

    The stock market, as with any other business, is quite unforgiving of amateurs. Inexperienced investors rarely get the assistance and support they need. In the period running up to the 1987 crash, less than 1 percent of the analyst's recommendations had been to sell (and even during the 2000–2002 bear market, the average did not rise above 5%). In the run up to 2000, the media amplified the general euphoria, with reports of rapidly rising share prices and the notion that large sums of money could be quickly earned in the so-called new economy stock market. (And later amplified the gloom which descended during the 2000–2002 bear market, so that by summer of 2002, predictions of a DOW average below 5000 were quite common.)

    Sometimes, the market seems to react irrationally to economic or financial news, even if that news is likely to have no real effect on the fundamental value of securities itself. But, this may be more apparent than real, since often such news has been anticipated, and a counterreaction may occur if the news is better (or worse) than expected. Therefore, the stock market may be swayed in either direction by press releases, rumors, euphoria and mass panic; but generally only briefly, as more experienced investors (especially the hedge funds) quickly rally to take advantage of even the slightest, momentary hysteria.

    Over the short-term, stocks and other securities can be battered or buoyed by any number of fast market-changing events, making the stock market behavior difficult to predict. Emotions can drive prices up and down, people are generally not as rational as they think, and the reasons for buying and selling are generally obscure. Behaviorists argue that investors often behave 'irrationally' when making investment decisions thereby incorrectly pricing securities, which causes market inefficiencies, which, in turn, are opportunities to make money.[18] However, the whole notion of EMH is that these non-rational reactions to information cancel out, leaving the prices of stocks rationally determined.

    Robert Shiller's plot of the S&P Composite Real Price Index, Earnings, Dividends, and Interest Rates, from Irrational Exuberance, 2d ed.[20] In the preface to this edition, Shiller warns, "The stock market has not come down to historical levels: the price-earnings ratio as I define it in this book is still, at this writing [2005], in the mid-20s, far higher than the historical average... People still place too much confidence in the markets and have too strong a belief that paying attention to the gyrations in their investments will someday make them rich, and so they do not make conservative preparations for possible bad outcomes."

    Price-Earnings ratios as a predictor of twenty-year returns based upon the plot by Robert Shiller (Figure 10.1,[20] source). The horizontal axis shows the real price-earnings ratio of the S&P Composite Stock Price Index as computed in Irrational Exuberance (inflation adjusted price divided by the prior ten-year mean of inflation-adjusted earnings). The vertical axis shows the geometric average real annual return on investing in the S&P Composite Stock Price Index, reinvesting dividends, and selling twenty years later. Data from different twenty-year periods is color-coded as shown in the key. See also ten-year returns. Shiller states that this plot "confirms that long-term investors—investors who commit their money to an investment for ten full years—did do well when prices were low relative to earnings at the beginning of the ten years. Long-term investors would be well advised, individually, to lower their exposure to the stock market when it is high, as it has been recently, and get into the market when it is low."[20] A stock market crash is often defined as a sharp dip in share prices of equities listed on the stock exchanges. In parallel with various economic factors, a reason for stock market crashes is also due to panic and investing public's loss of confidence. Often, stock market crashes end speculative economic bubbles.

    There have been famous stock market crashes that have ended in the loss of billions of dollars and wealth destruction on a massive scale. An increasing number of people are involved in the stock market, especially since the social security and retirement plans are being increasingly privatized and linked to stocks and bonds and other elements of the market. There have been a number of famous stock market crashes like the Wall Street Crash of 1929, the stock market crash of 1973–4, the Black Monday of 1987, the Dot-com bubble of 2000, and the Stock Market Crash of 2008.

    One of the most famous stock market crashes started October 24, 1929 on Black Thursday. The Dow Jones Industrial lost 50% during this stock market crash. It was the beginning of the Great Depression. Another famous crash took place on October 19, 1987 – Black Monday. The crash began in Hong Kong and quickly spread around the world.

    By the end of October, stock markets in Hong Kong had fallen 45.5%, Australia 41.8%, Spain 31%, the United Kingdom 26.4%, the United States 22.68%, and Canada 22.5%. Black Monday itself was the largest one-day percentage decline in stock market history – the Dow Jones fell by 22.6% in a day. The names "Black Monday" and "Black Tuesday" are also used for October 28–29, 1929, which followed Terrible Thursday—the starting day of the stock market crash in 1929.

    The crash in 1987 raised some puzzles-–main news and events did not predict the catastrophe and visible reasons for the collapse were not identified. This event raised questions about many important assumptions of modern economics, namely, the theory of rational human conduct, the theory of market equilibrium and the efficient-market hypothesis. For some time after the crash, trading in stock exchanges worldwide was halted, since the exchange computers did not perform well owing to enormous quantity of trades being received at one time. This halt in trading allowed the Federal Reserve system and central banks of other countries to take measures to control the spreading of worldwide financial crisis. In the United States the SEC introduced several new measures of control into the stock market in an attempt to prevent a re-occurrence of the events of Black Monday.

    Since the early 1990s, many of the largest exchanges have adopted electronic 'matching engines' to bring together buyers and sellers, replacing the open outcry system. Electronic trading now accounts for the majority of trading in many developed countries. Computer systems were upgraded in the stock exchanges to handle larger trading volumes in a more accurate and controlled manner. The SEC modified the margin requirements in an attempt to lower the volatility of common stocks, stock options and the futures market. The New York Stock Exchange and the Chicago Mercantile Exchange introduced the concept of a circuit breaker. The circuit breaker halts trading if the Dow declines a prescribed number of points for a prescribed amount of time. In February 2012, the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC) introduced single-stock circuit breakers.[21]

    The movements of the prices in a market or section of a market are captured in price indices called stock market indices, of which there are many, e.g., the S&P, the FTSE and the Euronext indices. Such indices are usually market capitalization weighted, with the weights reflecting the contribution of the stock to the index. The constituents of the index are reviewed frequently to include/exclude stocks in order to reflect the changing business environment.

    Financial innovation has brought many new financial instruments whose pay-offs or values depend on the prices of stocks. Some examples are exchange-traded funds (ETFs), stock index and stock options, equity swaps, single-stock futures, and stock index futures. These last two may be traded on futures exchanges (which are distinct from stock exchanges—their history traces back to commodities futures exchanges), or traded over-the-counter. As all of these products are only derived from stocks, they are sometimes considered to be traded in a (hypothetical) derivatives market, rather than the (hypothetical) stock market.

    Stock that a trader does not actually own may be traded using short selling; margin buying may be used to purchase stock with borrowed funds; or, derivatives may be used to control large blocks of stocks for a much smaller amount of money than would be required by outright purchase or sales.

    In short selling, the trader borrows stock (usually from his brokerage which holds its clients' shares or its own shares on account to lend to short sellers) then sells it on the market, hoping for the price to fall. The trader eventually buys back the stock, making money if the price fell in the meantime and losing money if it rose. Exiting a short position by buying back the stock is called "covering." This strategy may also be used by unscrupulous traders in illiquid or thinly traded markets to artificially lower the price of a stock. Hence most markets either prevent short selling or place restrictions on when and how a short sale can occur. The practice of naked shorting is illegal in most (but not all) stock markets.

    In margin buying, the trader borrows money (at interest) to buy a stock and hopes for it to rise. Most industrialized countries have regulations that require that if the borrowing is based on collateral from other stocks the trader owns outright, it can be a maximum of a certain percentage of those other stocks' value. In the United States, the margin requirements have been 50% for many years (that is, if you want to make a $1000 investment, you need to put up $500, and there is often a maintenance margin below the $500).

    A margin call is made if the total value of the investor's account cannot support the loss of the trade. (Upon a decline in the value of the margined securities additional funds may be required to maintain the account's equity, and with or without notice the margined security or any others within the account may be sold by the brokerage to protect its loan position. The investor is responsible for any shortfall following such forced sales.)

    Regulation of margin requirements (by the Federal Reserve) was implemented after the Crash of 1929. Before that, speculators typically only needed to put up as little as 10 percent (or even less) of the total investment represented by the stocks purchased. Other rules may include the prohibition of free-riding: putting in an order to buy stocks without paying initially (there is normally a three-day grace period for delivery of the stock), but then selling them (before the three-days are up) and using part of the proceeds to make the original payment (assuming that the value of the stocks has not declined in the interim).

    Global issuance of equity and equity-related instruments totaled $505 billion in 2004, a 29.8% increase over the $389 billion raised in 2003. Initial public offerings (IPOs) by US issuers increased 221% with 233 offerings that raised $45 billion, and IPOs in Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA) increased by 333%, from $ 9 billion to $39 billion.

    One of the many things people always want to know about the stock market is, "How do I make money investing?" There are many different approaches; two basic methods are classified by either fundamental analysis or technical analysis. Fundamental analysis refers to analyzing companies by their financial statements found in SEC Filings, business trends, general economic conditions, etc. Technical analysis studies price actions in markets through the use of charts and quantitative techniques to attempt to forecast price trends regardless of the company's financial prospects. One example of a technical strategy is the Trend following method, used by John W. Henry and Ed Seykota, which uses price patterns, utilizes strict money management and is also rooted in risk control and diversification.

    Additionally, many choose to invest via the index method. In this method, one holds a weighted or unweighted portfolio consisting of the entire stock market or some segment of the stock market (such as the S&P 500 or Wilshire 5000). The principal aim of this strategy is to maximize diversification, minimize taxes from too frequent trading, and ride the general trend of the stock market (which, in the U.S., has averaged nearly 10% per year, compounded annually, since World War II).

    According to much national or state legislation, a large array of fiscal obligations are taxed for capital gains. Taxes are charged by the state over the transactions, dividends and capital gains on the stock market, in particular in the stock exchanges. However, these fiscal obligations may vary from jurisdictions to jurisdictions because, among other reasons, it could be assumed that taxation is already incorporated into the stock price through the different taxes companies pay to the state, or that tax free stock market operations are useful to boost economic growth.[citation needed]


    1.^ "World Equity Market Declines: -$25.9 Trillion". Seeking Alpha. Retrieved 2011-05-31.
    2.^ "Quarterly Review Statistical Annex – December 2008". September 7, 2008. Retrieved March 5, 2010.
    3.^ "Central Intelligence Agency". Retrieved 2011-05-31.
    4.^ a b Amedeo De Cesari, Susanne Espenlaub, Arif Khurshed, and Michael Simkovic, The Effects of Ownership and Stock Liquidity on the Timing of Repurchase Transactions (October 2010). Paolo Baffi Centre Research Paper No. 2011-100.
    5.^ "What's the difference between a Nasdaq market maker and a NYSE specialist?". Retrieved March 5, 2010.
    6.^ Ortega, Edgar (2006-12-04). "UBS, Goldman Threaten NYSE, Nasdaq With Rival Stock Markets". Retrieved 2011-05-31.
    7.^ "16de eeuwse traditionele bak- en zandsteenarchitectuur [[Oude Beurs (Antwerpen)|Oude Beurs Antwerpen]] 1 (centrum) / Antwerp foto". Retrieved March 5, 2010.
    8.^ "PhD thesis 'The world's first stock exchange'". Retrieved 2011-10-01.
    9.^ "World Federation of Exchanges Monthly YTD Data". Retrieved 2011-05-31.
    10.^ Cesari, Amedeo De; Espenlaub, Susanne; Khurshed, Arif; Simkovic, Michael (2010). "The Effects of Ownership and Stock Liquidity on the Timing of Repurchase Transactions". Paolo Baffi Centre Research Paper No. 2011-100. SSRN 1884171.
    11.^ Simkovic, Michael (2009). "The Effect of Enhanced Disclosure on Open Market Stock Repurchases". Berkeley Business Law Journal 6 (1). SSRN 1117303.
    12.^ "No. HS-38. Stock Prices and Yields: 1900 to 2002" (PDF). Retrieved 2011-05-31.
    13.^ a b Cutler, D. Poterba, J. & Summers, L. (1991). "Speculative dynamics". Review of Economic Studies 58: 520–546.
    14.^ Mandelbrot, Benoit & Hudson, Richard L. (2006). The Misbehavior of Markets: A Fractal View of Financial Turbulence, annot. ed. Basic Books. ISBN 0-465-04357-7.
    15.^ Taleb, Nassim Nicholas (2008). Fooled by Randomness: The Hidden Role of Chance in Life and in the Markets, 2nd ed. Random House. ISBN 1-4000-6793-6.
    16.^ Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1974). "Judgement under uncertainty: heuristics and biases". Science 185 (4157): 1124–1131. doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124. PMID 17835457.
    17.^ Morris, Stephen; Shin, Hyun Song (1999). "Risk management with interdependent choice". Oxford Review of Economic Policy 15 (3): 52–62. doi:10.1093/oxrep/15.3.52.
    18.^ Sergey Perminov, Trendocracy and Stock Market Manipulations (2008, ISBN 978-1-4357-5244-3).
    19.^ "News Headlines". October 13, 2008. Retrieved March 5, 2010.
    20.^ a b c Shiller, Robert (2005). Irrational Exuberance (2d ed.). Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-12335-7.
    21.^ Completing the Circuit: Canadian Regulation, FIXGlobal, February 2012
    22.^ Chris Farrell. "Where are the circuit breakers". Retrieved October 16, 2008.

    Further reading

    Hamilton, W. P. (1922). The Stock Market Baraometer. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc (1998 reprint). ISBN 0-471-24764-2.
    Preda, Alex (2009). Framing Finance: The Boundaries of Markets and Modern Capitalism. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-67932-7.

    Carol wrote:
    Central bankers secretly stockpiling gold through third parties in anticipation of euro collapse
    · Greek assets – even whole islands – being secretly sold off to pay troika
    · Check for $300 million signed by CEO of major bank is used to defraud global gold reserves
    · United Bank of Switzerland selling US dollars at 20% discount in preparation for collapse,
    while UBS bonds are discounted more than 30% in global trade, as banksters try to dump fast for cash now
    · Cyprus theft of savings accounts was test run, coming soon to a bank near you
    · How Neil Keenan and the Alliance intend to prevent oligarchy’s plan for financial chaos
    by Michael Henry Dunn - JAKARTA, April 5, 2013: Word has reached Neil Keenan here that the banking cabal’s fear and desperation are now moving into what may be a final phase. They tried triggering World War III and that didn’t work. They thought they could depopulate the planet through designer diseases, and that didn’t work. They thought they could escape to vast underground cities, and (thanks to off-planet allies) that can no longer work. Facing exposure, humiliation, and prison (if they are lucky) they are now down to their last desperate throw: to create financial chaos by collapsing world currencies and pulling off a vast Cyprus-style theft of middle-class savings in the U.S. As global forces line up behind Neil Keenan, the Alliance, the Qing Dynasty, and the imminent “Changing of the Guard” to reclaim control over the Global Collateral Accounts, the oligarchs are desperately stockpiling gold in the hope that they can once more dominate an impoverished humanity by surviving the chaos that they themselves plan to trigger.

    Not going to happen – they made the mistake of stealing from Neil Keenan.

    Clearly, there’s more to it than that, and this fight for freedom has been secretly waged by thousands of men and women for decades. But it may well be that historians will look back at the moment when the hapless Daniele Del Bosco absconded with $144.4 billion in bonds entrusted to Keenan by the Dragon Family as the turning point that set the final wheels in motion to bring down Financial Tyranny. As Del Bosco attempted to launder the bonds through the Italian government, the U.N., the World Economic Forum, and the so-called Office of International Treasury Control, Keenan relentlessly pursued the unfolding evidence that led to the Trillion-Dollar Lawsuit and the creation of the Monaco Accords, which are now supported by more than 160 nations. Information continues to flow into Keenan on a daily basis from multiple sources, as witnessed first-hand by this writer.

    Forces are now in motion to prevent this final dark plan from succeeding. The cabal’s desperation is palpable. It’s every man for himself, as the once monolithic Illuminati becomes merely a pack of vicious thieves – which is all they ever were in fact – fleeing from the justice they thought they would never face. Meanwhile, the pressure on them increases daily as the avenues of escape are closed off one by one. And military, militia, and intelligence cooperation is poised to make the long-awaited final sweep of the cabal power structure.

    The cabal’s strategy down through the ages has always been the same: “out of chaos, order.” They create the chaos, and then impose an ever more oppressive “order,” in order to degrade free human beings into debt slaves. They lived by their twisted version of The Golden Rule: ”he who has the gold makes the rules.” They amassed the gold reserves now known as The Global Collateral Accounts on the pretext of removing the cause of war (while slaughtering millions in a series of gold-theft wars). In a century-long struggle, they succeeded in subverting their greatest enemy – a free American republic – into the bankster-controlled U.S.A., Inc., via their secret ownership of the Federal Reserve System. They triggered the Great Depression so they could buy America for a song while outlawing private ownership of gold. The final phase of their grand strategy called for their rulership over a post-Armageddon remnant of mankind. These plans have now fallen apart, and their grand goal of ultimate dominion has been reduced to a desperate struggle for survival.
    Carol wrote:

    Money, religion, politics: The shifting landscape of the New World Order and the approaching cashless society
    Unholy alliance: The Bible warns of an unholy alliance between religion, finance, and political powers at the end of time that will usher in a new age of global conformity. “And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.” Revelation 13:17

    April 8, 2013 – ECONOMY – The same could potentially be said for Bitcoin as over the past months its popularity has grown so much that “anarcho-capitalist…Libertarian…Freedom Fighter against mankind’s two biggest enemies, the State and Central Banks,” Dollar Vigilante Chief Editor, Jeff Berwick, has been on CNBC, CNN, Fox News, and BBC, and other mainstream outlets. What brought on this sudden attention? No, not our anarcho-capitalism, but our announcement of the world’s first BitcoinATM. So, is Jeff just a patsy so that the New World Order can bring in a digital currency? I began wondering this myself, and I came to what I think is a reasonable conclusion. What many skeptics fail to understand is that the so-called New World Order – with its global governance, fiat currencies, and so on – has already, for the most part, been implemented on a global scale. Especially economically. For instance, 95%+ of fiat money today is digital, and it’s all based on the Federal Reserve System, thus creating one worldwide currency with lots of different designs on the actual notes supposedly representing the various cultural backgrounds of nation-states. Despite nearly everything being digital already, there are mainstream technologies that go above-and-beyond, aiming to rule out the need for cash. One particular app for this cashless society, above-and-beyond credit and debit, is called Square, and was developed by Jack Dorsey, Twitter’s co-founder. According to CNN, “this is a telltale signs that the mobile-payments revolution has arrived.” CNN writes, as anyone who has studied American consumers know, “changing the way Americans pay for stuff is going to be really hard work.” But Bitcoin is turning out to be a force to be reckoned with. For instance, in comparison to long-time friends of the liberty movement, gold and silver, Bitcoin seems to have been the play to make over the past six months and beyond. For months, besides today’s drop from $150-$115, after running to $150 from $105, our charts over at Gold Silver Bitcoin have shown a bimetallic standard precipitously dropping relative to Bitcoin.

    The CNN article surmises that, “Paying by phone will be as transformative as the advent of the credit card in the 1950s. It will change the way we shop and bank. With powerful smartphones and tablets taking center stage on both sides of the checkout counter, it will reshape the relationship between buyer and seller. Not only will the phone or the tablet become a wallet for consumers, but it will also turn into a credit card reader and a register for merchants. Shoppers will use their mobile device as a coupon book, a comparison-shopping tool, and a repository of those unwieldy loyalty cards they carry from everyone from giant retail chains to the corner bakery. And your smartphones will serve as beacons that will alert a retailer when you walk into its store so that it can recommend products, show you reviews, or direct you to aisle five, where that beanbag chair you didn’t buy last week still beckons — and you can now have it for 10% off. You won’t even need a few singles to tip the valet or pay the dog walker, because they’ll take mobile payments too.” This basically explains the Bitcoin experience. One big difference? While CNN assumes a central authority, Bitcoin does not. With big players like AT&T, Verizon, Visa, Mastercard, Google, Microsoft, and eBay’s PayPal unit investing in billions in digital payment solutions, it is no surprise that the mainstream media is serving the idea to the public domain in kind and uncritical ways. One of their assumptions is a monopoly on the technology by some corporation friendly to compromising. While the mainstream press has been unable to ignore Bitcoin, it certainly has been critical of Bitcoin being prone to hackers. Sure, a great many people have lost bitcoins. But, imagine if the general population had to become their own banks. Most of them would get eaten right away by sharks in the economic waters. The CNN article champions the ease of digital transactions, and the time saved. Bitcoin is surely faster: “While this revolution will be powered by complex technology, its ultimate effect will be to greatly simplify things for consumers. Think about my experience at Grumpy. While I had to fiddle with my phone ahead of time — to upload my credit card to the Square app and to authorize it to talk to the Grumpy register — once there, the phone never left my pocket. All I had to do was order my cappuccino.” The article portends that “a cashless future is more real than many suspect.” According to the global head of mobile at Visa, “financial institutions are going to have a big role to play. We are, I think, on a precipice of some fundamental change in the way money is exchanged between consumers and businesses,” Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., said as she opened the first of a string of hearings one year ago on cashless ways. The Federal Reserve found that 12 percent of cell phone users had already made a payment through their phones, and almost two-thirds of technology experts surveyed by the Pew Center on Internet and American Life said they expected mobile payments to eclipse cash and credit cards by 2020. –The Market Oracle

    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:29 pm

    This madness isn't going to get any easier, is it?? I've honestly been trying to slow-down or stop for several years. I had no intention of starting. My sad experience has made me very wary of spreading the joy. I guess I'll just try to stay in this present 'holding-pattern'. Somehow, I think the industrial-revolution, the technological-revolution, the infowar, and the church-state issue -- could've been handled in a better way -- but I'm not sure how, exactly -- especially under the circumstances which I suspect exist. Why should I try to continue to be a 'wise-guy' when nothing positive seems to result from this?? I feel so empty and lost -- while everyone around me seems to be so happy and with-it. I think I'm supernaturally bombarded by both the good-guys and the bad-guys -- and I never know who's who. I continue to have no anger and no enemies -- yet I seem to be annoyed by divinity, humanity, everyone, and everything. I seem to be living in another-world -- with no fellow-travellers. I got along well with the Ancient Egyptian Deity -- yet I sensed that our loyalties and agendas were VERY different. I often felt as if they were testing me -- or setting me up for something. I sometimes sensed what seemed to be a deep and ancient hatred. I was told that 'they' had been watching me for a long time. The last I heard from them was when they wished me a Happy Easter -- one year ago -- even though they didn't really seem to wish to talk to me. They said they'd be talking to me soon -- but that hasn't happened. I continue to fear a solar system meltdown -- regardless of who does what -- and regardless of who's in bed with who. A helluva lot of chickens (and who knows what else) are coming home to roost (and do who knows what)...

    In most science-fiction shows, the standard greeting usually involves "Take Me To Your Leader". Well, in my case it would be "Show Me the Financial-Records for Orion, Aldebaran, Sirius A&B, Arcturus, Nibiru, and This (Earth) Solar System (Sol) -- Going Back One Million Years. The REAL Records -- Not the Cooked-Books. Then, Show Me the War and Treaty Records for the Same Locations and Time Period. Then, Take Me to Your Leader. The Leader of Your Secret Government, That Is." Remember the Resurrection episode (Season 7) in Stargate SG-1 with a shady character named Keffler or something like that?? He had Nazi ancestors, and he knew a lot about Egyptology and Forbidden-Genetics, etc. He smoked cigarettes, and held them in a peculiar manner. He spoke in sort of a tight and sarcastic way. He was very intelligent -- and very creepy. He reminded me of Kate in East of Eden -- Starbuck's Mom in Battlestar Galactica -- Dr. Mataros in Earth: Final Conflict -- and who I think might be the one who runs this solar system. I just tend to think that's the nature of the beast -- that it's so depressing, stressful, negative, etc. -- and the power and corruption so absolute -- that this type of behavior might be somewhat inevitable. I guess I've sort of tried to model this type of 'person' in this thread -- though on a more refined plane -- and on a higher moral ground. But still, I've been somewhat rude, irreverent, sarcastic, contrarian, arrogant, etc, etc. Once again, I'm not like this in real life -- but I suspect if I were closer to the center of things -- I would move in that direction. BTW -- the entire 7th Season of Stargate SG-1 is superb.

    Is it really wrong and evil to be interested in the "positive-aspects" of the Third Reich??? If one removed the mistreatment, torture, murder, theft, warfare, etc -- from the equation -- is what remains really THAT bad?? What if the Nazis had left the Jews, Gypsies, Gays, Misfits, et al alone -- and what if they hadn't gone to war?? What if they had just built all of those fancy buildings -- had their parades and speeches -- developed that fancy 'alien' technology -- and attempted to win the world over to their point of view by being a City on a Hill -- rather than blasting the hell out of everyone??? What if they had united Europe, the Anglican Communion, and the Roman Catholic Church into some sort of an alliance?? I have no idea what I'm talking about -- other than hearing someone say that the original plan was for Hitler to NOT go to war. What if the idealism of the Third-Reich got hijacked by something MUCH more sinister than what many of the key-players signed-up for??? I like reading the Joseph Farrell books about Nazi technology. It's very sad -- but in some ways -- it's very cool. Why can't we have the good side of this -- without the bad side?? For example, I liked the good aspects of Anna and the Visitors -- but I hated the bad aspects. Why can't we accentuate the positives of everything and everyone in history -- throughout the solar system?? What is the current state of the Nazi Phenomenon -- throughout the solar system??? We might be shocked. The horror.

    Consider a Solar System Command Space Fleet which would provide Transportation and Security for the Entire Solar System. There might be at least 100 large and highly-armed unconventional spacecraft (with many smaller internal shuttle-craft) -- spread throughout the solar system. Obsolete and/or Damaged Craft might be used in war-games. Then, consider a health-care system which was 50% conventional and 50% alternative -- with completely integrated healthcare-centers -- with conventional and alternative practitioners recieving the same pay. BTW -- Ministers of Music (with doctorates in theology and music) should receive at least the same level of pay as these health-care professionals IMHO. Free Insurance would cover both conventional and alternative services at 100% -- provided that people followed all directions, and used both the conventional and alternative treatments and preventive measures. Taxation for the United States of the Solar System might be Point of Sale at the rate of 5%. This would cover the goverance, university-system, health-care and transportation services, etc. Again, the University of Solar System Studies and Governance campuses would be an integral part of a United States of the Solar System -- sort of like Georgetown University assists (some say controls) Washington D.C. Anyway, here is another list variation:

    1. The Latin Mass.
    2. The 1928 Book of Common Prayer.
    3. Sacred Classical Music.
    4. The Desire of Ages.
    5. The Federalist Papers.
    6. Astronomy and Egyptology.
    7. Nature and Exercise.
    8. Science-Fiction.

    This is for study purposes only. I'm trying to create a frame of mind -- and a frame of reference -- from which to discover the real answers and solutions for this solar system. Very few of you pay any attention to this -- so why do I continue?? If I were a Bad@$$ Billionare you'd pay attention -- wouldn't you?? Come -- Let Us Reason Together?? What a Joke!! Do you want another Star War?? Would THAT get your attention?? If the current Solar System Administrator is a Bad@$$ there might be some legitimate reasons why this might be the case -- but I don't think things have to be that way. Please rewatch The Century of the Self -- and The Ring of Power. Then connect the dots and join these two documentaries together. This stuff is both profound and sad. You seem to have zero inclination to work with me in this matter -- which makes me keep thinking that Edward Bernays and Jordan Maxwell were correct about people not wanting the truth -- and needing to be manipulated from the shadows. Once again, I am modeling a hypothesis that Archangel Michael was instrumental in the creation of the human being and responsible freedom -- but that this did not sit well with the Galactic PTB -- and that they sent Gabiel and/or Lucifer (in Battlestar Moon from Nibiru?) many thousands of years ago -- to reign-in, punish, and enslave Michael and Humanity. I suspect that Lucifer switched sides at least once or twice -- and MIGHT presently be fighting BOTH sides. Who knows?? I have no proof -- and this is simply a contrarian-hypothesis -- which I hope is NOT true. This stuff truly scares the hell out of me -- and I am HIGHLY traumatized (physically, mentally, spiritually, financially, etc, etc). I need to stop and sleep. It is pointless to continue. This is truly an exercise in futility. Hopefully, we do NOT have Hell to pay every day. Namaste and Have a Nice Day.

    The following is just more reposting of old posts (mostly unedited). My thinking might've changed -- but these posts are intended to make YOU think -- and not necessarily to tell you what I think. Most days, I don't know what I think -- and I'm quite easily confused -- and that's the truth. When I speak of wishing to be an Insider-Philosopher-Observer I mean to communicate that I'm probably at my best while just observing the REALLY bright and responsible people (and other than people) at work. I make no claims to genius or moral-perfection. Raven was, and is, right. I, orthodoxymoron, am a Completely Ignorant Fool -- and I'm not saying this to be a smart@ss (or a dumb@ss). It's frustrating that half of the old links no longer work. I'm not seeking new links for these old posts. I'm simply eliminating the dead-links.

    I was tranferring a couple of posts from the 'What is Gizeh Intelligence?' thread on AV1 - when it was apparently shut-down. It seemed as if someone pulled the plug. I joked that it was probably shut-down by a Tall, Long-Nosed Grey in an Underground Base - who was sick and tired of my nonsense! Could we be dealing with the Annunaki vs Gizeh Intelligence? Or - are we really dealing with only one Solar System Super Power? Could they have created all of the mythologies, theologies, hybrids, greys, reptilians, nukes, anti-gravity craft, etc and et al? Damned if I know. I just keep marching bravely and stupidly into the unknown - waiting to get shot down.

    Is there any truth to the following?

    ALDEBARAN -- Human militarists of a fascist slant who have traditionally sided with the Dracos and Greys. They collaborate within a large underground facility below Egypt, the base of a secret "Kamagol-II" cult which has connections to the Bavarian Thule Society and the Montauk time-space projects. This cult is also referred to as the Gizeh empire or Gizeh Intelligence, and they are working with secret societies on earth in an effort to dissolve all national sovereignties into a global religio-eco-political order. There are also Insectoid forces involved with Aldebaran. Apparently a neo-Nazi space force may have helped to colonize that system by sending time-space forces back into the distant past to inhabit the 4th dimensional realm of one or more of its planets. These forces from the past are currently involved with the New World Order scenario, attempting to carry out their dictatorial agenda on earth from their "base" within another time-space dimension of Aldebaran (source: Preston Nicholes, and others).

    Here is another reference:

    Alex Collier Video: 1. 2. Alex Collier Lecture ..A; 1995

    Interaction Between Gizeh Group and Nazi Germany: The Greys made contact with a world governmental body for the first time in 1931. This was in Germany. The Greys were however turned away by the German government, because it had already committed itself to involvement with the Gizeh Intelligence. Now, I don't know if you know who Gizeh intelligence is, but I will tell you that it is a renegade group of human extraterrestrials that were headquartered under the Gizeh plateau in Egypt. They were predominantly Pleiadians at the time. Ashtar was part of that group, Kamagol was part of that group. Even Jehovah was part of that group for some time. They did their own thing. They came down here and "played God" with us, and people worshipped them as "Gods" because they had this technology. They abused their power. The Germans were, in the 1930's, building rockets and starting a space program because of their contacts with extraterrestrials - the Gizeh Intelligence.

    Technology was developed and used to create weapons, because the German governmental bodies involved were concerned that there was going to be an alien invasion. The Gizeh intelligence told them that the Greys were here. However, there was not an actual invasion, per se, in progress. Weapons, such as sound devices, lasers, neutron bombs, particle beam weapons were created, although many of these were actualized later on in history. The Germans were given a lot of this technology by the Gizeh intelligence. These technologies also included free energy devices and anti-gravity technology. Tripartite Interaction: US, USSR and Britain. The United States was the first to open its doors to the alien race known as the Greys. I have been told of a contact in 1934, wherein the Greys made their presence known to the United States government in Washington State. It wasn't until 1947 that actual contact occurred with the aliens and United States officials, due to the shooting down of an alien craft in Roswell, New Mexico. This pressed the Greys into contact earlier than they had anticipated. After this crash at Roswell in 1947 the United States, the Soviet Union and the British, at the very highest levels of government, became "blood-brothers".

    Now, these governments did not know what Germany was really up to at that time in history. The Germans were very very secretive about their contact with Gizeh intelligences. What was going on in Germany and what was going on between these other countries were two separate issues. The Roswell incident created more of an urgency to develop a true space program in order to defend the Earth. Again, the United States government and the Soviets thought that there was a threat due to the technologically advanced state of the aliens they had encountered. The true space program as an "underground" development that we are just now beginning to hear about. It was originally financed by members of the Club of Rome. Now, you will need to do some homework to find out who those members are, and don't be surprised at who you see. We'll talk more about that when we discuss the moon. The Greys assisted the "black government" with the building of some of the first facilities on the moon and Mars.

    Here is one more:

    The observation leads to the conclusion that Al Gore is a top member of Gizeh intelligence. This was the reported occult backing of Adolf Hitler and his Nazi movement in Germany. Ethnically, the Mars connection of pyramid builders (Caucasian white race component of modern humanity via Atlantis, in their original form fitting the Nazi stereotype and extremely racist, the people described by contactee Elizabeth Klarer). The story is very old and very complex. In order to give a short intro, just take a look at this ancient Egyptian painting of Toth writing judgment: Toth, or Hermes Trismegistos, was born during the times of Atlantis and achieved personal immortality. A part of this was a shape-shifting ability. In the painting above, he is depicted with an animal head (ibis). Gizeh intelligence comprized around 8000 highly advanced people under the supreme leadership of shape-shifting Toth. They lived since ancient times in a network of underground cities, the main city being under Gizeh, Egypt, another site being under a location in the Grand Canyon, U.S.A. Other animal shapes reported from ancient times include a crocodile face, a lion face, etc. Toth is the fading embodiment of a fallen angel, Lucifer. In the 19th century, some of the 8000 started becoming active, such as through the Theosophical society of Madame Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. In the early 20th century, the Gizeh intelligence became active as a backer of Adolf Hitler in Germany and his Rothschild-Windsor sponsors in England. Today, all the 8000 have left their cities and are active among humanity. From this connection it is plausible that they are also the force behind the Jesuits in the Vatican and the Knights Templar before that. Reference: Books by Drunvalo Melchizedek. Contrary to myth, the Nazis won the second world war and took over the United States of America. See research by Mae Brussell, Webster G. Tarpley, Anton Chaitkin, David Emory and Greg Hallett. From this connection it is plausible that Gizeh intelligence is in control of America. My personal psychic experience is that Al Gore is a shape-shifting demonic entity from the very top of Gizeh intelligence with Assamite ability (one of the so-called „Ascended Masters” who are highly developed negative beings). The activation of the Gizeh intelligence over the past 150 years (since John D. Rockefeller, Sr.’s time) is to my mind an incidental part of the prophecy that is frequently discussed today under the caption of „2012”. The traditional Christian name for this is the Apocalypse (after the Book of Revelation, the last book of the Bible). Here is the link:

    In light of the above information, please watch the following: 1. 2. Do you see a pattern...or is it just me? Tell me I'm not crazy! Pretty please!! Help! I'm finding very little information on 'Gizeh Intelligence'. The above description seems to place 'them' at the center of our troubles. The views expressed above are not necessarily mine...but they seem intriquing. What is going on here?

    Correct! Which is why I am looking for a plurality of sources regarding 'Gizeh Intelligence'. Collier says they are gone...but I doubt this. If they existed here historically...I would expect that they are still here. Could Gizeh Intelligence be the group wherein Lucifer resides? Are they the 'fallen angels'? Do they compose the present day Illuminati? Is David Icke speaking of Gizeh Intelligence? Has he ever mentioned this term? Did they create the well as a mythology to go along with their creation? Are they creating an army and air-force of aliens in the Deep Underground Military Base genetics labs? Will we end up fighting these creations...which we have helped to develop? Are we building the UFO's which they fly? Is most of ufology utter bs...invented mostly by Gizeh Intelligence? Do they live on the inside of our hollow earth(if it is indeed hollow) ...and come through their tunnel system in the earth's raise heck with us? Are Pleiadians the only aliens here on earth? Are we all Pleiadians? Are the Gizeh Intelligence Pleiadian Aliens those who at some point in history, mated with reptillians? So...might there be Reptillian Pleiadians and Non-Reptillian Pleiadians...and nothing more? Are the reptillians the real bad-guys(demons)? Are the off-world Pleiadians the real good-guys(angels)? Are we the wild card in-between guys? It's the real nice guys who get you! I think I just became a heretic! I recant!! What? You don't believe me?! Oh, come on! I'll be good! What are you doing with that torch?

    So...who the heck is Gizeh Intelligence? Do they have a Central Giza Intelligence Agency? Or how about the GIA (Gizeh Intelligence Agency)? Or might it be the CIA (Central-earth Intelligence Agency)? I actually prefer Compassion In Action! Hi guys! Is MI6...Middle-earth Intelligence 6? Is no one interested in this topic? Can someone direct me to where people might be interested in this topic? Sometimes I feel like I'm from another planet...and I wish I were kidding. Please consider all the information available so far on this thread...and give me some feed-back. If these guys are in charge...and no one knows or cares...they have been very, very sucessful. Our greed, fear, and stupidity makes it very, very easy for the bad-guys. Did Billy Meier ever mention 'Gizeh Intelligence'? There seems to be very little information available on this subject. Are the Pleiadians he interacted with...'off-world' other words, not residing here on earth, or interveining in human affairs, other than providing warning, inspiration, and advice? Could Gizeh Intelligence be Pleiadians who are in cahoots with reptillians and greys? Do they live in the crust of the earth...and possibly in the allegedly hollow earth? Have they interbred with the reptillians? Is this the basis of the Illuminati, and are the Illuminati actually Pleiadian/Reptillian hybrids? Are the Illuminati and Greys actually subservient pawns to the Draconian Reptillians? Are all of the above the foundation of the New World Order? Could this righly be called the Old World Disorder Alien-Theocracy? Is this really old, rather than new...and possibly thousands of years old? Are we humans...all Pleiadians?

    Thank-you Karen. It's difficult for me to distill the truth from the bs. The Hyperborean reference reminded me of a passage in Frederick Nietzsche's book 'The Anti-Christ' which reads 'We are Hyperboreans'. It's been years since I read this, but that phrase stuck. I'm guessing he was referring to the Germanic people, but I don't really know for sure. The thesis of Jim Marrs' book 'Rise of the Fourth Reich' is that Nazi Fascism is alive and well in the good 'ol US of A. Seperately, the Alex Collier allegation that Gizeh Intelligence was behind Hitler and the Third Reich, would suggest that the same forces are at work today, if in fact, there is a Fourth Reich on the rise presently. Why would Gizeh Intelligence be removed without the other rascals being 86'd? The US/Gray treaties? What about the Reptilians? The whole concept of the earth's crust being laced with bases, tunnels, cities, and aliens is a very unsettling hypothesis. If there is a hollow earth with a central sun...the plot thickens, to say the least! Mind you, I don't know if any of this is true. I have been jilted in the area of traditional religion...and I believe that it is possible to be jilted in the area of ufology and conspiracy research. It's hard to simply say 'could be...but then again...might not be'. Was it Carl Sagan who said 'I don't want to believe. I want to know'? I want to know, as well. Yet I am tending to be very detached...and I have a chronic case of commitment-phobia. I tend to change my mind on a daily basis. The upside is that it's harder to hit a moving target! :

    The man behind the curtain must just about die laughing at us...that sob! Perhaps it would be interesting to study the previous decade in light of the current decade. This would provide some perspective and some critique and potential validation or debunking. The current decade may be too close to focus upon...and going back futher than the previous decade may be too far. I don't know. Maybe comparing everything with everything...without latching on to anything in a good approach. But the emotional and spiritual trauma may be too much for many people. I started a thread recently titled '1990's Prophets Vindicated or Debunked?' where I looked at Bill Cooper, Alex Collier, and Bill Still. The response was pretty minimal, and focused only on Bill Cooper. The constant asking and answering of questions may be a good approach. I keep getting the feeling that no matter which way we turn we are going to encounter trouble. There seems to be no simple, easy road to utopia. If you are ignorant and guillible, you get taken. If you know too much, they're out to get you! If you're at the bottom, you're a slave. If you're at the top, you might not like the view! I don't have the answer. I'm not even sure what the question is...:sad:

    I'm going to try this one more time. The response to this thread has been almost non-existant. Could the tall, long-nosed greys, who supposedly met Eisenhower...and who our government supposedly signed treaties with...have been Gizeh Intelligence, with some plastic surgery perhaps? Please, someone shoot this thread down, provide some additional sources, or substantiate and expand on this initial hypothesis. Do benevolent aliens have the green light to remove malevolent is alleged to have occured with Gizeh Intelligence in 1978? I thought benevolent aliens were non-interventionist. We supposedly signed treaties with the tall greys...not the short greys...right? people report seeing tall greys? I'm sensing that there may be a lot of 'local' aliens with human 'help' really screwing the human race. Isn't this an important topic? You can vibrate as fast as you want...but the details of who really controls our planet...and why so many people have died in the past 100 years...may determine the destiny of the human race. If we don't get our house in order...we may be stuck in enslavement/extinction...instead of going into 4th or 5th densities. Do we have our heads stuck in the clouds...and are we too sure that we are going to 'graduate' from all the trouble here on earth? We may be in for a big surprise...

    Thank-you for your responses. Gizeh Intelligence may go by other names...but the descriptions in my first post seem to fit what is going on in our world. Go through the whole first post a couple of times...including the video clips...and see if you can see a startling pattern emerging. The whole Nazi/Hitler/Illuminati/Military Industrial Complex/New World Order/Fascist/Enslavement/Extermination/International Banking thing really has me it seems to be a global phenomenon which can convincingly be traced for nearly 100 years...right up to 2009. Everything we have seen and experienced thus far may just be practice for the main event. I don't even want to think about what that might be. Check out EVERYTHING on YouTube or Google Video on Jim Marrs, Joseph Ferrell, and Bill Cooper ...for starters. The dots should start connecting...with a very disturbing picture emerging. Please give this some serious thought. The truth may set us free...but it's sure scaring the heck out of me!

    I don't have anything in particular against Forrest Gore...but life is like a Google never know what you're gonna get! However, it might be wise to look closely at the Vice Presidents of the past 60 years...and how they were selected. Were they who the President really wanted? I'm simply interested in how corruptible the top jobs in our country are. Is our political system a glorified 'The Price is Right' show? Who's the host? Who's the parasite? Are we the suckers?

    Dr. Earlyne Chaney, in an article titled 'ODYSSEY INTO EGYPT', in her occult-oriented magazine VOICE OF ASTARA (May, 1982) tells of a discovery she and researcher Bill Cox was shown in Egypt. These were two tunnels, neither of which had been fully explored. One was in the temple of Edfu between Luxor and Cairo in the ruins of El Tuna Gabel; and the other near Zozer's Step Pyramid at Cairo near Memphis-Saqqarah, within the tomb of the Bull, called "Serapium". The Egyptian government sealed both tunnels because of fears of certain archaeologists who alleged that they "lead too deeply down into the depths of the earth," and because they found the earth to be "honeycombed with passages leading off into other depths," and the possibility of explorers becoming lost. If such labyrinths do exist, then it may explain one story which alleged that men dressed like "ancient Egyptians" have been seen deep in unexplored tunnels near Cairo, as well as possible confirmation of the story which appeared in Nevada Aerial Research's 'LEADING EDGE' Publication to the effect that the U.S.(?) Government secretly maintains a huge base within a cavern of tremendous size (several miles in diameter) beneath the desert sands of Egypt. Could this tie in with the vaque references to a subterranean society(s) referred to by certain people 'in the know' which is/are known as the 'Phoenix Empire' and/or the 'Gizeh People'?

    How many factions of humans/aliens are there in this solar system? I think that it is important to know who all of the major players are throughout the solar system...what their track records are...and what their intentions for the future are. Ignorance may be bliss...but it could also be deadly. To me...there should be no secrets regarding all of the above.

    If Hitler was interacting with Giza Intelligence (is it Giza or Gizeh?)...this is something which should be examined very carefully. Why is there so little information on this subject? Supposedly they broke off interaction with Hitler in 1941 and were driven off planet in 1979. Does this have something to do with the Dulce Wars? Is this when the military industrial complex and the secret human government really lost control of the alien situation...or were they never in control? Did Giza Intelligence simply move voluntarily to the Dark Side of the Moon? Is this the Capitol of the Solar System? Is there a Vatican Connection? Is Lucifer the head of Giza Intelligence? Do they still have a presence in North Africa?

    The Secret Space Program. The Deep Underground Military Bases. The City-States. The Reptilians and Greys. Lucifer. Who Owns and Operates the Solar System? These are the key words and phrases. All of the secrecy should end...and the Solar System should be based upon Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom with an uncorrupted form of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, which is adapted to incorporate 100's of states throughout the Solar System.

    Gizeh Intelligence may be at the center of all of the above. What do you think?

    I know that dealing with this subject is playing with fire. I don't know what the stakes really are. If I did...I'd probably just play video games. I just don't want malevolent humans or aliens to play god in this part of the universe...and engage in genocide, atrocity, or enslavement. Bad-guys need secrecy a lot more than good-guys.

    Perhaps I could return to the subject of the thread by saying that all of this stuff is interconnected. Compartmentalizing what we discuss may be a mistake. Thinking about the Secret Space Program while watching a motorcycle race may unlock new insights. I'm not kidding. I call this Contextual Superimposition...and related to the Eureka Phenomenon. The military industrial complex has a huge presence in Southern California. Just ask John Lear. hugely important regarding the subject of aliens and ufo's. I guess that North Africa and the Southwestern United States are two of the most interesting areas to this time...other than the Dark Side of the Moon.

    Richard Hoagland states that the three main factions within NASA are 1. The Masons 2. The NAZI's 3. The Magicians (Occultists?). My question is...which of these three factions is most closely associated with Giza Intelligence? Or are all of the seemingly different factions simply different facets of the same diamond? There has to be a supreme council headed by a supreme leader...which oversees all of the madness. I suspect that this leader is Lucifer. Again...did Giza Intelligence move their headquarters from North Africa to the Dark Side of the Moon in 1979 (or shortly thereafter)?

    Actually...I think the underground bases, leviton trains, secret space program, kinda cool...but all of this should not be secret...and should not be under malevolent reptilian control. We the People of Earth should control all of this very, very expensive activity. We're paying for it...aren't we? We the People should be invited to the party. It should be 'Our Party' to speak.

    Again...I don't know if any of this is true. I'm simply exploring different lines of possibility and probability. The Vatican, the Pentagon, the NSA, the CIA, etc, etc...all keep forgetting to brief me on what's REALLY going on! I am NOT a potted-plant!

    Thank-you James. The links were fascinating. I will have to start following your posts more closely. I haven't been...and I don't know why. No reason at all. I guess I just got in a rut.

    Thank-you Tango. A remote viewer brought 'The Roswell Conception' idea to me a few weeks ago.

    Was (is?) Omnipotent Highness KRLLL really Lucifer?
    Could Giza Intelligence be a relatively benevolent faction of humans, greys, and reptilians? Are they fighting more malevolent factions of humans, greys, and reptilians? I'm sensing a very dark and complex power struggle...with lots of collateral damage. Are the various factions really different shades of black? Disclosure could be unbelievably complex. Are there good Masons? Are there good NAZI's? Are there good Occultists? Are there good Popes? Are there good Illuminati? Are there good Zionists? Are there good Reptilians? Are there good Greys? What were the World Wars REALLY all about? Did WWII really end? Is it still raging (over our heads, beneath our feet, and invisibly all around us...and even in us)?

    I'm sensing that we are discussing the tip of the iceberg. We may be picking a scab which covers a very ugly and grotesque wound. We may not like what we see when 'Disclosure' fully occurs. I'm thinking that we may have to become very unhappy and disillusioned before we can really begin to build a better world and solar system. Keep digging...but don't be surprised if you don't like what you find. Abandon all hope ye who enter Avalon. Just kidding...or am I?

    What if Earth (and the Solar System) was colonized millions of years ago by Humans (rather than having evolved here on Earth, at least)...who brought all of the fancy technology with them (including antigravity, nuclear weapons, holographic, free energy, etc). Could we Earth Humans really be Humans from Sirius? Sirius is the All Seeing Eye at the Top of the Pyramid. Sirius is at the center of EVERYTHING.

    What if we Humans can exist both physically and spiritually...and simply get recycled here on Earth (and the Solar System)? What if a faction of Humans hoarded the technology, dumbed the rest of the Humans down genetically and educationally. What if all of the religions are manmade? What if all of the alien races are either made up...or have been genetically created by Humans? What if a faction of Human Beings is behind all of this? Could this be Gizeh (Giza) Intelligence? I've asked this sort of thing before...and I live in perpetual uncertainty. This uncertainty is taking a toll. I'm just asking at least some of you to think through what a completely Human Earth scenario would look like. Imagine being part of a faction of throughout the Solar System...and deceiving 99% of the other Humans. How would you pull it off...century after century? We have to consider all possibilities...don't we?

    I know Humans exist. I know Spirits exist. I know UFO's are real. I know we are in HUGE trouble. Beyond that...I don't really know a damn thing. I'm getting everything second, third, fourth, and fifth hand. Many of us have open minds regarding Aliens, UFO's, time-travel, etc, etc...but what about being open-minded about the possibility that all of this phenomenon is Human? Could the supposed Roswell future Humans really be the elite underground Humans called Giza Intelligence? Bill Cooper was perplexed by the 'Alien Presence' and wondered if it could be a completely homegrown phenomenon.

    I just noticed the view-count of this thread. It's over 3,000...yet there aren't very many comments. What's going on here? Somebody help me out here. I'm feeling very small, stupid, and helpless. I'm in way over my head thinking about this stuff. I need to stop. Could the superimposed parallel universes simply be 1. The elite members of Giza Intelligence (1% of the Human Race?). 2. The rest of us peons (99% of the Human Race?). Who knows? Oh...I forgot...the Shadow Government knows. Gotta go. Someone's pounding on my front-door...

    A special note to Gizeh Intelligence: If what I have said in the previous post is correct...all I ask at this that all extermination and enslavement scenarios be conclusively terminated. Just join the rest of the human race. I request that all factions throughout the solar system reconcile and join together under the authority of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. This sad chapter of universal history can have a happy ending...and a new beginning. Namaste.

    I'm feeling really close to the truth...yet really far away. I'm thinking that Sirius is at the center of everything...yet I'm not sure exactly how. Could it be that the God of This World is a Draconian-possessed androgynous black human alien from Sirius who heads Giza Intelligence, the Secret Space Program, and the Deep Underground Military Bases...and who is the real Black Pope? Could the Ark of the Covenant be the UFO which brought us here from Sirius along with technology obtained from Draconian-demons in exchange for allowing the Draconians to possess the elite-humans? Is this solar system really part of the Siran solar system? Is our sun really Sirius C? Is the ancient depiction of three suns really Sirius A, Sirius B, and Sirius C? Are the tall greys from Sirius, really just human beings? Did we all come from Sirius? Is there a stargate between this solar system and Sirius? Is all of the cr@p we have been in for millions of years really a Sirian civil war? Are we all different factions of Sirians? Would my pet project of The United States of the Solar System really have to apply to Sirius as well? Is Sirius the All Seeing Eye at the top of the pyramid? Is Sunday really Sun God Day? Is this sun really Sirius? Is the Roman Catholic Church all about Sirius? Are the Masons all about Sirius? Are the occultists all about Sirius? Is the layout of Washington D.C. all about Sirius? Is the Sirian Theocratic System really the Universal Church aka The Holy Roman Empire aka the New World Order?

    How answerest thou...SaLuSa?

    I tend to agree TRANCOSO. I just wonder if it's possible to remove the Draco part of the unholy trinity you mentioned? Are the Draconians really demons who are usually invisible...but who can manifest themselves in reptilian/grey form? Are the Sirians we are dealing with really human beings? When the Vatican referred to extraterrestrials as our brothers...perhaps they meant this literally. Are the Nazis, Masons, Vatican, City of London...and most of the people we love to hate...really pawns? Would an exorcism of the Sirius system as well as our solar system be necessary to rid us of most of our problems? If so...what would make this possible? Is it even possible? Has a significant faction of humanity been dealing with the devil? How expensive would this divorce be?

    I have no hatred in asking these questions. I'm treating this like a science fiction mystery novel. I realize that if even 5% of it is true that we are in very deep trouble. I'm thinking that Sirius A, B, and C need to be completely divorced from Draco...and that Sirius A, B, and C need to completely reconcile under the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights...and completely expose all of the dark secrets, horrific wars, and deals with the devil. I just want the BS to stop. Hope springs eternal. Conduit closing.

    I completely agree TRANCOSO. They have to use Secrecy and Deception to pull-off their agenda. That is Not a good sign. I think we have a chance to properly handle this BS...but that the window of opportunity is very small. The consequences of getting this wrong are enormous...I think. We seem to be like an abused spouse who believes the promise that it will be different this time. How many times do we have to get beat-up before we wake-up and get a cosmic divorce and a universal restraining order? If we keep going back for more...there is probably very little the benevolent forces throughout the universe can do for us.

    I keep wondering about the distinction between supposed 'native' reptilians and the alleged 'Draconian' reptilians. Perhaps the 'native' reptilians are not really a huge problem. They seem to be more physical than supernatural. Perhaps greys are a type of 'native' reptilian. I don't know. But it does seem that there are 'non-native' reptilians which seem to be more supernatural than physical. These Draconian reptilians seem to be very evil, smart, and dangerous. Perhaps these Draconians can manifest as reptilians or hijack the native reptilians (and greys?) to do their bidding...or at least blame them for all the trouble. The greys with two brains (one which is computerized?) seem to just be robots. Do the Draconians sometimes (or always?) possess these greys? The Draconians seem to need physicality. Why is this? Why do they possess people?

    We are told that we need to ascend beyond physicality. I don't buy this at all. We are also told that we will be taken to better places with spaceships and stargates. Are we sure we would really go to 'better' places? It sounds like they want our bodies and our planet. It sounds like they want to rule over us as Gods. I want to keep my body. I want to keep my planet. I want Constitutional Responsible Freedom. I want the Draconians to go to hell...and leave us alone.

    Giza Intelligence is supposedly connected with Aldebaran...but I am considering the possibility that they are connected with Sirius. I haven't decided if they are with the Draconians...or against them. It sounds like they are with them...and even possessed by them. I really don't know. It just sounds like our solar system and the Sirian solar system are linked...and that we are dealing with a human phenomenon(Sirian humans and Earth humans)...with the exception of the Draconians...and perhaps some native reptilians and greys(native to both Sirius and Earth). Again...I don't know. Help somebody.

    I'm simply suspecting huge doses of BS everywhere...especially from ET's who are oh so superior to us stupid mortals...and are here to help us abducting us, experimenting on us, terrorizing us, and dictating to us...whether we like it or not. BS!!!!!

    !!!!!!!!!!!! BETTER DEAD THAN REP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SOLAR SYSTEM EXORCISM!!!!!!!!!!!

    Here is something of interest regarding Aldebaran from Wikipedia: Notice especially the section on the Gnostic Neo-Nazis.

    Ancient cultures
    The name Aldebaran comes from the Arabic (الدبران al-dabarān) meaning "the follower" and refers to the way the star follows the Pleiades star cluster in its nightly journey across the sky. In Persia it was known as Sadvis and Kugard.[7] The Romans called it Palilicium, and it is known as 畢宿五 (Bìxiùwŭ, the Fifth Star of the Net) in Chinese. Aldebaran is identified as the lunar mansion Rohini in Hindu astronomy and as one of the twenty-seven daughters of Daksha and the wife of the god Chandra.

    Gnostic Neo-Nazis
    An esoteric neo-Nazi sect headquartered in Vienna, Austria called the Tempelhofgesellschaft, founded in the early 1990s, teaches a form of Gnosticism called Marcionism[citation needed]. They distribute pamphlets claiming that the Aryan race originally came to Atlantis from the star Aldebaran (this information is supposedly based on "ancient Sumerian manuscripts"). They maintain that the Aryans from Aldebaran derive their power from the vril energy of the Black Sun. They teach that since the Aryan race is of extraterrestrial origin it has a divine mission to dominate all the other races. It is believed by adherents of this religion that an enormous space fleet is on its way to Earth from Aldebaran which, when it arrives, will join forces with the Nazi Flying Saucers from Antarctica to establish the Western Imperium. [8]

    Inuit culture
    In Inuit astronomy, Aldebaran is called "Spirit of a Polar Bear".

    Italian witchcraft
    In the religion of Stregheria, Aldebaran is a fallen angel and quarter guardian of the eastern gate.

    Aldebaran is referred to in Edmund Spenser's The Faerie Queene (1590), book one, canto three, stanza 16:

    Now when Aldeboran was mounted hye
    Aboue the shinie Cassiopeia chaire (I.III.16.1-2)
    In American horror writer H. P. Lovecraft's Cthulhu Mythos, Hastur resides in the Hyades cluster, and is signified by Aldebaran being above the horizon. When Aldebaran is visible, Hastur's eye is said to be upon all it oversees.

    Mexican culture
    For the Seris of northwestern Mexico, this star is providing light for the seven women giving birth (Pleiades). It has three different names: Hant Caalajc Ipápjö, Queeto, and Azoj Yeen oo Caap ("star that goes ahead"). The lunar month corresponding to October is called Queeto yaao "Aldebaran's path".[9]

    Native American culture
    For the Dakotas (a branch of the Native American Sioux tribe), Aldebaran took on a heroic aspect. The young star was the child of the sun and the lady Blue Star. One day, he desired to hunt the white buffalo (the Pleiades). After he pulled up a sapling to make a spear, a hole was made in the ground and he could see all the people of Earth down below. The white buffalo took this chance to push him through. He was found by an old woman and was to be known as Old Woman's Grandson. On Earth, he killed many strange monsters that had been troubling the Native Americans; one monster of which was a serpent that caused drought. The young hero killed the serpent, releasing a great stream of water that became the Mississippi River. In time, Old Woman's Grandson remembered the white buffalo and returned to hunting him in the sky to fulfill his destiny.

    Reference to Aldebaran appears in the The Rolling Stones song "2000 light years from home" from the 1967 psychedelic rock album Their Satanic Majesties Request. The Welsh-born Dark Ambient musician Brian Williams (Lustmord) has a track entitled Aldebaran of the Hyades on his 1994 album The Place where the Black Stars Hang. Enya included a song named Alderbaran on her first album, Enya (later re-released as The Celts). Austrian musician B. Fleischmann includes a song called "Aldebaran Waltz" in his 2006 album, The Humbucking Coil.

    Aldebaran is also the title of a song by Essra Mohawk, and is included on her album "Revelations Of The Secret Diva".

    Thank-you no caste. I did see the other post. What if what we are really dealing with is Draconian Demon Possessed or Controlled Humans vs Pleiadian Angelic Assisted Humans? What if all of the physical ET's who are here are really Human Beings? Would this violate the non-intervention rule? Are native Reptilians and Greys being forced to do the bidding of the Draconians? Are the Greys who are doing the abductions, etc...really clones, robots, or PLF's? Will the native Reptilians and Greys be used as scapegoats by the Draconian Cabal?

    I'm presently seeing Draco > Aldebaran > Sirius B > Earth (Giza Intelligence, Vatican, Nazis, Masons, Illuminati, Occultists, City of London, United Nations, Washington D.C., Deep Underground Military Bases, Secret Space Program) = Military/Industrial/Financial/Draconian Theocracy. This is not exactly a happy-go-lucky, live and let live, group of humans and extraterrestrials (in spirit form?) say the least! I suspect that this is where all the drug money...war blood money...bankster bail-out money...missing trillions from the defense budget, etc...really goes. Negative Karma to the nth degree is being generated daily. Judgement Day will not be pretty or pleasant. Crime does not pay on Judgement Day. Getting nervous guys? It won't be long now. The Horror.

    The fun never ends...does it?

    That figure at the 1984 Olympics looks like one of our Draconian Masters...looking down on us stupid a Gargoyle on a Cathedral.

    Here is something relevant to this thread that I posted on another thread:

    The Aldebarans are supposedly renegade Pleiadians. Did they thumb their noses at the Pleiadian Powers That Be...and make deals with the Devil aka obtain Technology and Spiritual Power? Was the Pleiades really Heaven? Was the Person In Charge really God. Was Lucifer a Pleiadian who tried to get a better deal by dealing with the Dracs? Did this result in the famous War in Heaven? Did Lucifer drag one third of the Pleiadians to Aldebaran...then to Sirius...and finally to Earth? Are we all Fallen Angels? Is this why Lucifer is the God of This World? Some say Lucifer is no more...but I doubt this. Is Aldebaran still renegade Pleiadian presently? Is Sirius A and Arcturus completely unfallen Pleiadian presently? Is Sirius B and Earth in Sirius trouble? Is a final battle brewing to settle this thing once and for all? the whole Universe under Draconian control...including the Pleiades? Did the God in the Pleiades keep this a secret to make a bad situation seem like Heaven? Did Lucifer smell a rat...and try to fight fire with fire...hoping to get technology and spirituality from the Dracs...and then turn on them? Could the final phase of this be happening presently? Is that what's brewing? Is this 'The Great Work'? Are Sirius B and Earth engaged in a rebellion against the Dracs which must be crushed? Will the Empire strike back? Does Sirius B and our Sun contain Planets in Rebellion? Do they threaten the Draconian Universal Church Theocracy? Did Lucifer mean well...but did he or she bite off more than they could chew...and go insane? I keep thinking that Lucifer is like Colonel Kurz in 'Apocalypse Now'. If Constitutional Responsible Freedom really catches fire...will this be the end of Draconian Universal Domination? I really and truly don't know. All of the above could be complete BS. I don't know who the good-guys and who the bad-guys are anymore. Do you?

    Take another look at the details of my previous couple of posts. If the whole universe was Drac-controlled...and this was being hidden from you...but you figured it out. How would you fight the tyranny being effected through your beloved leader? Would you confront your leader publicly while privately dealing with the Dracs to try to get their technology and spirituality? You'd end up fighting both your beloved leader and his loyal (and clueless?) when you double-crossed the'd have to fight them as well. Did Lucifer and his(her?) followers get kicked out of Heaven...and then get involved in a horrific fight with the Dracs? Was this the 600,000 year Gaian-Orion War? Supposedly no one won...they just stopped killing each other. Did a sort of 'cold-war' follow? Is this the situation we find ourselves in presently? Is this why everything is so $crewed-up? Is the New World Order a Draconian attempt to completely regain domination over humanity? Is this how much trouble we are really in...or is it much worse? I suspect that it is. Is Lucifer insane because of the hopelessness of the situation? Are all of us Renegade Pleiadians?

    I continue to believe that Constitutional Responsible Freedom would be in everyone's best interest...including the Pleiadians and Dracs. The God thing really doesn't work. I suspect that Lucifer found this out the hard way. Humanity is waking up to this very harsh reality as well. If what I am thinking is true...the Pleiadian God was wrong. Lucifer was wrong. And the Draconians were (and are) wrong. Two new commandments I give unto all of you: I. Thou Shalt Have No Gods. Period. II. Thou Shalt Not Be An @sshole. Period. I really don't want to fight with the Dracs. I can't believe that there is no possibility of them warming to the idea of Responsible Freedom. I don't know what made them so mean...but perhaps there is a legitimate reason. Regardless...why not base the Universe on the best principles...rather than on brute-force? Why is this so hard? Lord Draco...we need to talk. Soon. In the're a warrior Lord you might like this video. But really...Lord Draco...isn't war and killing really, really stupid? Isn't this video insane? I think it is. We can do better than this...can't we Lord Draco? Here is a bit of a restatement of questions which I have previously asked:

    Are we really dealing with the following? Draconian-Pleiadian-Annunaki Theocracy vs Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom?? How would Giza Intelligence fit in with the above? Is Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom a grave threat to the Universal Church? Is Earth a Planet in Rebellion against the Draconian-Pleiadian-Annunaki Theocracy aka Universal Church? Will the Empire Strike Back to crush this rebellion? Does might trump right? We might not have to wait long to find out. Something seems to be brewing. Hmmmmmm.

    I continue to be mystified by the 4,000+ views of this thread...combined with very few comments (other than my own). Does this indicate that Giza Intelligence is key to all of the mysteries we discuss on this site? I just want all of us to get informed about who we really are...and what's really going on...without becoming angry or going crazy. Obviously...I want a sovereign and free humanity...especially in this solar system. I certainly hope this is a possible possibility. I'm leaning toward a hypothesis that the original creation is a mystery...which is probably a combination of evolution and intelligent design. I see evidence of this everywhere. What I don't see is an All Powerful, All Knowing, All Loving, and All Present Creator God of the Universe running this solar system. I'm seeing something quite sinister. I don't think the Annunaki, Pleiadians, or Dracs created us. They may have done some genetic engineering (mostly dumbing us down to control us).

    I'm seeing a cabal of Annunaki, Pleiadians, and Dracs playing god. Could this have been what Lucifer rebelled against in the Pleiades? Did war in heaven result? Did Lucifer and a third of the Pleiadians get kicked out of heaven? Did Lucifer then try to play god in Aldebaran with a third of the angels? Did this apostasy spread to Sirius and Earth...among other places? Are we all part of the third of the angels? Did Lucifer try to fight a wrong with a wrong? We know that two wrongs don't make a right. Did Lucifer go insane? Is the whole concept of theocracy the real root problem? Should the Ten Commandments be replaced by the Two Commandments?

    I. Thou Shalt Have No Gods.
    II. Thou Shalt Not Be An @$$hole.

    I think so.

    I really don't wish to demonize or destroy anyone. I just want the bs to stop.

    Here is a comment which I posted on another thread which is relevant to this thread:

    I have a fascination regarding cathedrals and pipe-organs. The whole temple and worship concept goes way back into antiquity. Lucifer was supposedly the chief musician in 'heaven'. If 'heaven' is really the Pleiades...perhaps there were cathedrals and pipe organs in the Pleiades...and Lucifer brought the whole theological concept...including temples, cathedrals, pipe-organs, and worship...from the Pleiades to Aldebaran...then to Sirius...and finally to Earth. As below. I guess I'm seeing two rival 'gods' leading a civil war. Are the Annunaki and Dracs mercenary interdimensional warriors and laborers? Was the Pleiadian 'god' instrumental in the destruction of Atlantis? Did the Luciferian 'god' take the Atlantian civilization underground? Is this Giza Intelligence? Are there underground mansions, cathedrals, libraries, and museums...combined with military bases and stargate temples? Does Lucifer (or equivalent) possess the ability to end most life on Earth through 'Earth Changes'? Is alien technology really ancient Pleiadian technology? I'm beginning to think so. The exact composition and motivations of the various secret factions are obviously unknown. My guess is that there may be three major factions...two theocratic (one Pleiadian and one Aldebaran Luciferian)...and one namaste constitutional responsible freedom faction.

    Hitler may very well have been a regular visitor to this underground or inner Earth realm. This may also be true for the Popes. I don't know. This is all just wild speculation. But studying the Nazi phenomenon may be the real window into what is going on.

    When Henry Kissenger was learning about the 'alien presence' he worked night and day...and wouldn't communicate with anyone...not even his wife. What he was learning must have been devastating. It couldn't have been good. Notice that certain key people, such as Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski (both Jason Scholar study directors)...who presumably know the complete story...quietly direct the Presidents...administration after administration. The Presidents presumably do not know the complete story...with the possible exception of George H.W. Bush.

    Once again...I just want the secrecy to end...I want all hard core regressive beings (human and non-human) to leave this solar system...and I want the solar system to be based upon namaste constitutional responsible freedom. That should correct most of the major ills...regardless of who is presently running things or which et's are good or bad. If this works...other star systems might try doing this as well. Is this too much to ask?


    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:32 pm

    Here is a real tear-jerking video from 1975. I'm not going to tell you anything about it. I don't wish to spoil it for you. I continue to identify most closely with Christianity -- yet I am highly unorthodox and non-practicing (or something like that). I know that a lot of non-members visit this forum, and view this thread -- yet remain completely silent -- day after day -- week after week -- month after month -- year after year. Don't claim ignorance. Don't say that nobody told you. I KNOW that you know better. Onward Christian Lawyers!! You know what I'm talking about -- don't you??!! I'm both a friend and enemy of Roman Catholicism (which probably makes me an enemy in their view) -- yet I certainly don't relish the thought of Trench-Warfare with the Jesuit-General!!! That could get ugly!!! But Siriusly -- Does Reality Require an Iron-Lady at the Center of Roman Catholicism??? I might get crucified for saying this -- but I think the Right-Iron-Lady Should be at the Center of Roman Catholicism. A Highly-Righteous -- Highly-Ethical -- Very-Tough -- Very-Decisive -- Traditional yet Progressive Iron-Lady. This is just a conceptual exercise -- without inside knowledge or specifics. I continue to imagine Gabriel and Lucifer sitting in the Pilot and Co-Pilot Thrones -- with Michael in the Dungeon of a Deep-Underground Reptilian-Monastery (or something like that)!! What Would Malachi Martin Say?? What Would Eric Jon Phelps Say?? What Would Charles Chiniquy Say?? Perhaps I should write my memoirs (as recently suggested to me) -- and call it Fifty Years as a Completely Ignorant Fool. I should stop -- before someone starts pounding on my door!! Malachi Martin appeals to me because he was conservative, intelligent, articulate, and outspoken. I don't have enough background to know how accurate he was in his books and interviews -- but a Roman Catholic Priest told me that The Jesuits was quite accurate (as verified by a Jesuit). Please remember that this thread is mostly speculative, fictional, and investigative. I am NOT an authority on anything. I really am a completely ignorant fool. Guilty as charged. Anyway, consider Malachi Martin.

    Malachi Brendan Martin (July 23, 1921 – July 27, 1999) was an Irish Catholic priest and writer on the Catholic Church. Originally ordained as a Jesuit priest, he became Professor of Palaeontology at the Vatican's Pontifical Biblical Institute, and from 1958 Martin also served as a theological adviser to Cardinal Augustin Bea during preparations for the Second Vatican Council.[1] Disillusioned by reforms he renounced his vows in 1964 and moved to New York. His 17 novels and non-fiction books were frequently critical of the Catholic Church, which he believed had failed to act on the third prophecy supposedly revealed by the Virgin Mary at Fatima.[2] Among his most significant works were The Scribal Character Of The Dead Sea Scrolls (1958) and Hostage To The Devil (1976) which dealt with satanism, demonic possession, and exorcism.[1] The Final Conclave (1978) was a warning against alleged Soviet spies in the Vatican.

    Martin was born prematurely in the village of Ballylongford, County Kerry, Ireland to a middle-class family[3] in which the children were raised speaking Irish at the dinner table and Catholic belief and practice were central—his three brothers also became priests, two of them academics.[4] He received his secondary education at Belvedere College in Dublin, and became a Jesuit novice on September 6, 1939, at the age of eighteen. Due to the Second World War and the inherent risks involved with travel during this time, Martin remained in Ireland and studied at the National University of Ireland where he received a bachelor's degree in Semitic languages and oriental studies while carrying out concurrent study in Assyriology at Trinity College, Dublin.[4]

    Upon completion of his degree in Dublin, Martin was sent to the Catholic University of Louvain in Belgium to continue his education. During the four year stay in Leuven he completed masters degrees in philosophy and theology and doctorates in Semitic languages, archeology and Oriental history. On August 15, 1954, the Feast of the Assumption, Martin was ordained a Jesuit priest at the age of thirty-three.[4]

    Martin started postgraduate studies at both the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and at Oxford University, specializing in intertestamentary studies and knowledge of Jesus Christ and of Hebrew and Arabic manuscripts. He undertook additional study in rational psychology, experimental psychology, physics and anthropology.[5]

    Martin took part in the research of the Dead Sea Scrolls and published twenty four articles on Semitic paleography in various journals.[6][7] He did archeological research and worked extensively on the Byblos syllabary in Byblos,[8] in Tyre,[9] both in Lebanon, and in the Sinai Peninsula. Martin assisted in his first exorcism while staying in Egypt for archeological research. It was upon a Muslim.[4] He published a work in two volumes, The Scribal Character of the Dead Sea Scrolls, in 1958.[10]

    He was summoned to Rome to work at the Holy See as a private secretary for Cardinal Augustin Bea S.J. from 1958 until 1964. This brought him into contact with Pope John XXIII. His years in Rome coincided with the start of the Second Vatican Council (1962–65), all of which sessions he attended[4] and which was to transform the Catholic Church in a way that the initially-liberal Martin began to find distressing.[3] He became friends with Msgr. George Higgins and Fr. John Courtney Murray S.J.[3]

    While in Rome, he became a professor at the Pontifical Biblical Institute of the Vatican, where he taught Aramaic, paleography, Hebrew and Sacred Scripture.[4] He during that time also taught theology, part-time, at Loyola University of Chicago's John Felice Rome Center.[3] During that period his living quarters were in the Vatican, outside the papal quarters of John XXIII.[4] He worked for the Orthodox Churches and ancient Oriental Churches division of the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity under Cardinal Bea, as a translator. As a result of this, Martin became well acquainted with prominent Jewish leaders, such as Rabbi Abraham Heschel, during 1961 and 1962.[11] Martin also accompanied Paul VI in his pilgrimage to the Holy Land in January 1964.[12] Martin resigned his position at the Pontifical Institute in June 1964.[3]

    Disillusioned by the reforms taking place among the Jesuits, the Church's largest male religious order,[citation needed] Martin requested special dispensation in February 1965.[3] He received a provisional release in May 1965[3] and a definite release from his vows of poverty and obedience on June 30, 1965,[3] after 25 years as a Jesuit religious, and left Rome suddenly in July.[13] He was not released from his vow of chastity and remained an ordained but secular priest. Paul VI gave him a general commission for exercising an apostolate in the media and communications.[4]

    He moved permanently to New York City in 1966, where he first had to work as a dishwasher, a waiter and taxi driver[3] before being able to make his living by writing.[4] He co-founded an antiques firm and was active in communications and media for the rest of his life.[5]

    After his arrival in New York, Cardinal Terence Cooke gave him written permission to exercise his secular priestly faculties.

    In 1964, Martin, under the pseudonym Michael Serafian, wrote The Pilgrim: Pope Paul VI, The Council and The Church in a time of decision, an apologia for the Jews, which, among other things, told the story of the Jewish question and the Second Vatican Council.

    In 1967, Martin received his first Guggenheim fellowship.[14] In 1969 he got his first breakthrough with his book The Encounter: Religion in Crisis as a result of his expertise in Judaism, Christianity and Islam and with which he won the Choice Book Award of the American Library Association.[15] Afterwards came other liberally oriented books like Three Popes and the Cardinal: The Church of Pius, John and Paul in its Encounter with Human History (1972) and Jesus Now: How Jesus has no Past, Will not come Again and in loving actions is Dissolving the Molds of Our Spent Society (1973).[citation needed] Martin became an American citizen in 1970.

    He received a second Guggenheim fellowship in 1969, which enabled him to write his first of four bestsellers,[16] Hostage to the Devil: The Possession and Exorcism of Five Living Americans. With this book, published in 1975, Martin references his experience as an exorcist.[citation needed] According to the book he assisted in several exorcisms. In 1996, he spoke of having performed thousands of minor exorcisms, and participated[4] in a few hundred major exorcisms during his lifetime.[17]

    During that decade, Martin also served as religion editor for National Review[18][19][20] from 1972 to 1978, when he was succeeded by Michael Novak. He was interviewed twice by William F. Buckley, Jr. for Firing Line on PBS.[21] He also was an editor for the Encyclopædia Britannica.[22] His literary agent was Lila Karpf.[23]

    Martin published several books in quick succession the following years: The Final Conclave (1978), King of Kings: a Novel of the Life of David (1980) and Vatican: A Novel (1986) were factional novels. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church (1981), The New Castle: Reaching for the Ultimate (1982), Rich Church, Poor Church: The Catholic Church and its Money (1984) and There is Still Love: Five Parables of God's Love That Will Change Your Life (1984) were non-fiction works.

    His bestselling[16] 1987 non-fiction book The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church was very critical of his previous ecclesiastical order. The book accused them of systematically undermining church teachings and replacing them with communist doctrines.[24]

    Psychiatrist M. Scott Peck, author of The Road Less Traveled and People of the Lie, developed a friendship with Martin and was strongly influenced by him in the development of his theories of evil and exorcism.[25]

    Belfast based Causeway Pictures ( are producing a feature documentary based on his works and writings, the project is titled "The Popes Exorcist" and is due for release in 2013.

    His book The Keys of This Blood: The Struggle for World Dominion between Pope John Paul II, Mikhail Gorbachev, and the Capitalist West was published in 1990 and was followed in 1996 by Windswept House: A Vatican Novel. Martin worked closely with the paranormal researchers Dave Considine and John Zaffis on several of their independent cases.[citation needed]

    Martin continued to offer daily the traditional Latin mass privately, and vigorously exercised his priestly ministry all the way up until his death. He was strongly supported by some traditional Catholic sources and severely criticized by other, less traditional sources, such as the National Catholic Reporter.[26][27][28]

    Martin served as a guest commentator for CNN during the live coverage of the pastoral visit of John Paul II to the United States October 4–8, 1995.

    He was a periodic guest on Art Bell's radio program, Coast to Coast AM, between 1995 and 1998 and a guest of Michael Corbin's radio program on Paranet Continuum radio.

    In the last three years of his life, Martin had forged a close friendship with the traditional Catholic philosopher, Fr. Rama Coomaraswamy.[29]

    In the final years before his death, Martin was received in a private audience by Pope John Paul II.[12] Afterwards, he started working on a book with the working title Primacy: How the Institutional Roman Catholic Church became a Creature of the New World Order.[13] This book which promised to be his most controversial and detailed work ever was never completed.[citation needed]

    Martin died of brain hemorrhage after a fall in his apartment in Manhattan, New York, in 1999.[12] His funeral wake took place in St. Anthony of Padua Roman Catholic Chapel of West Orange, New Jersey, before the burial within the Gate of Heaven Cemetery, in Hawthorne, New York.

    Martin produced numerous best-selling fictional and non-fictional literary works, which became widely read throughout the world. His fictional works gave detailed insider accounts of Church history during the reigns of Popes Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI (The Pilgrim, Three Popes and the Cardinal, Vatican: A Novel[16]), John Paul I (The Final Conclave[16]) and John Paul II (The Keys of This Blood, Windswept House).

    His non-fictional writings cover a range of Catholic topics, such as demonic exorcisms (Hostage to the Devil), satanism, Liberation Theology, the Second Vatican Council (The Pilgrim), the Tridentine liturgy, Catholic dogma, modernism (Three Popes and the Cardinal; The Jesuits), the financial history of the Church (Rich Church, Poor Church; The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church), the New World Order and the geopolitical importance of the Pope (The Keys of This Blood).

    His books, both fictional and non-fictional, frequently present a dark view of the present state of the world, exposing dark spirits, conspiracy, betrayal, heresy, widespread sexual perversion, self-advancement, and demonic possession, each being asserted as rife throughout the Catholic Church, from its lowest levels up to its highest.

    He spoke and wrote often about the three secrets of Fatima and was an ardent supporter of Fr. Nicholas Gruner: "Father Gruner is fulfilling a desperately needed function in the ongoing perception of Mary's role in the salvation of our imperilled world. Father Gruner is absolutely correct that the consecration of Russia as—Our Lady desired, has not been executed".[30]

    Martin said concerning the three secrets of the Virgin Mary as Queen of Heaven in Fatima in 1917, she mandated the pope of 1960 to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart. The Russian orthodox church would then convert back. If the mandate were not followed, devastating war in the world and destruction inside the church (The Great Apostasy) would follow. He said that he stood outside the papal living quarters in 1960 whilst Pope John XXIII and Cardinal Bea and others were reading the document containing the third secret, and that, in order to assure Russian cooperation at the approaching Second Vatican Council, the Pope decided against the mandate. Later Paul VI and John Paul II also decided against it for various reasons.[4]

    He was an outspoken opponent of the alleged apparitions of the Virgin Mary at Bayside in the United States[12] and Međugorje in former Yugoslavia.[31] Martin regretted writing the foreword of The Thunder of Justice: The Warning, the Miracle, the Chastisement, the Era of Peace, a 1993 book by Ted and Maureen Flynn[32] defending, among others, the apparitions in Međugorje, stating that false pretences were used in obtaining his recommendation.[33] Concerning the Garabandal apparitions, he remained open-minded.[34]

    Martin believed the ordinations of several sedevacantist bishops by the former Archbishop of Huế, Vietnam, Pierre Martin Ngô Đình Thục, although not allowed, were sacramentally valid.[35]

    In March 1997 Martin said on Radio Liberty's Steel on Steel, hosted by John Loefller, that two popes were murdered during the Twentieth century:

    Pope Pius XI was murdered on the orders of Benito Mussolini, because of his 1931 encyclical, Non Abbiamo Bisogno, which was critical of the Italian fascist state.

    Pope John Paul I was murdered[35][36] according to Malachi's book, Vatican: A Novel, by Jean-Marie Villot, later the Cardinal Secretary of State under Pope Paul VI, under orders from the U.S.S.R..[15]

    Martin also partially gave credence to the Siri Thesis, saying that Cardinal Giuseppe Siri was twice elected pope in papal conclaves, but declined his election after being pressured by worldly forces acting through cardinals present at the conclaves. Martin called this the little brutality. On the one hand, Martin says that Siri was intimidated: on the other hand he says that Siri did indicate that his decision not to accept was made freely.[35][37]

    The first occasion, according to him, was the Papal conclave, 1963. Martin mentions the possibility of a nuclear threat which involved "the very existence of the Vatican state" during this conclave on pages 600 to 610 of his book The Keys of this Blood, which deals primarily with Siri and the 1963 conclave.

    The second time was the Papal conclave, October 1978. Martin said on Radio Liberty's programme Steel on Steel, hosted by John Loefller, in March 1997 that Siri received a written note after his initial election threatening him and his family with death should he accept.[36]

    Martin, who spoke many languages, was present at both conclaves as a translator.[citation needed]

    Martin claimed that Popes John XXIII and Paul VI were freemasons during a certain period and that photographs and other detailed documents proving this were in the possession of the Vatican State Secretariat.[35] He also allegorically mentioned these supposed facts in his 1986 novel Vatican: A Novel, where he related the masonic adherence of Popes Giovanni Angelica and Giovanni De Brescia.[15] He also said that Archbishop Annibale Bugnini C.M. was a freemason and that Agostino Casaroli, long-time Cardinal Secretary of State, was an atheist.[35]

    In his book The Jesuits, published in 1987, Martin claims to prove the existence of a diplomatic agreement between the Vatican and the U.S.S.R. called the Metz Accord. The Vatican allegedly promised a non condemnation of communism in exchange for participation of Russian-Orthodox prelates as observers at the Second Vatican Council.

    In his book The Final Conclave, published on 1 August 1978,[38] the month of the 1978 conclave that resulted in the 28 August election of Albino Luciani, Malachi Martin wrote of the unexpected election of a Cardinal Angelico, a figure that has been interpreted as corresponding to Luciani.[39]

    Martin stated that, along with diabolic possession, angelic possession also exists and that angels could have use of preternatural powers in certain circumstances.[4][17]

    Martin was convinced that the antichrist described in the Book of Revelation was a literal historical figure, and was alive in 1996.[17]

    There were three allegations made against Martin of having affairs with women:

    Martin was criticized most notably in the book Clerical Error: A True Story by Robert Blair Kaiser, Time Magazine's former Vatican correspondent. Kaiser, a former Jesuit, accused Martin of having carried on an extramarital affair with his wife during 1964 in Rome,[3] and claimed that Martin fled to the United States as a renegade from the priesthood. Throughout the book, Martin is presented as a liar and fantasist.[40] A friend of Martin's, William H. Kennedy, published an article in the journal Seattle Catholic to dispute Kaiser's allegation and other claims made about Martin after his death.[41] Kennedy points out that Kaiser admits in his book that he was diagnosed as having paranoid schizophrenia,[42] and cites passages from Kaiser's book which he believes show that Kaiser was writing from a distorted and delusional perspective due to his mental illness. With regard to being a renegade from the priesthood, evidence is cited that suggests that Martin received a special dispensation in order to become a writer, while retaining his status as a priest with limited faculties.[43][44]

    In her 2008 book Queen of the Oil Club: The Intrepid Wanda Jablonski and the Power of Information, Anna Rubino wrote that Martin had a love affair with oil journalist Wanda Jablonski on a visit to Beirut, Lebanon in the 1950s.[45] The book was published long after the deaths of both Jablonski (1992) and Martin (1999).

    In a book called Disguised as a Man: Malachi Martin and Me (2012) author Sally Hawthorne claims to have had a sexual affair with Martin. However, "Sally Hawthorne" is a pen name for an unknown person thus making her claims impossible to verify and consequently suspect.[citation needed]

    In 2004, Father Vincent O'Keefe S.J., former Vicar General of the Society of Jesus and a past President of Fordham University, stated that Martin had never been laicized. O'Keefe stated that Martin had been released as a religious from all his vows—poverty and obedience—save the vow of chastity.[46] Martin no longer was a Jesuit but remained a (secular) priest during the rest of his life.

    The Vatican, on the other hand, has a different view. In a letter from the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, the following is stated:

    "In 1965, Mr. Martin received a dispensation from all privileges and obligations deriving from his vows as a Jesuit and from priestly ordination." [Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, 25 June 1997, Prot. N. 04300/65].[47]

    According to the Vatican, it seems Martin was not only released from religious vows but also his vows from "priestly ordination" (which means laicisation).[48]

    It is claimed that attacks were mounted on Martin in retaliation for his book The Jesuits, which is hostile to the Jesuit order of which he had formerly been a member.[46] In the book, he accuses the Jesuits of deviating from their original character and mission by embracing Liberation Theology.[49]

    During a videotaped memorial entitled Malachi Martin Weeps For His Church, Rama Coomaraswamy, a sedevacantist cleric, claimed that Martin had told him that he had been secretly ordained a bishop during the reign of Pius XII in order to travel behind the Iron Curtain ordaining priests and bishops for the underground churches of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. Coomaraswamy died in 2006.[12][50][51][52]

    The book The Pilgrim: Pope Paul VI, The Council and The Church in a time of decision was written by Martin under the pseudonym Michael Serafian. This was confirmed by Martin himself and corroborated independently by Hans Küng.[53] Martin related that his choice of surname, Serafian, is due to meeting a carpet dealer in Jerusalem with that name, during the pilgrimage of Paul VI to the Holy Land in January 1964.[12]

    The anonymously-written book Complaints against God by One of His Creatures was not written by Martin but by Fr. Andrew Greeley, a liberal priest.[54]

    The pseudonym of Xavier Rynne, used to write more than 20 books on Vatican II, is not that of Martin but of Fr. Francis X. Murphy C.Ss.R..[55][56]

    The 1966 article Laures et ermitages du désert d'Egypte published in Mélanges de l'Université Saint-Joseph by the hand of "M. Martin" was written by Maurice Martin, and not Malachi Martin.[57]

    Journalist Joseph Roddy alleged—in a 1966 Look Magazine article about the debate on the Jewish question during the Second Vatican Council[58]—that one and the same person under three different pseudonyms had written or acted on behalf of Jewish interest groups, such as the American Jewish Committee, to influence the outcome of the debates. Roddy wrote that two timely and remunerated 1965 articles were penned under the pseudonym of F.E. Cartus, one for Harper's Magazine[59] and one for the American Jewish Committee’s influential intellectual periodical Commentary Magazine.[60][61] Roddy further stated that tidbits of information were leaked to the New York press that detailed Council failings vis a vis the Jews under the pseudonym of Pushkin. Roddy also stated that these two unidentified persons were one and the same person—a young cleric-turned-journalist and a Jesuit of Irish descent working for Cardinal Bea and who was active in the Biblical Institute—he figuratively named as Timothy O'Boyle-Fitzharris S.J. in order not to reveal the true identity of his source. Roddy also mentions The Pilgrim in a footnote to his article.

    In his 2007 book Spiritual Radical: Abraham Joshua Heschel in America, Edward K. Kaplan confirmed that Martin cooperated with the American Jewish Committee during the Council for a mixture of motives, both lofty and ignoble. He primarily advised the committee on theological issues, but he also provided logistical intelligence and copies of restricted documents. It is confirmed in the book that Martin used the pseudonyms Forest and Pushkin.[11] Kaplan further acknowledges that the kiss and tell book about the internal workings of the Council, The Pilgrim by Michael Serafian, was requested from Martin by Abraham J. Heschel, who also arranged the book to be published by Roger W. Straus, Jr.'s Farrar, Straus and Giroux printing company. It was published in the hope that it would influence the deliberations in the council.[11] Once that Martin's identity as author was revealed, it led to protests and the book had to be removed from circulation at considerable financial loss to the publisher. This led to the end of friendly relations between Martin and Heschel and Straus.[11] Kaplan lastly states that Malachi Martin was the primary source of information for Joseph Roddy in writing his 1966 article for Look Magazine, and that Fr. Timothy O'Boyle-Fitzharris S.J. was in fact Martin. Kaplan judges the Roddy article as dangerously misleading because of the credence it gives to the claim that without organised Jewish pressure the council declaration on the Jews would not have been accepted.[11]

    Martin explicitly denied he was a spy, along with denying other rumors. Michael Cuneo, in his book American Exorcism writes that, "Martin told me that he was perplexed, and more than a little annoyed, by the swirl of rumors surrounding his personal life." He quotes Martin as saying:

    Look, I've had three heart operations, recently open-heart surgery, and I'm at the point where I'd like to put some of these stories to rest," he said. "I've been accused of everything; speculation on my life is a veritable cottage industry. I'm a lecher, a wife-stealer, and a spy; I'm secretly married with children; I've sexually abused little girls— it's all nothing but fancy.[3]

    Rumors appearing on various Catholic or sedevacantist websites[62] and magazines[63] alleged that Malachi Martin had Jewish ancestry on account of ancestral descent from Iberian Jews migrating to Ireland and Great Britain in the 15th century, and alleged him being an Israeli spy[4] because of his first name, Malachi, after a Hebrew prophet and his extensive travels in the Levant. These allegations were rebutted by William H. Kennedy in his article In Defense of Father Malachi Martin.[64] After having made genealogical inquiries with surviving relatives of Martin in Ireland, Kennedy concluded that Martin's father was an Englishman who moved to Ireland and his mother was fully Irish. Fr. Rama Coomasrawamy confirmed this independently.[12] The Irish language name Maelsechlainn is usually anglicised as Malachy.

    Claims that Martin features as a curial monsignor in full regalia on a prominent photograph next to Pope John Paul I and his assistant Diego Lorenzi appeared on the Internet.[65] The photograph, published in David Yallop's In God's Name: An Investigation into the Murder of Pope John Paul I as number 28 between pages 120 and 121, shows a 'Monsignor Martin', visibly different from Malachi Martin.[66] This is a case of mistaken identity. The cleric in the photograph was Jacques-Paul Martin, Prefect of the Casa Pontificia between 1969–86.[67][68]


    The Scribal Character of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Vol. 1, Bibliothèque du Muséon 44, Publications Universitaires, Louvain, 1958
    The Scribal Character of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Vol. 2, Bibliothèque du Muséon 45, Publications Universitaires, Louvain, 1958
    The Pilgrim: Pope Paul VI, The Council and The Church in a time of decision, Farrar, Straus, New York, 1964 (written under the pseudonym of Michael Serafian)
    The Encounter: Religion in Crisis, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York, 1969 ISBN 0-374-14816-3 (in collaboration with Henry Allen Moe)
    Three Popes and the Cardinal: The Church of Pius, John and Paul in its Encounter with Human History, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York, 1972 ISBN 0-374-27675-7
    Jesus Now: How Jesus has no Past, Will not come Again and in loving actions is Dissolving the Molds of Our Spent Society, E. P. Dutton, New York, 1973 ISBN 0-525-13675-4
    Hostage to the Devil: The Possession and Exorcism of Five Living Americans, 1st edition, Readers Digest, New York, 1976 ISBN 0-06-065337-X; 2nd edition with a new preface by the author, HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco, 1992 ISBN 0-06-065337-X
    The Final Conclave, Stein and Day Publishers, New York, 1978 ISBN 0-8128-2434-2
    King of Kings: a Novel of the Life of David, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1980 ISBN 0-671-24707-7
    The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church, G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1981 ISBN 0-399-12665-1
    The New Castle: Reaching for the Ultimate, E.P. Dutton, New York, 1984 ISBN 0-525-16553-3
    Rich Church, Poor Church: The Catholic Church and its Money, G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1984 ISBN 0-399-12906-5
    There is Still Love: Five Parables of God's Love That Will Change Your Life, Macmillan, New York, 1984 ISBN 0-02-580440-5
    Vatican: A Novel, Harper & Row, New York, 1986 ISBN 0-06-015478-0
    The Marian Year of His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, Saint Paul, Remnant Press, 1987
    The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1987 ISBN 0-671-54505-1
    God's Chosen People: The Relationship between Christian and Jews, Remnant Press, Saint Paul, 1988
    Apostasy Within: The Demonic in the (Catholic) American Church, Christopher Publishing House, Hanover, 1989 ISBN 0-8158-0447-4 (in collaboration with Paul Trinchard S.T.D.)
    The Keys of This Blood: The Struggle for World Dominion between Pope John Paul II, Mikhail Gorbachev, and the Capitalist West, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1990 ISBN 0-671-69174-0
    The Thunder of Justice: The Warning, the Miracle, the Chastisement, the Era of Peace, MaxKol Communications, Sterling, 1993 ISBN 0-9634307-0-X (in collaboration with Ted Flynn and Maureen Flynn)
    Windswept House: A Vatican Novel, Doubleday, New York, 1996 ISBN 0-385-48408-9
    In the Murky Waters of Vatican II, MAETA, Metairie, 1997 ISBN 1-889168-06-8 (in collaboration with Atila Sinke Guimarães)
    Fatima Priest: The Story of Father Nicolas Grüner, Gods Counsel Publishing, Pound Ridge, 1997 ISBN 0-9663046-2-4 (in collaboration with Francis Alban and Christopher A. Ferrara)

    Revision and reclassification of the Proto-Byblian signs, in Acta Orientalia, No. 31, 1962
    The Balu'a Stele: A New Transcription with Paleographic and Historical Notes, Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, 1964, 8–9 (in collaboration with Ward William)
    The Dialogue is Over, in Worldview Magazine, Vol. 17 No. 1 Jewish Christian Ceasefire, Council on Religion and International Affairs, New York, January 1974 OCLC 5856776 (in collaboration with James A. Rudin and David R. Hunter) [1]
    The Scientist as Shaman, in Harper's Magazine, Vol. 244 No. 1462, March 1972 [2]
    Death at Sunset, in National Review, November 22, 1974
    The Scientist as Shaman, in Clarke, Robin, Notes for the future: an alternative history of the past decade, Universe Books, New York, 1975 ISBN 0-87663-929-5
    On Toying with Desecration, in National Review, October 10, 1975
    On Human Love, in National Review, September 2, 1977
    Test-Tube Morality, in National Review, October 13, 1978
    Footsteps of Abraham, in The New York Times, March 13, 1983 [3]

    Related books and articles
    Nicholas Hagger's The Secret History of the West and The Syndicate
    Kennedy, William H. (2004). Lucifer's lodge : satanic ritual abuse in the Catholic Church (1st ed.). Hillsdale, NY: Sophia Perennis. ISBN 978-0-900588-06-8.
    Luigi Marinelli's Shroud of Secrecy: The Story of Corruption Within the Vatican
    I Millenari's Fumo di Satana in Vaticano
    Charles Upton's The System of Antichrist
    Ralph M. Wiltgen's The Rhine Flows into the Tiber

    See also
    List of Jesuits
    Franz König
    Alfred Kunz
    Marcel Lefebvre
    Emmanuel Milingo
    Leo Joseph Suenens
    Rama Coomaraswamy


    1.^ a b Galati, Eric (10 August 1999). "Malachi Martin". The Guardian (London). Retrieved 4 October 2012.
    2.^ The Independent, 6 August 1999
    3.^ a b c d e f g h i j k Cuneo, Michael W., American Exorcism: Expelling Demons in the Land of Plenty, Doubleday, New York, 2001 ISBN 0-385-50176-5
    4.^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m Doran, Brian (2001). Malachi Martin: God's Messenger - In the Words of Those Who Knew Him Best (cassette). Monrovia: Catholic Treasures. ISBN 1-885692-08-0
    5.^ a b Corley, Felix, "Obituary: Malachi Martin", The Independent, August 6, 1999.
    6.^ Martin, Malachi, Revision and reclassification of the Proto-Byblian signs, Acta Orientalia, 31, 1962
    7.^ Ward, William and Martin, Malachi, The Balu'a Stele: A New Transcription with Paleographic and Historical Notes, Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, 1964, 8–9
    8.^ Martin, Malachi, Laures et ermitages du désert d'Egypte, Imprimerie Catholique, Beyrouth, 1966 OCLC 418237964
    9.^ Martin, Malachi King of Kings: a Novel of the Life of David, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1980 ISBN 0-671-24707-7
    10.^ Martin, Malachi, The Scribal Character of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 2 volumes, Bibliothèque du Muséon 4445, Publications Universitaires, Louvain, 1958
    11.^ a b c d e Kaplan, Edward R., Spiritual Radical: Abraham Joshua Heschel in America 1940-1972, Yale University Press, New Haven, 2007 ISBN 0-300-11540-7
    12.^ a b c d e f g Coomaraswamy, Rama, Malachi Martin Weeps For His Church, Catholic Counterpoint, Broomall, 1999 OCLC 54977738
    13.^ a b Dougherty, Jon E., Malachi Martin: Dispelling the Myths, WorldNetDaily, August 2, 1999
    14.^ Martin, Malachi, The Encounter: Religion in Crisis, The Dial Press, New York, 1983 ISBN 0-385-27904-3
    15.^ a b c Martin, Malachi, Vatican: A Novel, Harper & Row Publishers, New York, 1986 ISBN 0-06-015478-0
    16.^ a b c d New York Times Bestseller List
    17.^ a b c Bell, Art, Interview with Malachi Martin, Coast to Coast AM, October 18, 1996
    18.^ Martin, Malachi, On Human Love, National Review, September 2, 1977
    19.^ Martin, Malachi, On Toying with Desecration, National Review, October 10, 1975
    20.^ Martin, Malachi, Death at Sunset, National Review, November 22, 1974
    21.^ Buckley, William F. Jr., The Jesus Movement: Interview with Malachi Martin, Firing Line, PBS, December 23, 1973
    22.^ Martin, Malachi, There is Still Love: Five Parables of God's Love That Will Change Your Life, Macmillan, New York, 1984, ISBN 0-02-580440-5
    23.^ Lila Karpf Literary Management
    24.^ Martin, Malachi, The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1987 ISBN 0-671-54505-1
    25.^ Jones, Arthur. (2007). The Road He Travelled: The Revealing Biography of M. Scott Peck. Rider.
    26.^ Woodward, Kenneth L., Looking for sanctity in all the wrong places, National Catholic Reporter, 8 October 2004
    27.^ Editiorial, Right and righteous who run with Ralph Reed, National Catholic Reporter, 27 December 1996/3 January 1997
    28.^ Greeley, Andrew, Farrell’s Hugo would be a papal Gorbachev, National Catholic Reporter, 22 May 1998
    29.^ Galati, Eric, Malachi Martin: A renowned biblical scholar, he clashed with the hierarchy on the role of the Roman Catholic church, The Guardian, August 10 1999
    30.^ U.S. News & World Report, Plotting World Order in Rome. Vatican expert Malachi Martin tries to scope out papal succession, June 10, 1996
    32.^ Flynn, Ted and Flynn, Maureen, The Thunder of Justice: The Warning, the Miracle, the Chastisement, the Era of Peace, MaxKol Communications, Sterling, 1993 ISBN 0-9634307-0-X
    33.^ Sabalto, Rich, Mystery Cloaks Father Malachi Martin’s Death, Unity Publishing's Weekly Newsletter, ..., 1999
    34.^ Janzen, Bernard, The External War: Interview with Malachi Martin (1991), Toronto, Triumph Communications, 2004, ISBN 0-9732148-1-3
    35.^ a b c d e Les Amis du Christ-Roi, L'Eglise Eclipsée? Réalisation du complot maçonnique contre l'Eglise. Témoignage inédit du père Malachi Martin, présent en qualité d'intreprète aux derniers Conclaves., Editions Delacroix, Dinard, 1997 ISBN 2-9511087-0-2
    36.^ a b Loeffler, John, The Wisdom of Malachi Martin, Radio Liberty, Soquel, March 1997
    37.^ Derksen, Mario, Eclipse of the Church: 1958 and Beyond, part 2, Daily Catholic, Vol. 15 No. 186, November 18–20, 2004
    39.^ The Final Conclave, Stein and Day Publishers, New York, 1978 ISBN 0-8128-2434-2
    40.^ Jones, Arhur, A wicked priest and a shattered marriage, National Catholic Reporter, 8 March 2002
    41.^ Kennedy, William H., Occult History, 2008 pages 129–157
    42.^ Kaiser, Robert, Clerical Error: A True Story, Continuum, New York, 2002, ISBN 0-8264-1384-6, page 261
    43.^ Dougherty, Jon E., Catholic novelist Malachi Martin dies: Complications from stroke, fall cited, WorldNetDaily, July 29 1999
    44.^ Fr. Malachi Martin Again, Greenspun
    45.^ Rubino, Anna, Queen of the Oil Club: The Intrepid Wanda Jablonski and the Power of Information, Beacon Press, Boston, 2008 ISBN 0-8070-7277-X
    46.^ a b Cain, Michael, A Reputation Recouped!: The 'Fly on the Wall' is Freed at Last!, The Daily Catholic, Vol. 15 No. 104 14 April 2004
    47.^ Malachi Martin, accessed July 23, 2010
    48.^ [cf. CIC 701, 291–292]
    49.^ Kennedy, William H. & Widner S.J., Tom, High Ranking Jesuit Confirms Malachi Martin’s Status as Life Long Priest, WilliamHKennedy, April 2004
    50.^ Anthony Cekada: Untrained and Un-Tridentine: Holy Orders and the Canonically Unfit
    51.^ Coomaraswamy, Rama, On the Validity of My Ordination, CoomaraswamyCatholicWritings
    52.^ Ekelberg, Mary Ellen, The Underground Church of Pius XII, Catholic Counterpoint, Broomall, ...
    53.^ Küng, Hans, My Struggle for Freedom: Memoirs, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, 2003, ISBN 0-8028-2659-8
    54.^ Kotre, John N., The Best of Times, The Worst of Times: Andrew Greeley and American Catholicism 1959-1975, Nelson-Hall Company, Chicago, 1978 ISBN 0-88229-380-X
    55.^ Hells Bibliophiles
    56.^ Brennan, Michael, Malachi Martin Is Dead at 78; Author of Books on the Church, The New York Times, July 30 1999
    57.^ Martin, Maurice, Laures et ermitages du désert d'Egypte, Mélanges de l'Université Saint-Joseph 42, Imprimerie Catholique, Beyrouth, 1966
    58.^ Roddy, Joseph, How the Jews Changed Catholic Thinking, Look Magazine, Volume 30 No. 2, January 25, 1966
    59.^ Cartus, F.E., The Vatican Council Ends: Reform on borrowed Time?, Harper's Magazine, September 1965
    60.^ Cartus, F.E., Vatican II & The Jews, Commentary, January 1965
    61.^ Cartus, F.E., Vatican II & The Jews, Commentary, January 1965 (Letters)
    62.^ Today's Catholic World, Daily News for the Church in Eclipse, December 2005
    63.^ Serviam, January 12 2009
    64.^ Kennedy, William H., In Defense of Father Malachi Martin, Seattle Catholic, July 2002
    66.^ Yallop, David, In God's Name: An Investigation into the Murder of Pope John Paul I, Constable & Robinson, London, 2007, ISBN 978-1-84529-496-0
    68.^ Martin, Jacques, Mes Six Papes: Souvenirs Romains du cardinal Jacques Martin, Editions Mame, Paris, 1993


    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:42 am

    I continue to 'enjoy' listening to Alex Collier -- but he loses me with dimensional-talk, ET-mentoring, no-money, spaceships which are bigger on the inside than they are on the outside, etc. I presently view 'leaving third-dimension' as being the extermination of humanity -- and the souls of humanity incarnating back into reptilian-physicality -- or whatever we were before we were human. I presently think that the Book of Revelation might be a bad-thing for humanity. Still, I think Alex knows a helluva lot -- and that he only tells us a portion of what he really knows. For example, he recently did NOT wish to talk about Angels -- and I think I know why. Alex is someone I'd like to have an all-night discussion with -- although I'd probably become suicidal by breakfast-time. I think things might be THAT bad. I try to have fun on this website -- but I strongly suspect that the galactic-realities are NOT pleasant -- and that very few individuals are prepared to properly process the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth -- about life, the universe, and everything. Knowing -- and Thinking We Know -- are two VERY different things. I KNOW that I don't know -- and I'm not sure I really wish to know. I might not be able to handle the truth. Me knowing the truth might create more problems than I can possibly imagine. What Would the NSA Say?? The Horror.

    I guess I'll just continue my very passive exoteric and esoteric quest. I continue to wonder if Archangel Michael is the Jewish Messiah -- rather than the Historical Jesus?! What if Archangel Michael is somehow responsible for the Teachings Attributed to Jesus -- and that these teachings were taken from a much larger collection of unpublished and unknown writings??!! There's something very fishy about the whole Archangel-Thing -- and my innermost thoughts are scaring the hell out of me. Perhaps this might have something to do with why Alex Collier didn't wish to discuss Angels. For the record -- I think Jewish Scholars know a helluva lot -- but that they are very guarded regarding what they say -- especially to the Goyim and Gentiles!! I continue to wonder how much of the Old Testament applies to Non-Jews -- especially in modernity?! I am troubled by BOTH the Old and New Testaments -- yet I am strangely attracted to the Whole Bible -- but I particularly appreciate the Teachings Attributed to Jesus Christ -- which seem to be very different than most of the rest of the Bible. Might there be a Garden of Eden Version of the Teachings of Archangel Michael??!! I'm beginning to think so. Consider the Talmud.

    The Talmud (Hebrew: תַּלְמוּד talmūd "instruction, learning", from a root lmd "teach, study") is a central text of Rabbinic Judaism, considered second to the Torah. It is also traditionally referred to as Shas (ש״ס), a Hebrew abbreviation of shisha sedarim, the "six orders" of the Oral Law of Judaism. The Talmud has two components: the Mishnah (Hebrew: משנה, c. 200 CE), the first written compendium of Judaism's Oral Law, and the Gemara (c. 500 CE), an elucidation of the Mishnah and related Tannaitic writings that often ventures onto other subjects and expounds broadly on the Hebrew Bible. The terms Talmud and Gemara are often used interchangeably.

    The whole Talmud consists of 63 tractates, and in standard print is over 6,200 pages long. It is written in Tannaitic Hebrew and Aramaic. The Talmud contains the opinions of thousands of rabbis on a variety of subjects, including law, ethics, philosophy, customs, history, theology, lore and many other topics. The Talmud is the basis for all codes of rabbinic law and is much quoted in other rabbinic literature.

    Originally, Jewish scholarship was oral. Rabbis expounded and debated the law (the written law expressed in the Hebrew Bible) and discussed the Tanakh without the benefit of written works (other than the Biblical books themselves), though some may have made private notes (megillot setarim), for example of court decisions. However, this situation changed drastically, mainly as the result of the destruction of the Jewish commonwealth and the Second Temple in the year 70 CE and the consequent upheaval of Jewish social and legal norms. As the Rabbis were required to face a new reality—mainly Judaism without a Temple (to serve as the center of teaching and study) and Judea without at least partial autonomy—there was a flurry of legal discourse and the old system of oral scholarship could not be maintained. It is during this period that Rabbinic discourse began to be recorded in writing.[1][2] The earliest recorded oral law may have been of the midrashic form, in which halakhic discussion is structured as exegetical commentary on the Pentateuch. But an alternative form, organized by subject matter instead of by biblical verse, became dominant about the year 200 CE, when Rabbi Judah haNasi redacted the Mishnah (משנה).[citation needed]

    The Oral Law was far from monolithic; rather, it varied among various schools. The most famous two were the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel. In general, all valid opinions, even the non-normative ones, were recorded in the Talmud.[citation needed]

    The six orders (sedarim; singular: seder) of general subject matter in the Talmud are divided into 60 or 63 tractates (masekhtot; singular: masekhet) of more focused subject compilations. Each tractate is divided into chapters (perakim; singular: perek), 517 in total, that are both numbered according to the Hebrew alphabet and given names, usually using the first one or two words in the first mishnah. A perek may continue over several (up to tens of) pages.[3] Each perek will contain several mishnayot[4] with their accompanying exchanges that form the "building-blocks" of the Gemara; the name for a passage of gemara is a sugya (סוגיא; plural sugyot). A sugya, including baraita or tosefta, will typically comprise a detailed proof-based elaboration of a Mishnaic statement, whether halakhic or aggadic. A sugya may, and often does, range widely off the subject of the mishnah. The sugya is not punctuated in the conventional sense used in the English language, but by using specific expressions that help to divide the sugya into components, usually including a statement, a question on the statement, an answer, a proof for the answer or a refutation of the answer with its own proof.[citation needed]

    In a given sugya, scriptural, Tannaic and Amoraic statements are cited to support the various opinions. In so doing, the Gemara will highlight semantic disagreements between Tannaim and Amoraim (often ascribing a view to an earlier authority as to how he may have answered a question), and compare the Mishnaic views with passages from the Baraita. Rarely are debates formally closed; in some instances, the final word determines the practical law, but in many instances the issue is left unresolved. There is a whole literature on the procedural principles to be used in settling the practical law when disagreements exist: see under #Logic and methodology below.

    The Mishnah is a compilation of legal opinions and debates. Statements in the Mishnah are typically terse, recording brief opinions of the rabbis debating a subject; or recording only an unattributed ruling, apparently representing a consensus view. The rabbis recorded in the Mishnah are known as Tannaim.[1]

    Since it sequences its laws by subject matter instead of by biblical context, the Mishnah discusses individual subjects more thoroughly than the Midrash, and it includes a much broader selection of halakhic subjects than the Midrash. The Mishnah's topical organization thus became the framework of the Talmud as a whole. But not every tractate in the Mishnah has a corresponding talmud. Also, the order of the tractates in the Talmud differs in some cases from that in the Mishnah.

    In addition to the Mishnah, other tannaitic teachings were current at about the same time or shortly thereafter. The Gemara frequently refers to these tannaitic statements in order to compare them to those contained in the Mishnah and to support or refute the propositions of Amoraim. All such non-Mishnaic tannaitic sources are termed baraitot (lit. outside material, "Works external to the Mishnah"; sing. baraita ברייתא).

    The baraitot cited in the Gemara are often quotations from the Tosefta (a tannaitic compendium of halakha parallel to the Mishnah) and the Halakhic Midrashim (specifically Mekhilta, Sifra and Sifre). Some baraitot, however, are known only through traditions cited in the Gemara, and are not part of any other collection.[citation needed]

    In the three centuries following the redaction of the Mishnah, rabbis throughout Palestine and Babylonia analyzed, debated, and discussed that work. These discussions form the Gemara (גמרא). Gemara means “completion” (from the Hebrew gamar גמר: "to complete") or "learning" ( from the Aramaic: "to study"). The Gemara mainly focuses on elucidating and elaborating the opinions of the Tannaim. The rabbis of the Gemara are known as Amoraim (sing. Amora אמורא).[citation needed]

    Much of the Gemara consists of legal analysis. The starting point for the analysis is usually a legal statement found in a Mishnah. The statement is then analyzed and compared with other statements used in different approaches to Biblical exegesis in rabbinic Judaism (or - simpler - interpretation of text in Torah study) exchanges between two (frequently anonymous and sometimes metaphorical) disputants, termed the makshan (questioner) and tartzan (answerer). Another important function of Gemara is to identify the correct Biblical basis for a given law presented in the Mishnah and the logical process connecting one with the other: this activity was known as talmud long before the existence of the "Talmud" as a text.[5]

    The Talmud is a wide-ranging document that touches on a great many subjects. Traditionally Talmudic statements are classified into two broad categories, halakhic and aggadic statements. Halakhic statements directly relate to questions of Jewish law and practice (halakha). Aggadic statements are not legally related, but rather are exegetical, homiletical, ethical, or historical in nature.

    In addition to the six Orders, the Talmud contains a series of short treatises of a later date, usually printed at the end of Seder Nezikin. These are not divided into Mishnah and Gemara.

    The process of "Gemara" proceeded in what were then the two major centers of Jewish scholarship, the Land of Israel and Babylonia. Correspondingly, two bodies of analysis developed, and two works of Talmud were created. The older compilation is called the Jerusalem Talmud or the Talmud Yerushalmi. It was compiled in the fourth century in Israel. The Babylonian Talmud was compiled about the year 500 CE, although it continued to be edited later. The word "Talmud", when used without qualification, usually refers to the Babylonian Talmud.

    While the editors of Jerusalem Talmud and Babylonian Talmud each mention the other community, most scholars believe these documents were written independently; Louis Jacobs writes, "If the editors of either had had access to an actual text of the other, it is inconceivable that they would not have mentioned this. Here the argument from silence is very convincing."[6]

    The Jerusalem Talmud was one of the two compilations of Jewish religious teachings and commentary that was transmitted orally for centuries prior to its compilation by Jewish scholars in Israel.[7] It is a compilation of teachings of the schools of Tiberias, Sepphoris and Caesarea. It is written largely in a western Aramaic dialect that differs from its Babylonian counterpart.[citation needed]

    This Talmud is a synopsis of the analysis of the Mishnah that was developed over the course of nearly 200 years by the Academies in Israel (principally those of Tiberias and Caesarea.) Because of their location, the sages of these Academies devoted considerable attention to analysis of the agricultural laws of the Land of Israel. Traditionally, this Talmud was thought to have been redacted in about the year 350 CE by Rav Muna and Rav Yossi in the Land of Israel. It is traditionally known as the Talmud Yerushalmi ("Jerusalem Talmud"), but the name is a misnomer, as it was not prepared in Jerusalem. It has more accurately been called "The Talmud of the Land of Israel".[8]

    Its final redaction probably belongs to the end of the fourth century, but the individual scholars who brought it to its present form cannot be fixed with assurance. By this time Christianity had become the state religion of the Roman Empire and Jerusalem the holy city of Christendom. In 325 CE Constantine, the first Christian emperor, said "let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd."[9] This policy made a Jew an outcast and pauper. The compilers of the Jerusalem Talmud consequently lacked the time to produce a work of the quality they had intended. The text is evidently incomplete and is not easy to follow. The apparent cessation of work on the Jerusalem Talmud in the fifth century has been associated with the decision of Theodosius II in 425 CE to suppress the Patriarchate and put an end to the practice of formal scholarly ordination. Some modern scholars have questioned this connection: for more detail see Jerusalem Talmud: Place and date of composition.

    Despite its incomplete state, the Jerusalem Talmud remains an indispensable source of knowledge of the development of the Jewish Law in Israel. It was also an important resource in the study of the Babylonian Talmud by the Kairouan school of Hananel ben Hushiel and Nissim Gaon, with the result that opinions ultimately based on the Jerusalem Talmud found their way into both the Tosafot and the Mishneh Torah of Maimonides.

    There are traditions that hold that in the Messianic Age the Jerusalem Talmud will have priority over the Babylonian. This may be interpreted as meaning that, following the restoration of the Sanhedrin and the line of ordained scholars, the work will be completed and "out of Zion shall go the Law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem". Accordingly, following the formation of the modern State of Israel there is some interest in restoring Eretz Yisrael traditions. For example, Rabbi David Bar-Hayim of the Makhon Shilo institute has issued a siddur reflecting Eretz Yisrael practice as found in the Jerusalem Talmud and other sources.

    The Talmud Bavli consists of documents compiled over the period of Late Antiquity (3rd to 5th centuries).[10] During this time the most important of the Jewish centres in Mesopotamia, later known as Iraq, were Nehardea, Nisibis, Mahoza (just to the south of what is now Baghdad), Pumbeditha (a town more famous in our times as Fallujah), and the Sura Academy.

    Talmud Bavli (the "Babylonian Talmud") comprises the Mishnah and the Babylonian Gemara, the latter representing the culmination of more than 300 years of analysis of the Mishnah in the Babylonian Academies. The foundations of this process of analysis were laid by Rab, a disciple of Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi. Tradition ascribes the compilation of the Babylonian Talmud in its present form to two Babylonian sages, Rav Ashi and Ravina. Rav Ashi was president of the Sura Academy from 375 to 427 CE. The work begun by Rav Ashi was completed by Ravina, who is traditionally regarded as the final Amoraic expounder. Accordingly, traditionalists argue that Ravina’s death in 499 CE is the latest possible date for the completion of the redaction of the Talmud. However, even on the most traditional view a few passages are regarded as the work of a group of rabbis who edited the Talmud after the end of the Amoraic period, known as the Saboraim or Rabbanan Savora'e (meaning "reasoners" or "considerers").

    The question as to when the Gemara was finally put into its present form is not settled among modern scholars. Some, like Louis Jacobs, argue that the main body of the Gemara is not simple reportage of conversations, as it purports to be, but a highly elaborate structure contrived by the Saboraim, who must therefore be regarded as the real authors. On this view the text did not reach its final form until around 700. Some modern scholars use the term Stammaim (from the Hebrew Stam, meaning "closed", "vague" or "unattributed") for the authors of unattributed statements in the Gemara. (See eras within Jewish law.)

    There are significant differences between the two Talmud compilations. The language of the Jerusalem Talmud is a western Aramaic dialect, which differs from the form of Aramaic in the Babylonian Talmud. The Talmud Yerushalmi is often fragmentary and difficult to read, even for experienced Talmudists. The redaction of the Talmud Bavli, on the other hand, is more careful and precise. The law as laid down in the two compilations is basically similar, except in emphasis and in minor details. The Jerusalem Talmud has not received much attention from commentators, and such traditional commentaries as exist are mostly concerned with comparing its teachings to those of the Talmud Bavli.

    Neither the Jerusalem nor the Babylonian Talmud covers the entire Mishnah: for example, a Babylonian Gemara exists only for 37 out of the 63 tractates of the Mishnah. In particular:

    The Jerusalem Talmud covers all the tractates of Zeraim, while the Babylonian Talmud covers only tractate Berachot. The reason might be that most laws from the Orders Zeraim (agricultural laws limited to the land of Israel) had little practical relevance in Babylonia and were therefore not included.[11] The Jerusalem Talmud has a greater focus on the Land of Israel and the Torah's agricultural laws pertaining to the land because it was written in the Land of Israel where the laws applied.

    The Jerusalem Talmud does not cover the Mishnaic order of Kodashim, which deals with sacrificial rites and laws pertaining to the Temple, while the Babylonian Talmud does cover it. It is not clear why this is, as the laws were not directly applicable in either country following the Temple's 70 CE destruction.

    In both Talmuds, only one tractate of Tehorot (ritual purity laws) is examined, that of the menstrual laws, Niddah.

    The Babylonian Talmud records the opinions of the rabbis of Israel as well as of those of Babylonia, while the Jerusalem Talmud only seldom cites the Babylonian rabbis. The Babylonian version also contains the opinions of more generations because of its later date of completion. For both these reasons it is regarded as a more comprehensive collection of the opinions available. On the other hand, because of the centuries of redaction between the composition of the Jerusalem and the Babylonian Talmud, the opinions of early amoraim might be closer to their original form in the Jerusalem Talmud.

    The influence of the Babylonian Talmud has been far greater than that of the Yerushalmi. In the main, this is because the influence and prestige of the Jewish community of Israel steadily declined in contrast with the Babylonian community in the years after the redaction of the Talmud and continuing until the Gaonic era. Furthermore, the editing of the Babylonian Talmud was superior to that of the Jerusalem version, making it more accessible and readily usable. According to Maimonides (whose life began almost a hundred years after the end of the Gaonic era), all Jewish communities during the Gaonic era formally accepted the Babylonian Talmud as binding upon themselves, and modern Jewish practice follows the Babylonian Talmud's conclusions on all areas in which the two Talmuds conflict.

    Of the two main components of the Babylonian Talmud, the Mishnah is written in Mishnaic Hebrew and the Gemara is written, with a few exceptions, in a characteristic dialect of Jewish Babylonian Aramaic.[12] This difference in language is due to the long time period elapsing between the two compilations. During the period of the Tannaim (rabbis cited in the Mishna), the spoken vernacular of Jews in Judaea was a late form of Hebrew known as Rabbinic or Mishnaic Hebrew, whereas during the period of the Amoraim (rabbis cited in the Gemara), which began around 200 CE, the spoken vernacular was Aramaic. Hebrew continued to be used for the writing of religious texts, poetry, and so forth.[13]

    Since the Mishnah and all of the Baraitas and verses of Tanakh quoted and embedded in the Gemara are in Hebrew, Hebrew constitutes somewhat less than half of the text of the Talmud. The rest, including the discussions of the Amoraim and the overall framework of the Gemara, is in Jewish Babylonian Aramaic. There are occasional quotations from older works in other dialects of Aramaic, such as Megillat Taanit.

    The first complete edition of the Babylonian Talmud was printed in Venice by Daniel Bomberg 1520-23. In addition to the Mishnah and Gemara, Bomberg's edition contained the commentaries of Rashi and Tosafot. Almost all printings since Bomberg have followed the same pagination. Bomberg's edition was considered relatively free of censorship.[14]

    Following Ambrosius Frobenius's publication of most of the Talmud in installments in Basel, Immanuel Benveniste published the whole Talmud in installments in Amsterdam 1644-1648,[15] Though according to Raphael Rabbinovicz the Benveniste Talmud may have been based on the Lublin Talmud and included many of the censors' errors.[16]

    The edition of the Talmud published by the Szapira brothers in Slavuta in 1795 is particularly prized by many hasidic rebbes. In 1835, after an acrimonious dispute with the Szapira family, a new edition of the Talmud was printed by Menachem Romm of Vilna. Known as the Vilna Shas, this edition (and later ones printed by his widow and sons) has been used in the production of more recent editions of Talmud Bavli.

    A page number in the Talmud refers to a double-sided page, known as a daf; each daf has two amudim labeled א and ב, sides A and B (Recto and Verso). The referencing by daf is relatively recent and dates from the early Talmud printings of the 17th century. Earlier rabbinic literature generally only refers to the tractate or chapters within a tractate. Nowadays, reference is made in format [Tractate daf a/b] (e.g. Berachot 23b). In the Vilna edition of the Talmud there are 5,894 folio pages.

    Lazarus Goldschmidt published an edition from the "uncensored text" of the Babylonian Talmud with a German translation in 9 vols. (commenced Leipzig, 1897–1909, edition completed, following emigration to England in 1933, by 1936).[17]

    The text of the Vilna editions is considered by scholars not to be uniformly reliable, and there have been a number of attempts to collate textual variants.

    1.In the early twentieth century Nathan Rabinowitz published a series of volumes called Dikduke Soferim showing textual variants from early manuscripts and printings.

    2.In 1960 work started on a new edition under the name of Gemara Shelemah (complete Gemara) under the editorship of Menachem Mendel Kasher: only the volume on the first part of tractate Pesachim appeared before the project was interrupted by his death. This edition contained a comprehensive set of textual variants and a few selected commentaries.

    3.Some thirteen volumes have been published by the Institute for the Complete Israeli Talmud (a division of Yad Harav Herzog), on lines similar to Rabinowitz, containing the text and a comprehensive set of textual variants (from manuscripts, early prints and citations in secondary literature) but no commentaries.[18]

    There have been critical editions of particular tractates (e.g. Henry Malter's edition of Ta'anit), but there is no modern critical edition of the whole Talmud. Modern editions such as those of the Oz ve-Hadar Institute correct misprints and restore passages that in earlier editions were modified or excised by censorship but do not attempt a comprehensive account of textual variants. One edition, by Rabbi Yosef Amar,[19] represents the Yemenite tradition, and takes the form of a photostatic reproduction of a Vilna-based print to which Yemenite vocalization and textual variants have been added by hand, together with printed introductory material. Collations of the Yemenite manuscripts of some tractates have been published by Columbia University.[20]

    There have been four editions aimed at bringing the Talmud to a wider audience. One is the Steinsaltz Talmud, now published by Koren Publishers Jerusalem, which contains the text with punctuation, detailed explanations and a modern Hebrew translation. The Steinsaltz Edition is available in two formats: one with the traditional Vilna page and one without. It is available in Hebrew, English, French, Russian and other languages.

    A third is the Metivta edition, published by the Oz ve-Hadar Institute. This contains the full text in the same format as the Vilna-based editions, with a full explanation in modern Hebrew on facing pages as well as an improved version of the traditional commentaries.[21]

    A previous project of the same kind, called Talmud El Am, "Talmud to the people", was published in Israel in 1960s-80s. The Talmud El Am contains Hebrew text, English translation and commentary by Rabbi Dr A. Ehrman, with short 'realia', marginal notes, often illustrated, written by experts in the field for the whole of Tractate Berakhot, 2 chapters of Bava Mezia and the halachic section of Qiddushin, chapter 1.

    From the time of its completion, the Talmud became integral to Jewish scholarship. A maxim in Pirkei Avot advocates its study from the age of 15.[22] This section outlines some of the major areas of Talmudic study.

    The earliest Talmud commentaries were written by the Geonim (c. 800-1000, CE) in Babylonia. Although some direct commentaries on particular treatises are extant, our main knowledge of Gaonic era Talmud scholarship comes from statements embedded in Geonic responsa that shed light on Talmudic passages: these are arranged in the order of the Talmud in Levin's Otzar ha-Geonim. Also important are practical abridgments of Jewish law such as Yehudai Gaon's Halachot Pesukot, Achai Gaon's Sheeltot and Simeon Kayyara's Halachot Gedolot. After the death of Hai Gaon, however, the center of Talmud scholarship shifts to Europe and North Africa.

    One area of Talmudic scholarship developed out of the need to ascertain the Halakha. Early commentators such as Rabbi Isaac Alfasi (North Africa, 1013–1103) attempted to extract and determine the binding legal opinions from the vast corpus of the Talmud. Alfasi's work was highly influential, attracted several commentaries in its own right and later served as a basis for the creation of halakhic codes. Another influential medieval Halakhic work following the order of the Babylonian Talmud, and to some extent modelled on Alfasi, was "the Mordechai", a compilation by Mordechai ben Hillel (c. 1250–1298). A third such work was that of Rabbi Asher ben Yechiel (d. 1327). All these works and their commentaries are printed in the Vilna and many subsequent editions of the Talmud.

    A fifteenth century Spanish rabbi, Jacob ibn Habib (d. 1516), composed the Ein Yaakov. Ein Yaakov (or En Ya'aqob) extracts nearly all the Aggadic material from the Talmud. It was intended to familiarize the public with the ethical parts of the Talmud and to dispute many of the accusations surrounding its contents.

    The Talmud is often cryptic and difficult to understand. Its language contains many Greek and Persian words that became obscure over time. A major area of Talmudic scholarship developed to explain these passages and words. Some early commentators such as Rabbenu Gershom of Mainz (10th c.) and Rabbenu Ḥananel (early 11th c.) produced running commentaries to various tractates. These commentaries could be read with the text of the Talmud and would help explain the meaning of the text. Another important work is the Sefer ha-Mafteaḥ (Book of the Key) by Nissim Gaon, which contains a preface explaining the different forms of Talmudic argumentation and then explains abbreviated passages in the Talmud by cross-referring to parallel passages where the same thought is expressed in full. Commentaries (ḥiddushim) by Joseph ibn Migash on two tractates, Bava Batra and Shevuot, based on Ḥananel and Alfasi, also survive, as does a compilation by Zechariah Aghmati called Sefer ha-Ner.[23] Using a different style, Rabbi Nathan b. Jechiel created a lexicon called the Arukh in the 11th century to help translate difficult words.

    By far the best known commentary on the Babylonian Talmud is that of Rashi (Rabbi Solomon ben Isaac, 1040–1105). The commentary is comprehensive, covering almost the entire Talmud. Written as a running commentary, it provides a full explanation of the words, and explains the logical structure of each Talmudic passage. It is considered indispensable to students of the Talmud.

    Medieval Ashkenazic Jewry produced another major commentary known as Tosafot ("additions" or "supplements"). The Tosafot are collected commentaries by various medieval Ashkenazic Rabbis on the Talmud (known as Tosafists). One of the main goals of the Tosafot is to explain and interpret contradictory statements in the Talmud. Unlike Rashi, the Tosafot is not a running commentary, but rather comments on selected matters. Often the explanations of Tosafot differ from those of Rashi.

    Among the founders of the Tosafist school were Rabbi Jacob b. Meir (known as Rabbeinu Tam), who was a grandson of Rashi, and, Rabbenu Tam's nephew, Rabbi Isaac ben Samuel. The Tosafot commentaries were collected in different editions in the various schools. The benchmark collection of Tosafot for Northern France was that of R. Eliezer of Touques. The standard collection for Spain was that of Rabbenu Asher ("Tosafot Harosh"). The Tosafot that are printed in the standard Vilna edition of the Talmud are an edited version compiled from the various medieval collections, predominantly that of Touques.[24]

    Over time, the approach of the Tosafists spread to other Jewish communities, particularly those in Spain. This led to the composition of many other commentaries in similar styles. Among these are the commentaries of Nachmanides (Ramban), Solomon ben Adret (Rashba), Yom Tov of Seville (Ritva) and Nissim of Gerona (Ran). A comprehensive anthology consisting of extracts from all these is the Shittah Mekubbetzet of Bezalel Ashkenazi.

    Other commentaries produced in Spain and Provence were not influenced by the Tosafist style. Two of the most significant of these are the Yad Ramah by Rabbi Meir Abulafia (uncle of the mystic Abraham Abulafia) and Bet Habechirah by Rabbi Menahem haMeiri, commonly referred to as "Meiri". While the Bet Habechirah is extant for all of Talmud, we only have the Yad Ramah for Tractates Sanhedrin, Baba Batra and Gittin. Like the commentaries of Ramban and the others, these are generally printed as independent works, though some Talmud editions include the Shittah Mekubbetzet in an abbreviated form.

    In later centuries, focus partially shifted from direct Talmudic interpretation to the analysis of previously written Talmudic commentaries. These later commentaries include "Maharshal" (Solomon Luria), "Maharam" (Meir Lublin) and "Maharsha" (Samuel Edels), and are generally printed at the back of each tractate.

    Another very useful study aid, found in almost all editions of the Talmud, consists of the marginal notes Torah Or, Ein Mishpat Ner Mitzvah and Masoret ha-Shas by the Italian rabbi Joshua Boaz, which give references respectively to the cited Biblical passages, to the relevant halachic codes and to related Talmudic passages.

    Most editions of the Talmud include brief marginal notes by Akiva Eger under the name Gilyonot ha-Shas, and textual notes by Joel Sirkes and the Vilna Gaon (see Textual emendations below), on the page together with the text.

    During the 15th and 16th centuries, a new intensive form of Talmud study arose. Complicated logical arguments were used to explain minor points of contradiction within the Talmud. The term pilpul was applied to this type of study. Usage of pilpul in this sense (that of "sharp analysis") harks back to the Talmudic era and refers to the intellectual sharpness this method demanded.

    Pilpul practitioners posited that the Talmud could contain no redundancy or contradiction whatsoever. New categories and distinctions (hillukim) were therefore created, resolving seeming contradictions within the Talmud by novel logical means.

    In the Ashkenazi world the founders of pilpul are generally considered to be Jacob Pollak (1460–1541) and Shalom Shachna. This kind of study reached its height in the 16th and 17th centuries when expertise in pilpulistic analysis was considered an art form and became a goal in and of itself within the yeshivot of Poland and Lithuania. But the popular new method of Talmud study was not without critics; already in the 15th century, the ethical tract Orhot Zaddikim ("Paths of the Righteous" in Hebrew) criticized pilpul for an overemphasis on intellectual acuity. Many 16th- and 17th-century rabbis were also critical of pilpul. Among them may be noted Judah Loew ben Bezalel (the Maharal of Prague), Isaiah Horowitz, and Yair Bacharach.

    By the 18th century, pilpul study waned. Other styles of learning such as that of the school of Elijah b. Solomon, the Vilna Gaon, became popular. The term "pilpul" was increasingly applied derogatorily to novellae deemed casuistic and hairsplitting. Authors referred to their own commentaries as "al derekh ha-peshat" (by the simple method) to contrast them with pilpul.[25]

    Among Sephardi and Italian Jews from the fifteenth century on, some authorities sought to apply the methods of Aristotelian logic, as reformulated by Averroes.[26] This method was first recorded, though without explicit reference to Aristotle, by Isaac Campanton (d. Spain, 1463) in his Darkhei ha-Talmud ("The Ways of the Talmud"), and is also found in the works of Moses Chaim Luzzatto.[27]

    According to the present-day Sephardi scholar José Faur, traditional Sephardic Talmud study could take place on any of three levels.[28] The most basic level consists of literary analysis of the text without the help of commentaries, designed to bring out the tzurata di-shema'ta, i.e. the logical and narrative structure of the passage.[29] The intermediate level, 'iyyun (concentration), consists of study with the help of commentaries such as Rashi and the Tosafot, similar to that practised among the Ashkenazim (historically Sephardim studied the Tosefot ha-Rosh and the commentaries of Nahmanides in preference to the printed Tosafot). The highest level, halachah (law), consists of collating the opinions set out in the Talmud with those of the halachic codes such as the Mishneh Torah and the Shulchan Aruch, so as to study the Talmud as a source of law. (A project called Halacha Brura,[30] founded by Abraham Isaac Kook, presents the Talmud and the halachic codes side by side in book form so as to enable this kind of collation.)

    A somewhat similar distinction exists in the Ashkenazi yeshivah curriculum between beki'ut (basic familiarization) and 'iyyun (in-depth study).

    Today most Sephardic yeshivot follow Lithuanian approaches such as the Brisker method: the traditional Sephardic methods are perpetuated informally by some individuals.

    In the late nineteenth century another trend in Talmud study arose. Rabbi Hayyim Soloveitchik (1853–1918) of Brisk (Brest-Litovsk) developed and refined this style of study. Brisker method involves a reductionistic analysis of rabbinic arguments within the Talmud or among the Rishonim, explaining the differing opinions by placing them within a categorical structure. The Brisker method is highly analytical and is often criticized as being a modern-day version of pilpul. Nevertheless, the influence of the Brisker method is great. Most modern day Yeshivot study the Talmud using the Brisker method in some form. One feature of this method is the use of Maimonides' Mishneh Torah as a guide to Talmudic interpretation, as distinct from its use as a source of practical halakha.

    Rival methods were those of the Mir and Telz yeshivas.

    As a result of Jewish emancipation, Judaism underwent enormous upheaval and transformation during the nineteenth century. Modern methods of textual and historical analysis were applied to the Talmud.

    The text of the Talmud has been subject to some level of critical scrutiny throughout its history. Rabbinic tradition holds that the people cited in both Talmuds did not have a hand in its writings; rather, their teachings were edited into a rough form around 450 CE (Talmud Yerushalmi) and 550 CE (Talmud Bavli.) The text of the Bavli especially was not firmly fixed at that time.

    The Gaonic responsa literature addresses this issue. Teshuvot Geonim Kadmonim, section 78, deals with mistaken biblical readings in the Talmud. This Gaonic responsum states:

    "...But you must examine carefully in every case when you feel uncertainty [as to the credibility of the text] - what is its source? Whether a scribal error? Or the superficiality of a second rate student who was not well versed?....after the manner of many mistakes found among those superficial second-rate students, and certainly among those rural memorizers who were not familiar with the biblical text. And since they erred in the first place....[they compounded the error.]

    —Teshuvot Geonim Kadmonim, Ed. Cassel, Berlin 1858, Photographic reprint Tel Aviv 1964, 23b.

    In the early medieval era, Rashi concluded that some statements in the extant text of the Talmud were insertions from later editors. On Shevuot 3b Rashi writes "A mistaken student wrote this in the margin of the Talmud, and copyists {subsequently} put it into the Gemara."[31]

    The emendations of Yoel Sirkis and the Vilna Gaon are included in all standard editions of the Talmud, in the form of marginal glosses entitled Hagahot ha-Bach and Hagahot ha-Gra respectively; further emendations by Solomon Luria are set out in commentary form at the back of each tractate. The Vilna Gaon's emendations were often based on his quest for internal consistency in the text rather than on manuscript evidence;[32] nevertheless many of the Gaon's emendations were later verified by textual critics, such as Solomon Schechter, who had Cairo Genizah texts with which to compare our standard editions.[33]

    In the nineteenth century Raphael Nathan Nota Rabinovicz published a multi-volume work entitled Dikdukei Soferim, showing textual variants from the Munich and other early manuscripts of the Talmud, and further variants are recorded in the Complete Israeli Talmud and Gemara Shelemah editions (see Printing, above).

    Today many more manuscripts have become available, in particular from the Cairo Geniza. The Academy of the Hebrew Language has prepared a text on CD-ROM for lexicographical purposes, containing the text of each tractate according to the manuscript it considers most reliable,[34] and images of some of the older manuscripts may be found on the website of the Jewish National and University Library.[35] The JNUL, the Lieberman Institute (associated with the Jewish Theological Seminary of America) and the Institute for the Complete Israeli Talmud (part of Yad Harav Herzog) all maintain searchable websites on which the viewer can request variant manuscript readings of a given passage.[36]

    Further variant readings can often be gleaned from citations in secondary literature such as commentaries, in particular those of Alfasi, Rabbenu Ḥananel and Aghmati, and sometimes the later Spanish commentators such as Nachmanides and Solomon ben Adret.

    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:44 am

    I continue to joke about becoming an "Insider" -- but the more I think about this, the more I think that might be highly-problematic. I obviously desire solutions -- yet the problems are undoubtedly vastly beyond my comprehension and abilities -- and I might sink into a deep state of despair -- or even irrational rage. Who knows?? I guess I keep fantasizing about the Queen of Heaven kissing my cheek -- and making everything better -- yet I suspect that the Queen of Heaven hates my guts. Obviously, I am imagining a possible reality which would probably anger Protestants, Catholics, Atheists, Agnostics, New-Agers, et al -- which is probably why it might be wise for me to limit my 'theological and political activities' to this little website -- or to simply keep my bloody fingers off my laptop -- and keep my bloody mouth shut -- if you know what I mean. I think it's very sad that so much unethical behavior and criminal activity gets swept under the rug at the highest levels of our world -- yet good and honest truth-seekers seem to be Public Enemy Number One. Why is this?? Are the Powers That Be really Too Bad to Expose??? Would setting things right really end Life as We Know It?? Would that be a good thing -- or a bad thing?? Should I forget about 'Saving the World' -- and just focus on Fame, Fortune, Power, and Pleasure (even if it's probably too late for that)??? Appearances Really Are EVERYTHING -- and the Bottom-Line Really is the Bottom-Line -- or so it seems. Anyway -- This Pointless and Profitless Quest Continues with the Talmud Continued.

    Historical study of the Talmud can be used to investigate a variety of concerns. One can ask questions such as: Do a given section's sources date from its editor's lifetime? To what extent does a section have earlier or later sources? Are Talmudic disputes distinguishable along theological or communal lines? In what ways do different sections derive from different schools of thought within early Judaism? Can these early sources be identified, and if so, how? Investigation of questions such as these are known as higher textual criticism. (The term "criticism", it should be noted, is a technical term denoting academic study.)

    Religious scholars still debate the precise method by which the text of the Talmuds reached their final form. Many believe that the text was continuously smoothed over by the savoraim.

    In the 1870s and 1880s Rabbi Raphael Natan Nata Rabbinovitz engaged in historical study of Talmud Bavli in his Diqduqei Soferim. Since then many Orthodox rabbis have approved of his work, including Rabbis Shlomo Kluger, Yoseph Shaul Ha-Levi Natanzohn, Yaaqov Ettlinger, Isaac Elhanan Spektor and Shimon Sofer.

    During the early 19th century, leaders of the newly evolving Reform movement, such as Abraham Geiger and Samuel Holdheim, subjected the Talmud to severe scrutiny as part of an effort to break with traditional rabbinic Judaism. They insisted that the Talmud was entirely a work of evolution and development. This view was rejected as both academically incorrect, and religiously incorrect, by those who would become known as the Orthodox movement. Some Orthodox leaders such as Moses Sofer (the Chatam Sofer) became exquisitely sensitive to any change and rejected modern critical methods of Talmud study.

    Some rabbis advocated a view of Talmudic study that they held to be in-between the Reformers and the Orthodox; these were the adherents of positive-historical Judaism, notably Nachman Krochmal and Zacharias Frankel. They described the Oral Torah as the result of a historical and exegetical process, emerging over time, through the application of authorized exegetical techniques, and more importantly, the subjective dispositions and personalities and current historical conditions, by learned sages. This was later developed more fully in the five volume work Dor Dor ve-Dorshav by Isaac Hirsch Weiss. (See Jay Harris Guiding the Perplexed in the Modern Age Ch. 5) Eventually their work came to be one of the formative parts of Conservative Judaism.

    Another aspect of this movement is reflected in Graetz's History of the Jews. Graetz attempts to deduce the personality of the Pharisees based on the laws or aggadot that they cite, and show that their personalities influenced the laws they expounded.

    The leader of Orthodox Jewry in Germany Samson Raphael Hirsch, while not rejecting the methods of scholarship in principle, hotly contested the findings of the Historical-Critical method. In a series of articles in his magazine Jeschurun (reprinted in Collected Writings Vol. 5) Hirsch reiterated the traditional view, and pointed out what he saw as numerous errors in the works of Graetz, Frankel and Geiger.

    On the other hand, many of the nineteenth century's strongest critics of Reform, including strictly orthodox Rabbis such as Zvi Hirsch Chajes, utilized this new scientific method. The Orthodox Rabbinical seminary of Azriel Hildesheimer was founded on the idea of creating a "harmony between Judaism and science". Another Orthodox pioneer of scientific Talmud study was David Zvi Hoffman.

    The Iraqi rabbi Yaakov Chaim Sofer notes that the text of the Gemara has had changes and additions, and contains statements not of the same origin as the original. See his Yehi Yosef (Jerusalem, 1991) p. 132 "This passage does not bear the signature of the editor of the Talmud!"

    Orthodox scholar Daniel Sperber writes in "Legitimacy, of Necessity, of Scientific Disciplines" that many Orthodox sources have engaged in the historical (also called "scientific") study of the Talmud. As such, the divide today between Orthodoxy and Reform is not about whether the Talmud may be subjected to historical study, but rather about the theological and halakhic implications of such study.

    Some trends within contemporary Talmud scholarship are listed below.

    Orthodox Judaism maintains that the oral law was revealed, in some form, together with the written law. As such, some adherents, most notably Samson Raphael Hirsch and his followers, resisted any effort to apply historical methods that imputed specific motives to the authors of the Talmud. Other major figures in Orthodoxy, however, took issue with Hirsch on this matter, most prominently David Tzvi Hoffmann.[37]

    Some scholars hold that there has been extensive editorial reshaping of the stories and statements within the Talmud. Lacking outside confirming texts, they hold that we cannot confirm the origin or date of most statements and laws, and that we can say little for certain about their authorship. In this view, the questions above are impossible to answer. See, for example, the works of Louis Jacobs and Shaye J.D. Cohen.

    Some scholars hold that the Talmud has been extensively shaped by later editorial redaction, but that it contains sources we can identify and describe with some level of reliability. In this view, sources can be identified by tracing the history and analyzing the geographical regions of origin. See, for example, the works of Lee I. Levine and David Kraemer.

    Some scholars hold that many or most the statements and events described in the Talmud usually occurred more or less as described, and that they can be used as serious sources of historical study. In this view, historians do their best to tease out later editorial additions (itself a very difficult task) and skeptically view accounts of miracles, leaving behind a reliable historical text. See, for example, the works of Saul Lieberman, David Weiss Halivni, and Avraham Goldberg.

    Modern academic study attempts to separate the different "strata" within the text, to try to interpret each level on its own, and to identify the correlations between parallel versions of the same tradition. In recent years, the work of R. David Weiss Halivni and Dr. Shamma Friedman have suggested a paradigm shift in the understanding of the Talmud (Encyclopaedia Judaica 2nd ed. entry "Talmud, Babylonian"). The traditional understanding was to view the Talmud as a unified homogeneous work. While other scholars had also treated the Talmud as a multi-layered work, Dr. Halivni's innovation (primarily in the second volume of his Mekorot u-Mesorot) was to differentiate between the Amoraic statements, which are generally brief Halachic decisions or inquiries, and the writings of the later "Stammaitic" (or Saboraic) authors, which are characterised by a much longer analysis that often consists of lengthy dialectic discussion. It has been noted that the Jerusalem Talmud is in fact very similar to the Babylonian Talmud minus Stammaitic activity (Encyclopaedia Judaica (2nd ed.), entry "Jerusalem Talmud"). Shamma Y. Friedman's Talmud Aruch on the sixth chapter of Bava Metzia (1996) is the first example of a complete analysis of a Talmudic text using this method. S. Wald has followed with works on Pesachim ch. 3 (2000) and Shabbat ch. 7 (2006). Further commentaries in this sense are being published by Dr Friedman's "Society for the Interpretation of the Talmud".[38]

    The Talmud is the written record of an oral tradition. It became the basis for many rabbinic legal codes and customs, of which the most important are the Mishneh Torah and the Shulchan Aruch. Orthodox and, to a lesser extent, Conservative Judaism accept the Talmud as authoritative, while Reconstructionist and Reform Judaism do not. This section briefly outlines past and current movements and their view of the Talmud's role.

    The Sadducees Jewish sect flourished during the Second Temple period. One of their main arguments with the Pharisees (later known as Rabbinic Judaism) was over their rejection of an Oral Law, and their denying a resurrection after death.

    Another movement that rejected the oral law was Karaism. It arose within two centuries of the completion of the Talmud. Karaism developed as a reaction against the Talmudic Judaism of Babylonia. The central concept of Karaism is the rejection of the Oral Torah, as embodied in the Talmud, in favor of a strict adherence to the Written Law only. This opposes the fundamental Rabbinic concept that the Oral Law was given to Moses on Mount Sinai together with the Written Law. Some later Karaites took a more moderate stance, allowing that some element of tradition (called sevel ha-yerushah, the burden of inheritance) is admissible in interpreting the Torah and that some authentic traditions are contained in the Mishnah and the Talmud, though these can never supersede the plain meaning of the Written Law.

    With the rise of Reform Judaism, during the nineteenth century, the authority of the Talmud was again questioned. The Talmud was seen by Reform Jews as a product of late antiquity having relevance merely as a historical document. In some cases a similar view was taken of the written law as well, while others appeared to adopt a neo-Karaite "back to the Bible" approach, though often with greater emphasis on the prophetic than on the legal books.

    See also Halakha: How Halakha is viewed today and Halakha: The sources and process of Halakha.
    Orthodox Judaism continues to stress the importance of Talmud study and it is a central component of Yeshiva curriculum, in particular for those training to be Rabbis. This is so even though Halakha is generally studied from the medieval codes and not directly from the Talmud. Talmudic study amongst the laity is widespread in Orthodox Judaism, with daily or weekly Talmud study particularly common in Haredi Judaism and with Talmud study a central part of the curriculum in Orthodox Yeshivas and day schools. The regular study of Talmud among laymen has been popularized by the Daf Yomi, a daily course of Talmud study initiated by Rabbi Meir Shapiro in 1923; its 13th cycle of study began on August, 2012.

    Conservative Judaism similarly emphasizes the study of Talmud within its religious and rabbinic education. Generally, however, the Talmud is studied as a historical source-text for Halakha. The Conservative approach to legal decision-making emphasizes placing classic texts and prior decisions in historical and cultural context, and examining the historical development of Halakha. This approach has resulted in greater practical flexibility than that of the Orthodox. Talmud study is part of the curriculum of Conservative parochial education at many Conservative day schools and an increase in Conservative day school enrollments has resulted in an increase in Talmud study as part of Conservative Jewish education among a minority of Conservative Jews. See also: The Conservative Jewish view of the Halakha.

    Reform Judaism does not emphasize the study of Talmud to the same degree in their Hebrew schools, but they do teach it in their rabbinical seminaries; the world view of liberal Judaism rejects the idea of binding Jewish law, and uses the Talmud as a source of inspiration and moral instruction. Ownership and reading of the Talmud is not widespread among Reform and Reconstructionist Jews, who usually place more emphasis on the study of the Hebrew Bible or Tanakh.

    The study of Talmud is not restricted to those of the Jewish religion and has attracted interest in other cultures.

    Christian scholars have long expressed an interest in the study of Talmud which has helped illuminate their own scriptures. Talmud contains biblical exegesis and commentary on Tanakh that will often clarify elliptical and esoteric passages. The Talmud contains possible references to Jesus Christ and his disciples, while the Christian canon makes mention of Talmudic figures and contains teachings that can be paralleled within the Talmud and Midrash. The Talmud provides cultural and historical context to the Gospel and the writings of the Apostles.[39]

    In South Korea, the Talmud is commonly read in the belief that it develops mental acuity and advances academic achievement. The Jewish traditional values expressed in the Talmud are also esteemed by the South Koreans.[40]

    Historian Michael Levi Rodkinson, in his book The History of the Talmud, wrote that detractors of the Talmud, both during and subsequent to its formation, "have varied in their character, objects and actions" and the book documents a number of critics and persecutors, including Nicholas Donin, Johannes Pfefferkorn, Johann Andreas Eisenmenger, the Frankists, and August Rohling.[41] Many attacks come from antisemitic sources, particularly Christians such as Justinas Pranaitis, Elizabeth Dilling or David Duke. Criticisms also arise from Muslim sources,[42][43][44] Jewish sources,[45] and atheists and skeptics.[46] Accusations against the Talmud include alleged:[41][47][48][49][50][51][52]

    1.Anti-Christian or anti-Gentile content[53][54][55][56]
    2.Absurd or sexually immoral content[57]
    3.Falsification of scripture[58][59][60]

    Defenders of the Talmud argue that many of these criticisms, particularly those in antisemitic sources, are based on quotations that are taken out of context, and thus misrepresent the meaning of the Talmud's text. Sometimes the misrepresentation is deliberate, and other times simply due to an inability to grasp the subtle and sometimes confusing narratives in the Talmud. Some quotations provided by critics deliberately omit passages in order to generate quotes that appear to be offensive or insulting.[61][62]

    The history of the Talmud reflects in part the history of Judaism persisting in a world of hostility and persecution. Almost at the very time that the Babylonian savoraim put the finishing touches to the redaction of the Talmud, the emperor Justinian issued his edict against deuterosis (doubling, repetition) of the Hebrew Bible.[63] It is disputed whether, in this context, deuterosis means "Mishnah" or "Targum": in patristic literature, the word is used in both senses.

    Full scale attacks on the Talmud took place in the thirteenth century in France, where Talmudic study was then flourishing. The charge against the Talmud brought by the Christian convert Nicholas Donin led to the first public disputation between Jews[64] and Christians and to the first burning of copies of the Talmud in Paris in 1242.[65][66][67] The burning of copies of the Talmud continued.[68]

    The Talmud was likewise the subject of the Disputation of Barcelona in 1263 between Nahmanides (Rabbi Moses ben Nahman) and Christian convert, Pablo Christiani. This same Pablo Christiani made an attack on the Talmud that resulted in a papal bull against the Talmud and in the first censorship, which was undertaken at Barcelona by a commission of Dominicans, who ordered the cancellation of passages deemed objectionable from a Christian perspective (1264).[69][70]

    At the Disputation of Tortosa in 1413, Geronimo de Santa Fé brought forward a number of accusations, including the fateful assertion that the condemnations of "pagans," "heathens," and "apostates" found in the Talmud were in reality veiled references to Christians. These assertion were denied by the Jewish community and its scholars, who contended that Judaic thought made a sharp distinction between those classified as heathen or pagan, being polytheistic, and those who acknowledge one true God (such as the Christians) even while worshipping the true monotheistic God incorrectly. Thus, Jews viewed Christians as misguided and in error, but not among the "heathens" or "pagans" discussed in the Talmud.[70]

    Both Pablo Christiani and Geronimo de Santa Fé, in addition to criticizing the Talmud, also regarded it as a source of authentic traditions, some of which could be used as arguments in favour of Christianity. Examples of such traditions were statements that the Messiah was born around the time of the destruction of the Temple, and that the Messiah sat at the right hand of God.[71]

    In 1415, Pope Benedict XIII, who had convened the Tortosa disputation, issued a papal bull (which was destined, however, to remain inoperative) forbidding the Jews to read the Talmud, and ordering the destruction of all copies of it. Far more important were the charges made in the early part of the sixteenth century by the convert Johannes Pfefferkorn, the agent of the Dominicans. The result of these accusations was a struggle in which the emperor and the pope acted as judges, the advocate of the Jews being Johann Reuchlin, who was opposed by the obscurantists; and this controversy, which was carried on for the most part by means of pamphlets, became in the eyes of some a precursor of the Reformation.[70][72]

    An unexpected result of this affair was the complete printed edition of the Babylonian Talmud issued in 1520 by Daniel Bomberg at Venice, under the protection of a papal privilege.[73] Three years later, in 1523, Bomberg published the first edition of the Jerusalem Talmud. After thirty years the Vatican, which had first permitted the Talmud to appear in print, undertook a campaign of destruction against it. On the New Year, Rosh Hashanah (September 9, 1553) the copies of the Talmud confiscated in compliance with a decree of the Inquisition were burned at Rome, in Campo dei Fiori (auto de fé). Other burnings took place in other Italian cities, such as the one instigated by Joshua dei Cantori at Cremona in 1559. Censorship of the Talmud and other Hebrew works was introduced by a papal bull issued in 1554; five years later the Talmud was included in the first Index Expurgatorius; and Pope Pius IV commanded, in 1565, that the Talmud be deprived of its very name. The convention of referring to the work as "Shas" (shishah sidre Mishnah) instead of "Talmud" dates from this time.[74]

    The first edition of the expurgated Talmud, on which most subsequent editions were based, appeared at Basel (1578–1581) with the omission of the entire treatise of 'Abodah Zarah and of passages considered inimical to Christianity, together with modifications of certain phrases. A fresh attack on the Talmud was decreed by Pope Gregory XIII (1575–85), and in 1593 Clement VIII renewed the old interdiction against reading or owning it.[citation needed] The increasing study of the Talmud in Poland led to the issue of a complete edition (Kraków, 1602-5), with a restoration of the original text; an edition containing, so far as known, only two treatises had previously been published at Lublin (1559–76). In 1707 some copies of the Talmud were confiscated in the province of Brandenburg, but were restored to their owners by command of Frederick, the first king of Prussia.[citation needed] A further attack on the Talmud took place in Poland (in what is now Ukrainian territory) in 1757, when Bishop Dembowski, at the instigation of the Frankists, convened a public disputation at Kamianets-Podilskyi, and ordered all copies of the work found in his bishopric to be confiscated and burned.[75]

    The external history of the Talmud includes also the literary attacks made upon it by some Christian theologians after the Reformation, since these onslaughts on Judaism were directed primarily against that work, the leading example being Eisenmenger's Entdecktes Judenthum (Judaism Unmasked) (1700).[76][77][78] In contrast, the Talmud was a subject of rather more sympathetic study by many Christian theologians, jurists and Orientalists from the Renaissance on, including Johann Reuchlin, John Selden, Petrus Cunaeus, John Lightfoot and Johannes Buxtorf father and son.[79]

    The Vilna edition of the Talmud was subject to Russian government censorship, or self-censorship to meet government expectations, though this was less severe than some previous attempts: the title "Talmud" was retained and the tractate Avodah Zarah was included. Most modern editions are either copies of or closely based on the Vilna edition, and therefore still omit most of the disputed passages. Although they were not available for many generations, the removed sections of the Talmud, Rashi, Tosafot and Maharsha were preserved through rare printings of lists of errata, known as Chesronos Hashas ("Omissions of the Talmud").[80] Many of these censored portions were recovered ironically enough from uncensored manuscripts in the Vatican Library. Some modern editions of the Talmud contain some or all of this material, either at the back of the book, in the margin, or in its original location in the text.[81]

    In 1830, during a debate in the French Chamber of Peers regarding state recognition of the Jewish faith, Admiral Verhuell declared himself unable to forgive the Jews whom he had met during his travels throughout the world either for their refusal to recognize Jesus as the Messiah or for their possession of the Talmud.[citation needed] In the same year the Abbé Chiarini published at Paris a voluminous work entitled "Théorie du Judaïsme," in which he announced a translation of the Talmud, advocating for the first time a version that would make the work generally accessible, and thus serve for attacks on Judaism.[citation needed] In a like spirit nineteenth century anti-Semitic agitators often urged that a translation be made; and this demand was even brought before legislative bodies, as in Vienna. The Talmud and the "Talmud Jew" thus became objects of anti-Semitic attacks, for example in August Rohling's Der Talmudjude (1871), although, on the other hand, they were defended by many Christian students of the Talmud, notably Hermann Strack.[82]

    Further attacks from anti-Semitic sources include Justinas Pranaitis' The Talmud Unmasked: The Secret Rabbinical Teachings Concerning Christians (1892)[83] and Elizabeth Dilling's The Plot against Christianity (1964).[84] The criticisms of the Talmud in many modern pamphlets and websites are often recognisable as verbatim quotes from one or other of these.[citation needed]

    Criticism of the Talmud is widespread, in great part through the Internet.[85]

    The Anti-Defamation League's report on this topic states that antisemitic critics of the Talmud frequently use erroneous translations or selective quotations in order to distort the meaning of the Talmud's text, and sometimes fabricate passages. In addition, the attackers rarely provide full context of the quotations, and fail to provide contextual information about the culture that the Talmud was composed in, nearly 2,000 years ago.[86]

    Gil Student, a prolific Internet author, states that many antisemitic attacks on the Talmud are merely recycling discredited material that originated in the thirteenth century disputations, particularly from Raymond Marti and Nicholas Donin, and that the criticisms are based on quotations taken out of context, and are sometimes entirely fabricated.[87]


    Talmud Bavli

    Neusner Translation ·Rodkinson Translation
    ·Schottenstein Edition ·
    Soncino Edition ·Steinsaltz Edition

    There are five contemporary translations of the Talmud into English:

    The Talmud: The Steinsaltz Edition Adin Steinsaltz, Random House. This work is an English edition of Rabbi Steinsaltz' complete Hebrew language translation of and commentary on the entire Talmud. Incomplete.

    Schottenstein Edition of the Talmud, Mesorah Publications. In this translation, each English page faces the Aramaic/Hebrew page. The English pages are elucidated and heavily annotated; each Aramaic/Hebrew page of Talmud typically requires three English pages of translation. Complete.

    The Soncino Talmud, Isidore Epstein, Soncino Press. Notes on each page provide additional background material. This translation is published both on its own and in a parallel text edition, in which each English page faces the Aramaic/Hebrew page. It is available also on CD-ROM. Complete.

    The Talmud of Babylonia. An American Translation, Jacob Neusner, Tzvee Zahavy, others. Atlanta: 1984-1995: Scholars Press for Brown Judaic Studies. Complete.

    The Babylonian Talmud, translated by Michael L. Rodkinson. (1903, contains all of the tractates in the Orders of Mo'ed/Festivals and Nezikin/Damages, plus some additional material related to these Orders.) This is inaccurate[citation needed] and was wholly superseded by the Soncino translation: it is sometimes linked to from the internet because, for copyright reasons, it was until recently the only translation freely available on the Web (see below, under Full text resources).

    Talmud Yerushalmi

    Talmud of the Land of Israel: A Preliminary Translation and Explanation Jacob Neusner, Tzvee Zahavy, others. University of Chicago Press. This translation uses a form-analytical presentation that makes the logical units of discourse easier to identify and follow. This work has received many positive reviews. However, some consider Neusner's translation methodology idiosyncratic. One volume was negatively reviewed by Saul Lieberman of the Jewish Theological Seminary.

    Schottenstein Edition of the Yerushalmi Talmud Mesorah/Artscroll. This translation is the counterpart to Mesorah/Artscroll's Schottenstein Edition of the Talmud (i.e. Babylonian Talmud).

    The Jerusalem Talmud, Edition, Translation and Commentary, ed. Guggenheimer, Heinrich W., Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin, Germany

    German Edition, Übersetzung des Talmud Yerushalmi, published by Martin Hengel, Peter Schäfer, Hans-Jürgen Becker, Frowald Gil Hüttenmeister, Mohr&Siebeck, Tübingen, Germany


    1.^ See, Strack, Hermann, Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash, Jewish Publication Society, 1945. pp.11-12. "[The Oral Law] was handed down by word of mouth during a long period...The first attempts to write down the traditional matter, there is reason to believe, date from the first half of the second post-Christian century." Strack theorizes that the growth of a Christian canon (the New Testament) was a factor that influenced the Rabbis to record the oral law in writing.
    2.^ The theory that the destruction of the Temple and subsequent upheaval led to the committing of Oral Law into writing was first explained in the Epistle of Sherira Gaon and often repeated. See, for example, Grayzel, A History of the Jews, Penguin Books, 1984, p. 193.
    3.^ For the meaning of "page" in this context see under #Printing.
    4.^ Jacobs, Louis, Structure and form in the Babylonian Talmud, Cambridge University Press, 1991, p.2
    5.^ e.g. Pirkei Avot 5.21: "five for the Torah, ten for Mishnah, thirteen for the commandments, fifteen for talmud".
    6.^ "Talmud". A Concise Companion to the Jewish Religion. Louis Jacobs. Oxford University Press, 1999, page 261
    7.^ "Palestinian Talmud". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica. 2010. Retrieved August 4, 2010.
    8.^ The Yerushalmi--the Talmud of the land of Israel: an introduction, Jacob Neusner, J. Aronson, 1993
    9.^ Eusebius (circa 330 CE). "XVIII: He speaks of their Unanimity respecting the Feast of Easter, and against the Practice of the Jews". Vita Constantini III. Retrieved June 21, 2009.
    10.^ "Early compilations » The making of the Talmuds: 3rd–6th century". Talmud (Judaism). Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 2008. Retrieved 2June 21, 2009.
    11.^ Steinsaltz, Adin (1976). The Essential Talmud. BasicBooks, A Division of HarperCollins Publishers. ISBN 0-465-02063-1.
    12.^ "Judaic Treasures of the Library of Congress: The Talmud". American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise.
    13.^ Sáenz-Badillos, Ángel and John Elwolde. 1996. A history of the Hebrew language. P.170-171: "There is general agreement that two main periods of RH (Rabbinical Hebrew) can be distinguished. The first, which lasted until the close of the Tannaitic era (around 200 CE), is characterized by RH as a spoken language gradually developing into a literary medium in which the Mishnah, Tosefta, baraitot, and Tannaitic midrashim would be composed. The second stage begins with the Amoraim, and sees RH being replaced by Aramaic as the spoken vernacular, surviving only as a literary language. Then it continued to be used in later rabbinic writings until the tenth century in, for example, the Hebrew portions of the two Talmuds and in midrashic and haggadic literature."
    14.^ Amnon Raz-Krakotzkin. The Censor, the Editor, and the Text: The Catholic Church and the Shaping of the Jewish Canon in the Sixteenth Century.Trans. Jackie Feldman. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007. viii + 314 ISBN 978-0-8122-4011-5. p104
    15.^ Christiane Berkvens-Stevelinck Le Magasin De L'Univers - The Dutch Republic As the Centre of the European Book Trade (Brill's Studies in Intellectual History)
    16.^ Printing the Talmud: a history of the individual treatises p239 Marvin J. Heller - 1999 "The Benveniste Talmud, according to Rabbinovicz, was based on the Lublin Talmud which included many of the censors' errors"
    17.^ The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia Isaac Landman - 1941 "His greatest work was the translation of the entire Babylonian Talmud into German, which, as it was made from the uncensored text and was the only complete translation in a European language, was of great value for students."
    18.^ Friedman, “Variant Readings in the Babylonian Talmud — A Methodological Study Marking the Appearance of 13 Volumes of the Institute for the Complete Israeli Talmud’s Edition,” Tarbiz 68 (1998).
    19.^ Amar, Yosef. "Talmud Bavli be-niqqud Temani".
    20.^ Julius Joseph Price, The Yemenite ms. of Megilla (in the Library of Columbia university), 1916; Pesahim, 1913; Mo'ed Katon, 1920.
    21.^ The other Oz ve-Hadar editions are similar but without the explanation in modern Hebrew.
    22.^ As Pirkei Avot is a tractate of the Mishnah, and reached its final form centuries before the compilation of either Talmud, this refers to talmud as an activity rather than to any written compilation.
    23.^ Sefer ha-Ner on Berachot
    24.^ For a list see Ephraim Urbach, s.v. "Tosafot," in Encyclopedia of Religion.
    25.^ See Pilpul, Mordechai Breuer, in Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 16, 2nd Ed (2007), Macmillan Reference, USA and H.H. Ben Sasson, A History of the Jewish People, pp. 627, 717.
    26.^ Kol Melechet Higgayon, the Hebrew translation of Averroes' epitome of Aristotle's logical works, was widely studied in northern Italy, particularly Padua.
    27.^ For a comprehensive treatment, see Ravitzky, below.
    28.^ Faur is here describing the tradition of Damascus, though the approach in other places may have been similar.
    29.^ Examples of lessons using this approach may be found here.
    30.^ Rav Avraham Yitzchok Ha-Cohen Kook, zt"l, Late Chief Rabbi of Israel (February 17, 2008). "A labor of great magnitude stands before us, to repair the break between the Talmudic deliberations and the halachic decisions... to accustom students of the Gemara to correlate knowledge of all the halacha with its source and reason...". Halacha Brura and Birur Halacha Institute. Retrieved 20 September 2010. It should not be confused with the halachic compendium of the same name by Rabbi David Yosef.
    31.^ As Yonah Fraenkel shows in his book Darko Shel Rashi be-Ferusho la-Talmud ha-Bavli, one of Rashi's major accomplishments was textual emendation. Rabbenu Tam, Rashi's grandson and one of the central figures in the Tosafist academies, polemicizes against textual emendation in his less studied work Sefer ha-Yashar. However, the Tosafists, too, emended the Talmudic text (See e.g. Baba Kamma 83b s.v. af haka'ah ha'amurah or Gittin 32a s.v. mevutelet) as did many other medieval commentators (see e.g. R. Shlomo ben Aderet, Hiddushei ha-Rashb"a al ha-Sha"s to Baba Kamma 83b, or Rabbenu Nissim's commentary to Alfasi on Gittin 32a).
    32.^ Etkes, Immanuel (2002). The Gaon of Vilna. University of California Press. p. 16. ISBN 0-520-22394-2.
    33.^ Solomon Schechter, Studies in Judaism p.92.
    34.^ Introduction to Sokoloff, Dictionary of Jewish Babylonian Aramaic.
    35.^ Treasury of Talmudic Manuscripts, Jewish National and University Library
    36.^ See under #Manuscripts and textual variants, below.
    37.^ See particularly his controversial dissertation, Mar Samuel, available at (German).
    39.^ "Why Christians Should Study Torah and Talmud". Bridges for Peace. Retrieved July 3, 2006.
    40.^ "Why Koreans study Talmud". Ynet. 05.12.11.
    41.^ a b Rodkinson
    42.^ Lewis, Bernard, Semites and anti-Semites: an inquiry into conflict and prejudice, W. W. Norton & Company, 1999, p. 134
    43.^ Johnson, Paul, A history of the Jews, HarperCollins, 1988, p. 577
    44.^ Arab attitudes to Israel, Yehoshafat Harkabi, p. 248, 272
    45.^ Such as Uriel da Costa, Israel Shahak and Baruch Kimmerling
    46.^ Such as Christopher Hitchens and Denis Diderot
    47.^ Hyam Maccoby, Judaism on Trial
    48.^ ADL report The Talmud in Anti-Semitic Polemics, Anti-Defamation League
    49.^ Student, Gil - Rebuttals to criticisms of Talmud
    50.^ Bacher, Wilhelm, "Talmud", article in Jewish Encyclopedia, Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1901
    51.^ Article online
    52.^ See especially sections "Attacks on the Talmud" at
    53.^ Fraade, pp. 144-146
    54.^ Kimmerling, Baruch, "Images of Gentiles" (book review), Journal of Palestine Studies, April 1997, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 96–98
    55.^ Siedman, p. 137
    56.^ Cohn-Sherbok, p. 48
    57.^ Steinsaltz, pp. 268-270
    58.^ See, for example, Uriel DaCosta, quoted by Nadler, p. 68
    59.^ Cohn-Sherbok, p. 47
    60.^ Wilhelm Bacher, "Talmud", article in Jewish Encyclopedia
    61.^ ADL report, p. 1-2
    62.^ For examples of some selective quoting and omissions, see:Responses to criticisms by Gil Student:Responses to criticisms by Michael Gruda
    63.^ Nov. 146.1.2.
    64.^ The Jewish representatives included Rabbi Yechiel of Paris and Rabbi Moses ben Jacob of Coucy
    65.^ Rodkinson, pp 66–69
    66.^ Levy, p 701
    67.^ For a Hebrew account of the Paris Disputation, see Jehiel of Paris, "The Disputation of Jehiel of Paris" (Hebrew), in Collected Polemics and Disputations, ed. J. D. Eisenstein, Hebrew Publishing Company, 1922; Translated and reprinted by Hyam Maccoby in Judaism on Trial: Jewish-Christian Disputations in the Middle Ages, 1982
    68.^ James Carroll Constantine's sword: the church and the Jews : a history
    69.^ Cohn-Sherbok, pp 50-54
    70.^ a b c Maccoby
    71.^ Hyam Maccoby, op. cit.
    72.^ Roth, Norman, Medieval Jewish civilization: an encyclopedia, Taylor & Francis, 2003, p. 83
    73.^ Rodkinson, p 98
    74.^ Hastings, James. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics Part 23, p 186
    75.^ Rodkinson, pp 100-103
    76.^ Rodkinson, p. 105
    77.^ Levy, p. 210
    78.^ Boettcher, Susan R., "Entdecktes Judenthum", article in Levy, p. 210
    79.^ Berlin, George L., Defending the faith: nineteenth-century American Jewish writings on Christianity and Jesus, SUNY Press, 1989, p 156
    80.^ Chesronos Hashas
    81.^ The Talmud: The Steinsaltz Edition, pp. 103-104 Heller, Marvin J. (1999). Printing the Talmud: a history of the individual treatises printed from 1700 to 1750. Basel: Brill Publishers. pp. 17, 166.
    82.^ Rodkinson, pp 109-114
    83.^ Levy, p 564
    84.^ Jeansonne, Glen, Women of the Far Right: The Mothers' Movement and World War II, University of Chicago Press, 1997, pp 168-169
    85.^ Jones, Jeremy (June 1999). "Talmudic Terrors". Australia/Israel Review. Retrieved 2008-06-12. "If any reader doubts the maliciousness, virulence and prevalence of such material in cyber-space, it is well worth a visit to the Internet site known as Talmud Exposé ( [now at]), in which Melbourne's David Maddison has performed the Herculean task of responding, one by one, to the hundreds of "anti-Talmud" quotes, lies and themes he has encountered on the Internet.".
    86.^ "The Talmud in Anti-Semitic Polemics" (PDF) (Press release). Anti-Defamation League. February 2003. Retrieved September 16, 2010. "By selectively citing various passages from the Talmud and Midrash, polemicists have sought to demonstrate that Judaism espouses hatred for non-Jews (and specifically for Christians), and promotes obscenity, sexual perversion, and other immoral behavior. To make these passages serve their purposes, these polemicists frequently mistranslate them or cite them out of context (wholesale fabrication of passages is not unknown).…In distorting the normative meanings of rabbinic texts, anti-Talmud writers frequently remove passages from their textual and historical contexts. Even when they present their citations accurately, they judge the passages based on contemporary moral standards, ignoring the fact that the majority of these passages were composed close to two thousand years ago by people living in cultures radically different from our own. They are thus able to ignore Judaism's long history of social progress and paint it instead as a primitive and parochial religion. Those who attack the Talmud frequently cite ancient rabbinic sources without noting subsequent developments in Jewish thought, and without making a good-faith effort to consult with contemporary Jewish authorities who can explain the role of these sources in normative Jewish thought and practice."
    87.^ Student, Gil (2000). "The Real Truth About The Talmud". Retrieved September 16, 2010. "Anti-Talmud accusations have a long history dating back to the 13th century when the associates of the Inquisition attempted to defame Jews and their religion [see Yitzchak Baer, A History of Jews in Christian Spain, vol. I pp. 150-185]. The early material compiled by hateful preachers like Raymond Martini and Nicholas Donin remain the basis of all subsequent accusations against the Talmud. Some are true, most are false and based on quotations taken out of context, and some are total fabrications [see Baer, ch. 4 f. 54, 82 that it has been proven that Raymond Martini forged quotations]. On the Internet today we can find many of these old accusations being rehashed…"

    Nathan T. Lopes Cardozo The Infinite Chain: Torah, Masorah, and Man (Philipp Feldheim, 1989). ISBN 0-944070-15-9
    Aryeh Carmell (December 1986). Aiding Talmud study. Feldheim Publishers. ISBN 978-0-87306-428-6. Retrieved 29 August 2011. (includes Samuel ha-Nagid's Mevo ha-Talmud, see next section)
    Zvi Hirsch Chajes Mevo Hatalmud, transl. Jacob Shachter: The Students' Guide Through The Talmud (Yashar Books, 2005). ISBN 1-933143-05-3
    Dan Cohn-Sherbok (1994). Judaism and other faiths. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-312-10384-2. Retrieved 29 August 2011.
    Fraade, Steven D, "Navigating the Anomalous: Non-Jews at the Intersection of Early Rabbinic Law and Narrative", in Laurence Jay Silberstein; Robert L. Cohn (1 August 1994). The Other in Jewish thought and history: constructions of Jewish culture and identity. NYU Press. pp. 145–165. ISBN 978-0-8147-7990-3. Retrieved 29 August 2011.
    R. Travers Herford (15 February 2007). Christianity in Talmud and Midrash. KTAV Publishing House, Inc. ISBN 978-0-88125-930-8. Retrieved 29 August 2011.
    D. Landesman A Practical Guide to Torah Learning (Jason Aronson, 1995). ISBN 1-56821-320-4
    Emmanuel Lévinas; Annette Aronowicz (February 1994). Nine Talmudic readings. Indiana University Press. ISBN 978-0-253-20876-7. Retrieved 29 August 2011.
    Levy, Richard S., Antisemitism: a historical encyclopedia of prejudice and persecution, Volume 2, ABC-CLIO, 2005. See articles: "Talmud Trials", "Entdecktes Judenthum", "The Talmud Jew", "David Duke", "August Rohling", and "Johannes Pfefferkorn".
    Hyam Maccoby; Jehiel ben Joseph (of Paris) (1993). Judaism on trial: Jewish-Christian disputations in the Middle Ages. Fairleigh Dickinson University Press. ISBN 978-1-874774-16-7. Retrieved 29 August 2011. A compendium of primary source materials, with commentary.
    Maimonides Introduction to the Mishneh Torah (English translation)
    Maimonides Introduction to the Commentary on the Mishnah (Hebrew Fulltext), transl. Zvi Lampel (Judaica Press, 1998). ISBN 1-880582-28-7
    Aaron Parry The Complete Idiot's Guide to The Talmud (Alpha Books, 2004). ISBN 1-59257-202-2
    Rodkinson, Michael Levi, The history of the Talmud from the time of its formation, about 200 B.C., up to the present time, The Talmud Society, 1918
    Jonathan Rosen (25 October 2001). The Talmud and the Internet: A Journey Between Worlds. Continuum International Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-8264-5534-5. Retrieved 29 August 2011.
    Adin Steinsaltz (11 September 2006). The essential Talmud. Basic Books. ISBN 978-0-465-08273-5. Retrieved 29 August 2011. Read more here. See also here.
    Adin Steinsaltz The Talmud: A Reference Guide (Random House, 1996). ISBN 0-679-77367-3

    Samuel ha-Nagid, Mevo ha-Talmud
    Joseph ben Judah ibn Aknin, Mevo ha-Talmud
    Zerachiah Halevi, Sefer ha-Tzava
    Samson of Chinon, Sefer ha-Keritut
    Jacob Hagiz, Teḥillat Ḥochmah (included in most editions of Keritut)
    collective, ed. Abraham ibn Akra, Meharere Nemarim
    Joseph ibn Verga, She'erit Yosef
    Isaac Campanton, Darche ha-Talmud
    David ben Solomon ibn Abi Zimra, Kelale ha-Gemara
    Bezalel Ashkenazi, Kelale ha-Gemara
    Yeshu’ah b. Yosef ha-Levi, Halichot Olam Joseph Caro, Kelale ha-Gemara (commentary on Halichot Olam)
    Solomon Algazi, Yavin Shemu’ah (commentary on Halichot Olam)

    Yisrael Ya'akov Algazi, Ar'a de-Rabbanan
    Serillo, Samuel, Kelale Shemuel
    Horowitz, Isaiah, Shene Luchot ha-Berit (section on Torah she-be-al-Pe)
    Moses Chaim Luzzatto, Derech Tevunot, translated into English as The Ways of Reason, Feldheim 1988, ISBN 978-0-87306-495-8 same, Sefer ha-Higgayon, translated into English as The Book of Logic, Feldheim 1995, ISBN 978-0-87306-707-2

    de Oliveira, Solomon, Darche Noam
    Malachi ha-Cohen, Yad Malachi
    Aryeh Leib HaCohen Heller, Shev Shema'tata
    Goitein, B., Kesef Nivhar
    Ezechia Bolaffi, Ben Zekunim vol. 1
    Moshe Amiel, Ha-Middot le-Ḥeqer ha-Halachah, vol. 1, vol. 2, vol. 3

    Modern scholarly works
    Y. N. Epstein, Mevo-ot le-Sifrut haTalmudim
    Hanoch Albeck, Mavo la-talmudim
    Louis Jacobs, "How Much of the Babylonian Talmud is Pseudepigraphic?" Journal of Jewish Studies 28, No. 1 (1977), pp. 46–59
    Saul Lieberman, Hellenism in Jewish Palestine (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1950)
    Jacob Neusner, Sources and Traditions: Types of Compositions in the Talmud of Babylonia (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992).
    David Weiss Halivni, Mekorot u-Mesorot (Jerusalem: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1982 on)
    Yaakov Elman, "Order, Sequence, and Selection: The Mishnah’s Anthological Choices,” in David Stern, ed. The Anthology in Jewish Literature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004) 53-80
    Strack, Herman L. and Stemberger, Gunter, Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash, tr. Markus Bockmuehl: repr. 1992, hardback ISBN 978-0-567-09509-1, paperback ISBN 978-0-8006-2524-5
    Moses Mielziner, Introduction to the Talmud: repr. 1997, hardback ISBN 978-0-8197-0156-5, paperback ISBN 978-0-8197-0015-5
    Aviram Ravitzky, Aristotelian Logic and Talmudic Methodology (Hebrew): Jerusalem 2009, ISBN 978-965-493-459-6
    Andrew Schumann, Talmudic Logic: (London: College Publications 2012), ISBN 978-1-84890-072-1

    On individual tractates
    Moshe Benovitz, Berakhot chapter 1: Iggud le-Farshanut ha-Talmud (Hebrew, with English summary)
    Stephen Wald, Shabbat chapter 7: Iggud le-Farshanut ha-Talmud (Hebrew, with English summary)
    Aviad Stollman, Eruvin chapter 10: Iggud le-Farshanut ha-Talmud (Hebrew, with English summary)
    Aaron Amit, Pesachim chapter 4: Iggud le-Farshanut ha-Talmud (Hebrew, with English summary)

    Historical study
    Shalom Carmy (Ed.) Modern Scholarship in the Study of Torah: Contributions and Limitations Jason Aronson, Inc.
    Richard Kalmin Sages, Stories, Authors and Editors in Rabbinic Babylonia Brown Judaic Studies
    David C. Kraemer, On the Reliability of Attributions in the Babylonian Talmud, Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989), pp. 175–90
    Lee Levine, Ma'amad ha-Hakhamim be-Eretz Yisrael (Jerusalem: Yad Yizhak Ben-Zvi, 1985), (=The Rabbinic Class of Roman Palestine in Late Antiquity)
    Saul Lieberman Hellenism in Jewish Palestine (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1950)
    John W. McGinley " 'The Written' as the Vocation of Conceiving Jewishly". ISBN 0-595-40488-X
    David Bigman, Finding A Home for Critical Talmud Study


    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:46 am

    orthodoxymoron wrote:
    enemyofNWO wrote:
    orthodoxymoron wrote:Do we all come from the goddess? Rewatch Alex Collier's 1994 interview - and his 1995 lecture - with this thread in mind. I continue to 'enjoy' listening to Alex Collier -- but he loses me with dimensional-talk, ET-mentoring, no-money, spaceships which are bigger on the inside than they are on the outside, etc. I presently view 'leaving third-dimension' as being the extermination of humanity -- and the souls of humanity incarnating back into reptilian-physicality -- or whatever we were before we were human. I presently think that the Book of Revelation might be a bad-thing for humanity. Still, I think Alex knows a helluva lot -- and that he only tells us a portion of what he really knows. For example, he recently did NOT wish to talk about Angels -- and I think I know why. Alex is someone I'd like to have an all-night discussion with -- although I'd probably become suicidal by breakfast-time. I think things might be THAT bad. I try to have fun on this website -- but I strongly suspect that the galactic-realities are NOT pleasant -- and that very few individuals are prepared to properly process the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth -- about life, the universe, and everything. Knowing -- and Thinking We Know -- are two VERY different things. I KNOW that I don't know -- and I'm not sure I really wish to know. I might not be able to handle the truth. Me knowing the truth might create more problems than I can possibly imagine. What Would the NSA Say?? The Horror.
    Orthodoxymoron, if you analyze the probable events from the above post you will find that none of those predictions ever happened . 10 predictions and Zero results . The facts speak for themselves . I am afraid that Alex is one of the multitude of people that tells his audience what they want to hear …….. and the people like it ........Let's watch this one " According to Alex Collier - December 3, 2013 we will be in 5th density "UFO Hypotheses - Alex Collier Volume Two (19 of 24)" It would be interesting to know who suggested this event to him… The tooth fairy?
    As I have said so many times, most of what I do within this website is science-fictional in nature. I simply consider possibilities which most people don't think about. Alex has caused me to think in ways which I otherwise would not have. I listen to a lot of strange sources -- and I take all of them with a sea of salt. I keep trying to imagine what it might be like to deal with real crazy stuff throughout the solar system. It's sort of a conditioning process. Real insiders are not likely to hold press conferences, and tell us the truth, with the approval of the powers that be. We probably have to be somewhat satisfied with a motley-zoo of sources. I suspect that probably 5% of the internet madness is actually true -- but that 5% might be extremely important. I have simply been modeling a particular appoach to managing the insanity.
    I think I might increase that 5% (truth to bs ratio) to maybe 15% within this thread. I suspect that those who get paid to monitor people such as myself, probably laugh at me most of the time -- yet, I suspect that there are times when they exclaim "How did he know THAT???!!!" Some people play video-games. Some people create political and theological science-fiction -- FOR FREE!!! I recently jokingly told someone that I did NOT discriminate -- that I simply hated everyone!! They behaved as though they thought I were serious!! Has the universe lost its sense of humour -- or is it just me?? On a more serious note -- consider the following potential disseration-topics:

    1. The Effect of Modern Technology on Third-World Nations.

    2. The Great Controversy Between Church and State in Modernity.

    3. The Word and Law of God in the Garden of Eden and the Earth Made New.

    4. The Centrality of the Sanctuary in Sacred Scripture.

    5. Unfallen and Fallen Human Nature Relative to Original Sin and the Unpardonable Sin.

    6. The Love of God Relative to the End of the World.

    7. Responsible Human Freedom Relative to the Righteous Sovereignty of God.

    8. Responsibility: The Word and Law of God Relative to the Sacrificial System and the Substitutionary Atonement in the Psalms and Proverbs of Sacred Scripture.

    9. Angels and Archangels in Sacred Scripture Relative to the War in Heaven and the Great Controversy Between Christ and Satan in the Conflict of the Ages.

    10. The Christological, Soteriological, and Eschatological Implications of the Possible Human and Reptilian Hybrid Nature of the God of This World.

    11. The Covenants Between Divinity and Humanity in Sacred Scripture Relative to the Jewish Nation and the Nations of the World.

    12. The Nature, Character, Word, and Law of God in Deuteronomy Relative to Matthew in the Holy Bible.

    13. Conditional and Unconditional Prophecy in Sacred Scripture.

    14. The Relationship Between Natural Law, God's Law, and Man's Law in Antiquity and Modernity.

    15. The Effect of Robert Harold Schuller and the Crystal Cathedral on the Roman Catholic Church.

    16. The Relationship Between the Kingdom of God, the State of Israel, the Roman Catholic Church, and the New World Order.

    17. The New World Order Relative to the Garden of Eden, the Fall of Man, the Flood of Noah, the Tower of Babel, the Hebrew Exodus, the Reign of Christ, and the New Earth.

    18. The Relationship Between Church and State in the First, Second, and Third Reichs.

    19. The Relationship Between the Anglican Communion and the Roman Catholic Church.

    20. The Relationship Between the Vatican, the City of London, Washington D.C., the United Nations, the Secret Government, and the New World Order.

    21. The Relationship Between the Nazis, Masons, and Jesuits in the Twentieth Century.

    22. Political, Technological, and Supernatural Challenges to the Right to Privacy.

    23. The Relationship Between a Well Organized Militia and the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

    24. The Religious, Political, and Financial Relationship Between Rome, London, and the United States of America.

    25. The Relationship Between Orion, Sirius, Aldebaran, the Pleiades, and Earth Humanity.

    26. The Twenty Most Important and Binding Argreements Affecting Earth Humanity in Antiquity and Modernity.

    27. The Exact and Comprehensive Roles of Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, David Rockefeller, the Pope of Rome, the Rothschilds and the Monarchy of England in the Governance of the United States of America.

    28. The Importance of the Throne of King David: Historically and in Modernity.

    29. The Exact and Comprehensive Roles of Archangels Gabriel, Michael, and Lucifer in Antiquity and Modernity.

    30. The Proper Relationship Between Psychology, Ethics, Politics, Religion, Business, Law, Law-Enforcement, and the Military.

    31. The Potential Integration of the Latin Mass, the 1928 Book of Common Prayer , the Federalist Papers , Sacred Classical Music, the Episcopal Church, the Anglican Communion, the Roman Catholic Church, the United Nations, the Secret Government, the New World Order, and the United States of the Solar System.

    That last one could get ugly!!!!! These topics are just scratching the surface of some very deep subjects and even deeper rabbit-holes. I can be as silly or serious as you wish for me to be -- but so far I've received a chilly-reception when I've tried to break the ice with humour and a kinder-gentler approach to conspiracy theories and esoteric research -- but you might prefer the Completely Ignorant Fool Act rather than My True Reincarnational Self. Should Probation Close Sometime Soon??? When Will the Cleansing of the Sanctuary be Completed??? Last Chance??? Conduit Closing??? Think About It -- But Think Fast. The End is Near. Repentance and Reformation Might be Wise Moves. Just a Thought. More Sherry Shriner! I'm just trying to make us think in some rather strange ways by posting this link! It sounds as though two very powerful and problematic factions (Gabriel v Lucifer?!) are fighting for supremacy in this solar system. I guess my hope is that a Third Pure Faction (Michael?!) will clean up the mess when the other two factions destroy each other! I'm half joking -- and half serious. Once again, I suspect that the way things work is very nasty and messy. This is very scary stuff IMHO. The Battle Between Good and Evil Seems to Involve Factions in Conflict Which are BOTH Good and Evil. Can't we just all get along??

    I continue to wish to live in a solar system of law and order -- but I am very troubled regarding the subjects of law and order when I read both the Old and the New Testaments of the Holy Bible. I don't relish digging up the dirty linen of the Seventh-day Adventist Church -- yet some of the theological controversy can be most enlightening. These two videos on the Sabbath contain some interesting points. 1. 2. Whatever you believe -- make sure that you talk fast -- and speak as if your words cannot be controverted or confounded. You know what I'm talking about. What was the Law of God for the Whole World in the Garden of Eden?? What was the Law of God for the Whole World at the Death of Moses?? What was the Law of God for the Whole World at the Birth of Christ?? What Was the Law of God for the Whole World Following the Resurrection of Christ?? What is the Law of God for the Whole World Presently?? Don't Lie. Be Honest About the Law of God. Once again, I presently consider the most important aspects of a New Solar System to consist of the proper integration of psychology, ethics, politics, religion, business, law, law-enforcement, and the military. I remain VERY conflicted regarding our predicament and the future of humanity. What occurred just prior to -- and just after -- the Creation of the Human Being -- is of Supreme Interest to me. I continue to wonder if there are hidden and suppressed Teachings of Archangel Michael in the Garden of Eden which might present the essence of the Ten-Commandments in a manner quite different than that exhibited in the Decalogue?! Notice that when Jesus was asked about the Law -- he didn't quote from the Ten-Commandments!! Why might this be?? Dr. Walter Martin concluded that no particular day is exclusively Holy. He should know. Walter was The Bible Answer Man. I have suggested that EVERY Day be considered Holy -- and that Work should be a Holy Activity -- but then I'm just a Completely Ignorant Fool. What is the Law of Gabriel?? What is the Law of Lucifer?? What is the Law of Michael?? Please do not neglect Biblical and Theological Studies -- even if you don't believe in God.
    magamud wrote:
    firefly wrote:Megamud, you posted this video. Thank you, I watched it, but no-one has given their opinion on this information. I don't quite accept this Christ that RayEl is putting forth. I do remember a similar sect that were building a welcome center for Aliens to visit commencing in Israel sometime ago. I wander if it is the same group. I do think that someone or something is creating the distruction we are experiencing all over the world. Is this Lucifer? or Enlil or both. If this Being is real and commanding the U.N. not to separate Israel then perhaps is this why the Governments of the World support Israel in all they do, whether good or evil. Oh! and incidently, what did Wilileaks have to do with the video? as I couldn't find any reference to them or the U.N. However, with all of my research I have come to believe that Lucifer is indeed governing our planet, but what was 21-12-12 all about. Could that have been the time of the Gate openning to allow Lucifer complete reign over us now and for a period of time in which alot of deception like never before is now taking place,ie in the above production bible verses are used to confirm the message. Remember, 'even the Elect will be decieved if that were possible'. I don't know if the Bible has been corrupted, I suspect it has, but there must be still truth in the life of Christ and his message. According to this video produced for the so called Templars. The Bible belt of America was hit by disasters because of their churches. I would think that if God or Christ were to punish the people they would start with Washington where the evil resides, wouldn't you?.

    Love and friendship

    Which video? I surely, usually will give an opinion. Yes which Christ is it, thats the question. How will one tell? I dont know of any sure answer. My talents might be best served when you are having the actual experience and might want to seek counsel. Im sure I could help with building up some context before the showdown. Christ will be the wisest amongst men without needing any miracle. If he uses miracles it will be to heal the sick and the poor. Much like the Gospel. This will be the foundation of his wisdom. Then from this comes his bestowal of power by his Father, our father, lord of creation. Who in his infinite knowledge blesses all with love. That is the system is indeed equal and transparent for everyone. Good does triumphant over evil resulting in Lucifer and his legion being weighed for their work or fruits of labor.

    Building ambassadorships would seem more common, but the amount of ridicule destroys any reflection of light to support such a task. That is man needs miracles to start extrapolating their soul. This is also an example of the self enslavement man has put himself under. Its good for someone to seek god or Et's as it might be good for someone to believe in atheism. These are the dramas of Idols.

    I believe you are pointing to the Raelian movement? I went to a few of their seminars in the beginning. I explored all ET contacts. A sift in this area can help. I believe all benevolent ETS follow the Christ narrative. They do this because this is where the truth lies for them. Now what I find going on here is some type of Karma being played out with ETS and their contacts. I suspect there are some very fine advanced races with compassion that did not believe in Christ and tried to do good things on their own. This resulted in Sin and thus the quest to understand this separation with opportunities here on Earth. I suspect there are quite a few of these dynamics going on now.

    What is happening now. Lucifer and the legion are playing out their last throws of survival and growth. One must be able to think in singularities to understand Lucifer. In as much as understanding the One Christ. He has his legion which has its hierarchal structure in every strata of life. So enlil, Enki, Ra, Odin, etc.... All work for the one boss. If you can grasp the centralizing ideas there is no need to process out someone elses personal dram to understanding God. This is idol worshipping. Idols need worship to have power and all use magic to manipulate their ponzie scheme. Also Evil is a force. Much like the holy spirit. It is a living thing that happens in the moment. It guides all of life. So evil is not necessarily in one person, but what a treat that would be if Christ outed the devil himself. The corruption lies mostly in the system itself. It takes someone very special to hold the corruption at bay.

    The geopolitical system is in place to centralize our species. Evil uses cunning or philanthropy to persevere. Without knowledge of what god is man will continue to mine for its salvation. This becomes the testament of our species ability to recycle itself through tyranny, revolution to tyranny again and again. God know this as to why he indeed gives us a beginning and an end.

    The bible is indeed true. Literally im not sure. I know the homophobia is ridiculous. There are some devoted to it who have missed the message as equal to a Atheist. Knowing and worshipping god can be very easy. His yolk is not a burden. The devil is indeed in the details and very cunning. A child can know god and it speaks to the common man.

    We are in the time of sorrows. Jesus is managing the fire of the planet. Man sows his destiny in his actions. A man who has power now in this world has a great amount of judgment on his hands. I suspect many incarnate now to have something for the next cycle on this planet.
    Have we been experiencing a monumental conflict essentially between Black-Giants and White-Nazis -- as politically incorrect as that sounds??!! Would this possibly be a Gabriel v Lucifer battle?? Anunnaki v Nazi?? I'm sorry for going down this road -- but I feel VERY uneasy regarding BOTH major factions. I feel VERY uneasy regarding BOTH Divinity and Humanity. I wonder what REALLY transpired in the Garden of Eden -- especially in connection with Gabriel, Michael, and Lucifer?! I continue to think that a proper understanding of the Archangels is essential to understanding just about everything else. I've been somewhat hesitant to really research this subject, because it scares the hell out of me. I believe there are records in secret archives and underground bases which tell the true story about this solar system and all life-forms who have lived here (and presently live here) -- but that the story is so upsetting and potentially disruptive -- that it is kept under lock and key -- with very, very few mortals allowed access to it. This is just speculation on my part -- but I think we'd be shocked and amazed if we knew what is secretly hidden away from us simple folk. I think there are probably good and bad reasons for keeping a lot of this hypothetical material secret. I've hinted at a helluva lot of things -- without pushing too hard. Some of you need to read between the lines in this thread -- and connect the dots. I haven't just been repeating what I've heard elsewhere. I've been attempting to do some unorthodox conceptual and intuitive thinking -- just to see where that leads -- and it has deeply frightened me.

    What I've said about the Ancient Egyptian Deity (AED) has been absolutely true and accurate. I've called a lot of this thread Religious and Political Science-Fiction -- but the AED stuff has NOT been fictional. I've spread the reporting over a lot of different posts -- and I've been very indirect and tactful -- but the information is absolutely true. There's been a helluva lot that I haven't talked about -- and I've kept a lot of related theories to myself -- but you should take all of this VERY seriously. I continue to think we might be dealing with (Good + Evil) v (Good + Evil). I continue to think of Gabriel as possibly being the Queen of Nibiru -- Lucifer possibly being the God of This World -- and Michael possibly being the Genetic-Engineer of the Human Race who was overthrown and demoted by Gabriel and Lucifer. I continue to think that the history of this solar system is unimaginably sad and violent. Money and Military Trumps Everything. Right?! Might Makes Right. Right?! Those With the Gold RULE!! Right?! Remind me to be a Banker-Warrior in my next incarnation -- so I don't repeat the fatal mistake of being an Idealistic Completely Ignorant Fool. Just Kidding -- or Am I??

    There was an episode in the latest version of V called We Can't Win -- and I've often wondered if the best Humanity can do is negotiate some sort of Peace-Agreement with one of the Galactic War Lords -- which probably involves being a Slave-Race on a Prison-Planet. I get the feeling that the Two Major Factions in this solar system don't really love humanity. We might be screwed no matter who rules. In other words -- no matter which faction wins -- we still lose. Try telling that to the members of your Happy-Clappy Church -- and see how long you get to preach to 10,000 people who just wish to Praise the Lord. Sorry for being blunt -- but honesty seems to be a crime these days. However, I remember Dr. Walter Martin telling us that the younger generation was honest. However, everything might be a lie. Everything might be a House of Cards. One thing leads to another thing leads to another thing. Please watch the Disclosure episode from the sixth-season of Stargate SG-1. Sorry -- there are missing parts. Consider purchasing all ten seasons for a real education.


    What do you think about this sort of thing?? It should be obvious to all by now that I hang-out on the edges of Christendom (as a Hypothetical Renegade French Jesuit Organist)!! I sometimes like listening to people such as Dave Hunt (who recently died), Malachi Martin, Walter Martin, Desmond Ford, John Todd, Constance Cumby, Tom Horn, Texe Marrs, Steve Quayle, Sherry Shriner, et al. Do you get the picture?? I just watch, listen -- and move on. I certainly don't recommend this sort of thing to everyone -- which is why I've just mumbled to a few unfaithful-followers on this little website (now with over 1,000 members)! I continue to think that those who watch this thread most closely get paid to do so!!! They're my captive-audience!!! I wonder how many of these people (and other than people) still retain their sanity??!! BTW -- what was happening in the world right around 285BC -- 290BC?? Alex Collier stated in 1995 that we'd transition into 5D in December of 2013. Might this POSSIBLY indicate the end of the 2300 year-day period of Daniel 8:14?? IF so, what was going on at the hypothetical beginning of this period?? What if the sanctuary cleansing process will be completed by the end of 2013?? I wouldn't count on it -- but I'm not sold on 1844 OR with at least another thousand years of madness being tolerated within this solar system. "Not in my solar-system!!" I generally don't play numbers-games -- but I indulge in this unsavory-vice once in a blue-moon.

    Nothing seemed to happen in December of 2012 -- so perhaps nothing will happen in December of 2013. One POSSIBLE scenario might be an economic and market collapse between now and December -- when things might sink to their nadir -- at which time the Saviour of the World might appear to mankind -- and set things right with NESARA!! I'm sorry when anyone dies. I don't know a lot about Margaret Thatcher -- so perhaps I should do some research. She seemed to be a fan of Adam Smith -- so perhaps I should study the two -- side by side. I just don't seem to have the time or energy to do what I think I should be doing. It's always been that way. BTW -- rumour has it that Bill Clinton nearly had a heart-attack after having a stroke in the Oval Office. I'm one sick puppy -- aren't I??!! I'm so sad, disillusioned, and despondant -- that being silly is probably the only thing keeping me at least partially sane!!! Here are some interesting images -- but some of them are rather nasty and unkind!! Sometimes I think that those who have NO interest in politics, religion, conspiracy-theories, psychic-phenomenon, aliens, ufos, transhumanism, etc, etc, etc -- might be the salvation of us all -- simply because they have NOT been driven mad by the insanity many of us seem to be obsessed with. Think about THAT while I take a break!!

    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:49 am

    I just finished 'listening' to Religulous because I got the wrong type of DVD (so there is no video). Hey!! Anyway, it was pretty much what I expected -- a sarcastic and caustic survey of religious people throughout the world. It was sort of funny on one level -- and sad on another level.

    But really, if one of the religious people had suggested that 'we are star people -- and that they had scientific proof that we had been created by aliens' I'm sure that Bill Maher would've had a good laugh, and would've asked some unanswerable questions -- to make the whole thing look ridiculous. But really, my limited research and speculation has led me in that direction -- even though it's mostly science-fiction to me -- at this point anyway. What if these aliens (angels led by a renegade archangel(s)?) created "us" -- and then incarnated into "us" (on a soul level) -- essentially becoming "us" -- which really angered the other aliens (conservative angels?) in the universe -- so much so, that they sent a couple of bad@ss archangels (Gabriel and Lucifer??) to clean up the mess??!! In this little hypothetical story -- I'm not sure if Michael and Lucifer were a Galactic Pinky and the Brain OR if Michael was BOTH Pinky and the Brain -- as a Crazy-Maker of sorts. What if one of these archangels (Lucifer??) decided to help the new race of beings (before or after the creation of humanity) -- and fought side by side with the other archangel (Michael??) -- but ultimately failed to win -- switched sides (to survive??) -- and was tasked with enslaving humanity (under the direction of this other victorious archangel)?? What if all of us are considered to be "Fallen-Angels" by the rest of the universe?? What if Lucifer has been the Solar System Administrator aka God of This World -- for thousands of years?? What if Lucifer mediates between God (Gabriel??) and Man (Michael??)?? What if Humanity has done better than expected -- yet things continue to get worse and worse?? What if no one gives a damn about what I just said???

    What if all of the seemingly ridiculous religions were invented by these two archangels to keep humanity in chains?? This wouldn't mean that there were no gods and no afterlife. It would simply mean that mankind was on the galactic fecal-list -- and was getting royally-screwed. My point is that Bill Maher might be right (in a way) -- and the people he was making fun-of might be right (in a way). The main thing, for me, is that people try to think about philosophical and theological themes. I talked to an SUV full of Jehovah's Witnesses today. I thought of them as being The God Squad!! I have no intention of joining them -- yet we had a brief and interesting conversation. We didn't get angry. We weren't mean. We used a lot of mutual positive-reinforcement before going our separate ways. I think that even the most absurd religious systems can serve as mental and spiritual exercises to those who participate in them. Even the most respectable religions might ultimately turn-out to be utter bull$hit. But even if they do, I still think we need churches and religion. They provide structure, fellowship, challenge, refinement, education, business-contacts, etc.

    As I've said so many times, I'm just going to keep doing what I've been doing on this website (unless I get excommunicated)!! If I ever get kicked-out -- I'll just do my thing somewhere else. The point is, I'm making a big deal about politics and religion -- without making a big deal about politics and religion. This is just a Tempest in a Teapot. Still, I think that some really cool science-fiction MIGHT result from this seeming exercise in futility -- and that ultimately, a lot of it might prove to be more factual than fictional. This is only the beginning. I see a helluva lot of smoke -- but I have yet to see the fire. I'm sure that the most powerful forces in this solar system would like to keep it that way. Just a hunch. I get the feeling that a lot of atheists and agnostics simply don't wish to wade through all the BS. They can't be bothered. They've got more important things to do. It takes a lot of time and energy to think through the various possibilities. In a sense, this thread is sort of my religion -- with a very loose definition of 'religion'.

    Regardless of what ends up being true and false -- there is a HUGE infowar and global communication network. Whether this will help or hurt us long-term remains to be seen. So far, it seems as if the good and bad are counterbalancing each other. It's the same old BS -- but on a different level. I seem to have been BADLY burned by all of the madness -- probably because of my radical theories -- and who I might be on a reincarnational-basis. I have been very hesitant to speculate about who I might've been -- going way, way back -- but I have been modeling the possibility of being Archangel Michael -- but NOT in the sense of various self-proclaimed Messianic-Gurus -- out to make a fast-buck. This is just a mind-game which helps me look at history in a different light. The Ancient Egyptian Deity called me 'Michael' while we shopped at Wal*Mart one night -- but I didn't take it seriously. It seemed to be some sort of a test. They later asked me "if I thought I was the one hanging on the cross?" I didn't think so -- and I don't think so.

    Regarding Michael -- I think Archangel Michael might have had something to do with the Teachings Attributed to Jesus -- but I'm thinking that Michael was NOT the Historical Jesus -- at least in the Greatest Story Ever Told sense. I'm thinking that Archangel Lucifer might've played the role of Jesus Christ over the past 2,000 years. This might sound blasphemous -- yet it represents no disrespect to who Christians are devoted to. I simply think that this thing might be much nastier and more complex than we think. I simply think that Michael has been in Demoted-Mode for thousands of years -- while Lucifer has been the God of This World for thousands of years. I suspect that Archangel Gabriel has been the Queen of Nibiru aka Queen of Heaven -- for thousands (if not millions) of years. I'm NOT going to spell this out for you. YOU will have to do your homework -- and come to your OWN conclusions. Think Long and Hard About This One. Just know that I mean NO harm. I come in peace. Wait a minute. No I don't.

    Comment by eleni: "Is it not possible the reptoids have been demonized and the real malevolent factors are just the PTB and are not controlled by ET's (or original species as the reptoids supposed look at their-selves as such) but by dark forces they tap into via ritual magic and have nothing at all to do with off planet species?"

    Here is another comment which I posted on another thread, but which is relevant to this thread by Seashore: "I think it's that they are outnumbered. I'll throw this in: Stewart Swerdlow said in Blue Blood, True Blood that most human civilizations that exist elsewhere are totalitarian by necessity because of the constant Reptilian threat."

    My Response: Are we in the middle of a civil war involving two rival Human Pleiadian and one Aldebaran Luciferian? This would mean two rival Theocracies. Do both sides do business with Interdimensional Reptilians...or is it just the Aldebaran Luciferian side? Do the Interdimensional Reptilians wish for this Human Civil War to result in the extermination of every man, woman, and child on Earth? Do they have to make us destroy ourselves? Are they unable to destroy us directly?

    I have received the following internet messages saying 'Try not to think in terms of good or bad. Understand this is not your planet. Then, understand nothing can be done to you that you don't do to yourself. Know that there are quadrillions of planets and they don't have a massive climate change every 26,000 years and violent deranged people like yourselves. Why on Earth would any race want to live here with you knowingly? The most intelligent life on the planet is not human.' And 'You can't rule yourselves'. And 'We're in your back'. And 'Y'all love fantisizing over my ancestral decorations, places, spirituality that you don't get, the greatness you won't achieve, and the melanin you'll never have. This depiction of my ancestors is pathetic. Y'all always make them look just as degenerative and recessive as you. Anyway, play and have fun as much as you still can. Yes you are running out of time, and to be honest, there is absolutly nothing you can do about it. I have no mercy, you lie and mock and blasphem all the way to hell.' And 'You know this isn't funny! The Lord God will judge you for claiming God ship. Just because God showed you a little bit of His secrets you think you know everything. He will NOT have mercy on you!' These comments did not sound human.

    It seems to me that both rival Human Gods are wrong. Theocracy is always wrong. Tyranny is always wrong. Could both Human Gods have been deceived by the Interdimensional Reptilians? I don't know. It further seems to me that Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom is a way to get the rival Human Gods to stop fighting...and to make the Interdimensional Reptilians leave the Pleiades, Aldebaran, Sirius, Our Solar System...and who knows where else? Are the Teachings of Jesus, the U.S. Constitution, and the Bill of Rights representative of this third non-theocratic way? Is this the Andromedan perspective which Alex Collier speaks of? Please rewatch his videos with this post in mind. Please forgive me for posting these videos one more time. I just think they are helpful in connecting the dots connected with these subjects. Some things need to be repeated over and over before they are grasped.

    YouTube - Leo Zagami the 2012 Armageddon
    YouTube - Ra Stargate - Devil Came To Me

    I know that Human Beings exist. I know that Spirits exist. I know that UFO's are real. I know that we are in huge trouble. Other than that...I don't have privileged inside information. HJ...Do you have evidence or inside information?

    I'm just dealing in possibilities and probabilities...and treating all of this as science fiction...which just might be true.

    Could we be dealing with a perfect storm of a combined war of the races...war of the sexes...and war of the gods? I caught a glimpse of something the other day...that just about floored me. I don't wish to be specific. It's too explosive.

    Annunaki, Draconian, Pigmented, Non-Pigmented, Male, Female, Theocratic, Non-Theocratic, Human, Non-Human, Physical, Non-Physical. Just think about various combinations and conflicts regarding these words. This is not an exhaustive list either. There may be huge seemingly irreconcilable differences among various factions throughout the universe.

    But once again...why can't this hypothetical mess be addressed in the context of Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom in the context of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights in the context of the United Nations? I don't wish for any group to be misused or abused...or done away with. Could future U.N. sessions look like the Star Wars Bar?

    I found this in Wikipedia. Could this have something to do with that which is brewing? Gnostic Neo-Nazis

    An esoteric neo-Nazi sect headquartered in Vienna, Austria called the Tempelhofgesellschaft, founded in the early 1990s, teaches a form of Gnosticism called Marcionism[citation needed]. They distribute pamphlets claiming that the Aryan race originally came to Atlantis from the star Aldebaran (this information is supposedly based on "ancient Sumerian manuscripts"). They maintain that the Aryans from Aldebaran derive their power from the vril energy of the Black Sun. They teach that since the Aryan race is of extraterrestrial origin it has a divine mission to dominate all the other races. It is believed by adherents of this religion that an enormous space fleet is on its way to Earth from Aldebaran which, when it arrives, will join forces with the Nazi Flying Saucers from Antarctica to establish the Western Imperium. [8]

    Thank-you eleni and TRANCOSO. I am researching the links presently...along with that Patricia Cori interview. Sometimes I think that I just want to ask questions and speculate...rather than seriously research...and find unexpected answers that throw me for a loop...and make me eat crow! On the other hand...I think that intuitive inquisitiveness has it's place with subjects as bizzare as this one! I am definitely out of my element...and in over my head...regarding the major secret power factions in this solar system. I feel very uncomfortable thinking about this subject. I know that this is playing with fire...and I am prepared to stop...and proceed in a different direction. There's a reason why some people have Q Clearances or Cosmic Clearances...and why others, such as myself, are lucky to get a passport. Anyway, I hope this thread is doing more good than harm.

    Could this link have something to do with Giza Intelligence?

    Four Factions in the Solar System?

    1. Human Pleiadians (Pigmented God the Father/Mother Theocracy)

    2. Human Aldebarans (Nazi Aryan/Luciferian Theocracy)

    3. Human Andromedans (Christlike Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom)

    4. Reptilian Draconians and Annunaki (Dominating Factions #1 and #2)

    Solution: Exorcise Faction #4 from the Solar System...and unite Factions #1 and #2 under Christlike Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom.

    Usual disclaimer: All of the above may be total bs.

    The bottom line is that I just want things to work out well for all factions and all individuals. Namaste to All.

    Here is another version of the previous post. I'm just stumbling through this...and probably into a heap of trouble.

    I'm still trying to think through three major hypothetical factions. Richard Hoagland speaks of the Nazis, Masons, and Magicians within NASA. I would guess that they represent the major players in the Solar System. There are supposedly three major factions in three major underground (under ice?) bases under one of the polar icecaps (can't remember which). A third of the 'angels' were kicked out of 'heaven'. Is this reference indicitive of three Pleiadian factions? One Pleiadian/PTB faction? One Pleiadian/Luciferian faction? One Pleiadian faction who chose not to participate in the 'War in Heaven'? I'm thinking that the Pleiades, Aldebaran, and Andromeda are key to understanding these three hypothetical factions. Could the 'Trilateral Commission' be so named because of the three major hypothetical factions? Are the following groupings somewhat accurate? However the groupings are arranged...I'm becoming more certain that we have three major players (four if we include the Interdimensional Reptilians). The first two factions are extremely dangerous...and the third faction is the least powerful (but has the solution to the sad state of affairs). Just speculation, of course.

    1. Pleiades/Humans/Draconians/Sirius-A/Annunaki/Nibiru(Sirius-C?)/Mars/Lemuria/Zionism/Magicians/Vatican/Illuminati.
    2. Aldebaran/Humans/Draconians/Radical-Luciferian/Sirius-B/Venus/Earth's-Moon/Teutonic-Zionism/Nazis/Giza-Intelligence/Bavarian-Illuminati.
    3. Pleiades/Andromeda/Arcturus/Moderate-Luciferian/Masons/US-Constitution/Responsible-Freedom/Less Draconian Involvement (but still some).

    The existence of each of these hypothetical factions may be completely justified from a historical perspective...and I'm sure they all have their sad-stories and horror-stories. But can't we do better than this in modernity? Why can't these three factions (if they exist as described) unite under Namaste Constitutional Responsible the context of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of the context of the United Nations...and applied to the entire Solar System? They could continue to address all grievances via Constructive Competition in an Open Court. A Solar System Exorcism would undoubtedly be necessary to make this proposal a reality. The Universal Super Powers That Be would undoubtedly have to agree to allow this to occur...or it would be a non-starter.

    Why does this have to be so hard?

    Orion the Hunter is holding and looking at Aldebaran. Is this correct? Is this significant? Where is Orion the Hunter from? Where is he going? Is it significant that M42 is part of the sword? Sirius is supposedly the All Seeing Eye at the top of the pyramid. Or is the eye simply illuminated by Sirius. Or is Sirius 'illuminated' by Aldebaran? Sirius is located by one of Orion's feet. Does this represent a hierarchy? 'As below'? Aldebaran>Sirius B>Giza Intelligence? Are the Andromedans a moderate faction of Giza Intelligence? Here is another piece of the puzzle:

    The mythology surrounding the various factions seems to be mostly traditional and arbitrary. I'm mainly interested in who the major hidden groups are...and what can be done to prevent Armageddon, the Seven Last Plagues, Earth-Changes, Theocracy, Tyranny, the New World Order, Extermination, Enslavement, etc.

    Does anyone have insights regarding the major hidden factions in our solar system? I've suggested some possibilities...but I don't really know. I smell smoke...and I'm sure there's fire. I'm suspecting that the power centers of these hypothetical factions are in underground bases here and on the moon.

    Why can't the various factions reconcile...reveal everything to the public...and then just rejoin the human race? Why does all of this have to be so dark and creepy? Can't we just move forward as a united and free human race? I feel like I only know .01% of what's really going on.

    I'm sure these hidden factions (if they exist) are very advanced technologically and intellectually...but I suspect that, with the exception of one of the groups, that their spirituality is very dark and powerful. But what do I know? Too much? Too little? Probably both.

    Were Giza Intelligence the real 'Raiders of the Lost Ark'? Were the World Wars really Zionism vs Teutonic Zionism? Was Indiana Jones an Andromedan Sympathizer? YouTube- Teutonic Zionism

    Which of the factions do you suppose was responsible for 9/11 no caste? Did ET phone Rome...and call 911? Your last two comments were fascinating! What shall we talk about? 9/11? Artifacts? Freudian debris? Strands of DNA? The origin of 'V' species? Which reminds me of the incident in Paris involving Dr. Claudie Haignere...her overdose and lab fire. One source suggested that she was doing DNA research which might have involved aliens. She supposedly exclaimed 'The World Must Be Warned!' 1. 2.

    Where have all the microbiologists gone?

    Perhaps the Dracs possess the PLF's/Greys. The Dracs seem to be physically challenged...from what I've heard.

    Please consider this in the context of the current thread.

    Try this one: I just want to say one more time...that I really don't know what I'm doing with all of this stuff. I'm just trying to get in the middle of all the fringe material...and try to rationally deal with it by just posting random thoughts about all of it. I know you know that...but some others might not. Everything in our world seems to be up for grabs right now. It seems to be a somewhat unstable situation...which could invite WWIII and a harsh tyranny...if we're not very careful.

    I watched the first linked video you just posted some time ago...but it was good to watch it again. It sounds like 'we' thought we could 'deal with the devil' without getting $crewed. It sounds like we now have hell to pay. How do we extricate ourselves from this mess? Did we think we were taking advantage of the 'aliens'...when the reality was that they were the ones who were taking advantage of us? To paraphrase JFK...those who ride to power on the back of a tiger...ususally end up inside. Are we presently inside?

    Regarding the secret major factions...I just hope that everything can be worked out without millions of people being killed or sacrificed. I don't necessarily have a problem with Earth Humans or Extraterrestrials working behind the scenes to make things better...but I'm sensing that all is not well...that things are out of control...and that everyone is in a very desperate situation. Even if this is not the is a possibility which should be exhaustively explored.

    A Solar System based upon Namaste Constitutional Responsible the context of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of the context of the United Nations...might be a good place to keep us from being enslaved or exterminated. But that's just my two cents worth of paradigms. Just the simple and naive thoughts of a neurotic disfunctional underachieving human.

    Is Gizeh Intelligence the main-game in our Solar System? Is it both good and evil? Is Lucifer at the helm? Is a Draconian at the helm? Are the major factions really branches of Gizeh Intelligence? I'm very confused about all of this. I think if I really knew what was going on...I would be told to shut-up in no uncertain terms. I realize this pseudo-quest is playing with fire.

    I just have huge problems with things like the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Civil War, the World Wars, Vietnam, Iraq, Assassinations, Terrorism, 9/11, the Great Depression, Planned Financial Collapses, Starvation, Disappearing Middle Class, Satanic Rituals, Human Sacrifices, Earth Changes, the New World Order, Theocracies, etc, etc, etc. Why is this world so violent and stupid? In a sense...I don't care if there are secret organizations, underground bases, and a secret space program. I just feel like this world has been out of control for a long, long time...and that something very, very evil is going on. Someone please straighten this BS out. I can't do it by arguing on the internet. This seems to be an exercise in futility.

    Once again...I continue to lean toward eliminating nearly all of the secrecy, and basing the Solar System on Namaste Constitutional Responsible the context of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of the context of the United Nations. I don't want to eliminate Gizeh Intelligence, the Vatican, the City of London, Washington D.C., the United Nations, etc. I just want them to clean up their acts...and run this Solar System properly. If there are Draconian Reptilians running the show...perhaps they need to be relocated out of the Solar System. I have a sinking feeling that we live in a Haunted Solar System. What the hell is going on? Or what from hell is going on? We can't just keep sweeping this cr@p under the rug...into Deep Underground Military Bases.

    I don't know what's going on with whoever was instrumental in the original creation/evolution of the Human Race. I'm not seeing this being or beings anywhere close to our Solar System. I'm rewatching 'Stargate SG1' and that may describe a lot of what is really going on. I keep thinking that something very bad happened to whoever made us...perhaps in a war or a coup d' etat. I'm seeing stand-in wannbe gods throughout Earth history...right up to the present. I'm thinking that we are mostly on our own. I'm thinking that Earth Humans need to be their own God. I don't trust anyone else. Actually...I don't even trust us...but we may be the best that we're going to get.

    I think we may all be Renegade Pleiadians who rebelled against a Pleiadian/Draconian Theocracy...and ended up in the Aldebaran Star System...and subsequently traveled to the Sirius Star System...and finally to our Solar System. We may be Fallen Angels...under the direction of Lucifer. If so...I think that despite a valiant effort...we may be right back into Draconian Theocracy territory...and that Lucifer has been partially insane ever since we got here. I sincerely hope I'm wrong about all of this...but pieces of the puzzle are beginning to fit...and I don't like what I'm seeing. I so hope I'm wrong.

    I really don't want to think about this anymore. I'm starting to read the 'Wall Street Journal' and to watch 'Bloomberg' I may just focus on business...and forget about this stuff. And then I might not have to have a close encounter of the worst kind with the Alphabet Guys or the Jesuits. Those are some of the people who I think really and truly know what's going on. But their bosses frown on loose cannons running around stirring up trouble and sticking their noses into sources of forbidden knowledge. Again...I hope that I'm just a paranoid nut-case...and that none of this stuff is true.

    I just feel like I'm frantically going round and round and round...under the watchful and scornful gaze of the Dracs...just like in this video! YouTube- smart turbo with hayabusa engine

    This might sound dumb...but I'm going to OD on SG1 and WSJ for awhile. This is not a random selection. I may or may not return.

    One last thought (for awhile)...the U.S. Constitution provides for an organized decentralism...or organized anarchy...or a non-theocratic spiritual state. It's not perfect...but bi+ching about a lifeboat's deficiencies (and not climbing aboard) after being the epitome of stupidity.


    I posted this elsewhere...but it seemed to fit this thread as well. Don't forget to watch the third episode of 'V' tonight. Think about the following while you watch. Once again...the following is educated speculation. It is a possibility.

    Could it be that Satan and Demons are really Interdimensional Draconian Reptilians who hate Humans? Could it be that God, Lucifer, and Jesus are Pleiadian Humans...and that even Lucifer is a good-guy or good-gal? They could all possibly be good. Could it be that they are all at odds with the Dracs...and that they simply have different philosophies regarding how to deal with them? Do they lead the three or four factions which I suspect are headquartered in underground and on the Moon? I believe in the literal existence of all of the above. With this in mind...consider the following link regarding God, Jesus, Satan, Lucifer, etc: Do the Dracs control the Vatican...against the will of the Curia and the Pope? Is the term 'Luciferian' really a cover for 'Draconian'? I keep thinking that the Dracs need to be kicked out of our Solar System. I keep thinking that no one should bow down and worship anyone...including worshipping God, Jesus, Satan, Lucifer, etc. We should simply reverence the Divinity Within Humanity aka The Christlike Holy Spirit. We should see Christ in All Persons. this correct? I continue to suspect that you would be ok if the Dracs were retired...and if our Solar System was based upon Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom. I still wish to hear you improvise on the Cavaille-Coll pipe-organ at Saint Sulpice...after this mess is resolved. Lucifer...can you use your Galactic Rolodex to arrange a Solar System Exorcism...and to arrange replacing the U.N. Charter with the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights...and have this apply to the entire Solar System? I tend to think that you can. Perhaps you have already called in the strike. If so...thank-you in advance. See you at Saint Sulpice. Namaste Lucifer.

    Could the four factions which I discussed lead by the following?

    1. God (Pleiadian Human) - Zionist - Theocratic
    2. Lucifer (Pleiadian Human) - Teutonic Zionist - Giza Intelligence - Dictatorship
    3. Jesus (Pleiadian Human) - Andromedan - Christlike Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom
    4. Satan (Draconian Interdimensional Reptilian) - Demands Worship, Praise, Submission, and Obedience. Plays God. Dominates #1 and #2. Attacks #3 with a vengeance.

    Is #4 the real problem? Could I convince most of you Dracs to choose #3...and rebel against your leaders? You have nothing to lose but your chains.

    Murcuriel...thank-you for your posts. Sometimes it takes thick skin to survive in this philosophical and spiritual food-for-thought fight. Hang in there!

    I found this on a thread by the eXchanger. I condensed it, and transfered it. Thank-you eXchanger!

    I found the following to be highly interesting. It wouldn't surprise me if this is quite close to the truth. This could really be who we are...and who our 'gods' are...and I'm not talking about the Founders or the Creator God of the Universe. I'm not seeing this Ultimate Divine Presence at work in this Solar System at this time. I wish I knew what happened to the original God. The vacuum is being filled by stand-ins and wannabe gods. I appreciate their efforts...I guess...but perhaps we don't need any gods whatsoever. I have no way of verifying the information...and I assume that it was channeled. I am wary of channeling...yet I still found the information to be fascinating. Reader discretion advised.

    How does Gizeh Intelligence fit into all of this? Darned if I know! The truth is down there! Or...the truth is down there...up there...on the Moon!

    The Truth about ETs - Original source:

    Approximately 60% of all UFOs reported are from solar systems outside our own. The majority are from Zeta Reticuli, Alpha Centauri, Rigel & Betelguese (Orion), Sirius A & B, and the Pleiades. Approximately 20% are above top-secret military tests of experimental craft, often reverse engineered from Zeta craft. Approximately 20% are natural phenomena mistakenly identified as artificial craft.

    In addition to the above, there are millions of encounters with beings from other dimensions (parallel, higher, etc.), most of whom are benevolent.

    We Are All ETs to Some Extent

    There is really no difference between ETs and humans, because Earth has been genetically manipulated for aeons by different ET races to the point that almost all of us have genetics from other star systems. There are often some physical genetic markers carried from generation to generation that can help identify one’s ET heritage. For example, those carrying genetic material from Nordic Pleaideans are often tall and muscular, with blond hair and blue eyes.. But with all the mixing and blending of our melting pot planet, this is a hard thing to track. For example, I am Venusian, but I do not have any markers that I'm aware of (I'm Italian with dark hair and eyes and olive skin while most Venusians are fair skinned and blond by nature).

    Actually, if a non-human being were to walk among us (and some do), he/she might not even be noticed. Not only can some alien races disguise themselves, but many already look a lot like us.

    As I've stated before, approximately 80% of all ETs are benevolent, kind, loving souls who sincerely want to lift humanity and welcome them back into the cosmic family. About 20% of ETs are malevolent, power-hungry beings with total disregard or even disdain of humans. Of course, there's some neutral middle ground (mostly alien scientists who have no ill feelings toward humanity but are not evolved enough spiritually to be in a position to decide what's best for us). In the name of research, they might dissect a human to learn more about him/her. (The subject of abductions is another matter for another time.)

    The problem is, most of the negative ETs are vibrating in the 3D and 4D realms and so are often visible to 3D and 4D humans. Many of the higher, more loving races exist in 5D, 6D and 7D and can only be contacted by humans who are attuned to those densities.

    So it APPEARS there are a lot of negative ETs involved with Earth. And of course, most of the world's rulers are controlled by negative ETs (because of their lust for power).

    There are many different "species" of aliens. Here's my latest assessment including those in human embodiment:

    Orion Constellation: Councils of Rigel & Betelguese, Incarnates from Mars and Maldek. 80%
    Pleiades System 7D: Adamic Race (original earthlings) from Lyra/Vega DNA, Atlantean Priest-Kings. 15%
    Sirius B Binary System: Biblical Gods, Greek Gods, descendants of Israel & the Middle East. 2%
    Venus, 6th Density: Generally blond-haired, blue-eyed, fair-skinned humans. 1%
    Pleiades System 4D: Nordic-type tall muscular humans (original Vikings, Scandinavian races). 1%
    Andromedan 4D: Oriental-type humans with small slanted eyes. 0.5%
    Antares 4D: Red giant race mentioned in Genesis, Nordic-types, stocky European. 0.3%
    Zeta Reticuli 3D: Human incarnates of original Zeta race before hybridization. 0.1%
    Zeta Reticuli 3D Hybrid: Human incarnates derived from breeding programs. less than 0.1%
    Andromedan 3D Hybrid: Human incarnates derived from breeding programs. less than 0.1%
    Tau Ceti, Alpha Centauri, Polaris: Human incarnates from these star systems. (mostly 6D-8D). less than 0.1%
    Arcturus 7D-9D: Emissaries incarnate in human form. less than one million.
    Nibiru (Planet X): Nibiruan Council members, on and off-planet incarnations. about 80,000
    ETs in alien bodies: Humanoids with off-planet incarnations. about 32,000
    Walk-ins (soul transfers): Various races taking over human bodies through soul transfer. about 6,000
    Other categories (3D-12D): Humans from star systems not mentioned above. about 50 million
    Other entities (7D or higher): Spiritual masters from higher dimensions (avatars in manufactured bodies). about 300

    Population percentage breakdown by density (current vibratory level of humans):

    3D -- About 78%
    4D -- About 22% (includes yours truly at approx. 4.65)
    5D -- About 0.1%
    6D -- About 0.00001%
    7D -- About 0.000000001%

    Here is my assessment of the types of craft observed in our skies, including the ones I've seen physically. The percentages are out of the total observed by humans:

    Grey, saucer shaped, 10m-20m diameter - Zeta Reticuli - 3D/4D. 50%
    Grey, saucer shaped, 10m-20m diameter - Illuminati Black Ops (Earth). 30%
    Black, triangular, a few meters across - Alpha Draconis 3D (Reptilian). 10%
    Multicolor, saucer-shaped - Pleiades 4D/7D, Venus 6D. 3%
    Spherical, green glowing - Pleiades 4D/7D 1%
    Black, triangular, very large - Illuminati Black Ops (Earth). 1%
    Cigar-shaped (mothercraft - very large) - Zeta Reticuli - 3D/4D. 1%
    Grey, Cylindrical - Andromeda - 3D/4D. 1%
    Interdimensional, various sizes and colors - Sirius B, Orion, other systems (5D-9D). about 3%

    NOTE: The Orions interbred with humans nearly half a million years ago. To my knowledge they have only a handful of emissaries from the constellation circling our heavens. The same goes for the Sirians. What about an impending invasion? Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but it already happened over 500,000 years ago and yeah, they won. No new invasion will be successful because Gaia (Mother Earth) is ascending, and only those souls on the path of ascension will be allowed to remain on Earth beyond the 2012 - 2030 A.D. window. See Earth Changes.

    Please use your own divine judgment when dealing with ETs and especially when dealing with humans, as the percentage of negatively vibrating humans is much higher than that of ETs. In fact, if it were up to chance (which it is not), you would stand a better chance of meeting a positive ET than a positive human.

    Detailed Descriptions of ETs - A complete description is found in Life On the Cutting Edge.

    The Orions look like us because almost 80% of us are Orions.
    The Pleiadeans look like us because they were the original root race of Earth.
    The Sirians are a bit taller and lighter than the average humans.
    The Antareans are large, muscular and have reddish-brown skin.
    The Andromedans tend to incarnate as orientals, but the original ETs are tall and lanky with large heads and small slanted almond eyes.

    The Zetas come in three main flavors:

    (1) alabaster white and short with huge black almond eyes;
    (2) short and grey with large black almond eyes (the most common); and
    (3) tall, blue-skinned hybrids with small slanted almond eyes.

    The other races are higher dimensional and can change their appearance at will.
    The Venusians are fair-skinned, blond and translucent.
    The Arcturians are large, blue-skinned translucent beings.
    The higher-dimensional Pleiadeans are shimmering golden figures of light.
    The highest level Pleiadeans look like the blue-white stars in the visible Pleiades star cluster.

    ETs in Our Solar System - Note: Some of this information is also available in the article on Souls and Soul Rays.

    Jupiter has advanced civilizations in the etheric atmosphere of the giant planet, vibrating at 5th and 6th density levels. They are not completely free of service-to-self (STS) vibrations and there is some kind of hierarchy to their government. They are large translucent beings originating in many local sectors of the galaxy. They were called to Jupiter to learn and grow spiritually with the assistance of Arcturians and Venusians. These beings have developed the power side of their nature more than the love side, although they are generally of a positive energy. However, that energy is somewhat harsh compared to the Venusians. Their biggest lesson appears to be finding balance between love, wisdom and power and integrating the mistakes they made during the Mars experience hundreds of thousands of years ago.

    The Orions (who have controlled Earth for the last half million years) sometimes incarnate etherically in the atmosphere of Jupiter once they have ascended from the warrior-masculine-aggressive Martian paradigm.

    Most of the rulers of the Jupiter conclave (about 1,000 rulers and 150,000 entities) are being tutored from higher realms in the ways of unconditional love, and how to govern a planet without ego superiority issues (a tough lesson).

    The Venusians are a sixth density race from which the goddess mythology arose. They look very much as pictured in visionary paintings – long flowing golden hair, flowing robes and translucent bodies of light, some with wings.

    The Martians are really the Orions prior to coming to Earth. They began their incarnations on the surface of Mars and later went underground when their atmosphere was destroyed by warfare.

    The Maldekians are really Orions that once inhabited Maldek, the planet between Mars and Jupiter. They blew their planet apart with warfare and what’s left is the asteroid belt. The souls incarnated on Mars and Earth after the destruction of Maldek. The destruction of this planet threw the other planets out of their original orbits and created problems far beyond the solar system. For this reason, the Divine Councils of the higher dimensions have intervened and will not allow the total destruction of any more planets in this sector.

    The Saturn Tribunal is a council of higher-dimensional entities from various systems that use etheric Saturn as their base of operations.

    Original source for the above information: are obviously very knowledgeable and intelligent. I often feel as though I should not be posting so much about things I know so little about...but my insecurities drive me forward into areas which make me even more insecure. Your post contains so much profound insight.

    A sentence from the last post before yours really reinforced something I have suspected for a long time...namely that a high level of spiritual development is necessary to contact the higher realms. Here is the quote:

    "The problem is, most of the negative ETs are vibrating in the 3D and 4D realms and so are often visible to 3D and 4D humans. Many of the higher, more loving races exist in 5D, 6D and 7D and can only be contacted by humans who are attuned to those densities."

    I suspect that most of the channelers and gurus who conduct workshops and sell books...are not as highly spiritually evolved as they think (or would like us to think). This is why I don't get involved in this stuff. I watch from a safe distance (if that's possible). I am frightened by traditional religion and New Age religion. I applaud everyone for trying to do the right thing...but believer beware. I think we live in a haunted prison planet...and that we are in huge trouble. We need to focus on responsibility and self-governance...rather than focusing on hocus-pocus and mumbo-jumbo. On the other hand...Jesus said 'Seek ye first the Kingdom of God, and His righteousness...and all these things shall be added unto you.' But I have concluded that the true Kingdom of God is defined by Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom. Jesus also said that the 'Kingdom of God is within you'...and that 'the truth will set you free.' More than anything...I think that Jesus was a whistleblower-insider...who we have not really carefully listened to and taken seriously.

    Please consider this Amen Ra thread in the context of the Gizeh Intelligence thread. They might be interconnected. The Dog-Star Sirius, Ancient Egypt, Amen Ra, and Gizeh Intelligence may be at the center of everything here on Earth. What would Daniel Jackson say? What would Hathor say?

    I'm starting to get really nervous and shaky regarding all of this. All of the above may be fully aware of who I am...and what I am posting. If this is true...I doubt that they are overwhelmed with feelings of love and joy. Probably just the opposite. The spirits may be restless...and the gods may be angry.

    Check this source out:

    Here is another link which you might find interesting (John Rhodes):

    Here's yet another speculative intellectual ejaculation resulting from the masturbation of the mind:

    What if Reptilians evolved...but not Humans? What if the entire universe was Reptilian? What if there were no Humans anywhere? What if the entire universe was a Reptilian Universal Church Theocracy? What if Humans were created as a slave race? ('Let us make man in our image') What if Lucifer (Ptah?) was the Reptilian in charge of the genetic engineering project which resulted in the creation of Human Beings? What if Humans were mistreated as slaves? What if a group of Reptilians, led by Lucifer, conspired with Humans, to kill God the Father (Ra?)...and take over 'Heaven'? What if this was the Luciferian Rebellion which led to War in Heaven...and the death of God the Father (Ra?)? What if the Reptilians loyal to God (Ra?) fought against the Luciferian Reptilians and Human Beings...driving them out of the Garden of Eden (Heaven?) What if Battlestar Moon was used to transport the Luciferian Reptilians and Humans to Aldebaran, Sirius, and Earth...while being violently pursued by Nibiru? What if Interdimensional Reptilians aka The Spirit of God aka Amen battle with Luciferian Interdimensional Reptilians and the Divinity Within Humanity aka The Holy regain control of the Renegade Human Race? What if the New World Order is the Kingdom of Ra? What if the Luciferian Reptilians and a select group of Humans run Earth from underground bases on Earth and the Moon? Could this be Gizeh Intelligence? Could Reptilians and Humans loyal to Ra be Zionists? Could Reptilians and Humans loyal to Lucifer be Teutonic Zionists? Could a pacifist union of both factions be Followers of Jesus? Could Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom be the solution to this ancient mess?

    How much trouble am I in now? Probably quite a bit. But once again...this is just speculation...with no inside information whatsoever.

    Thank-you Echo6. Who knows if they're true? But I am trying very hard to approximate reality. I'm not pulling these theories out of a black hole.

    Echo6 stated "From what i can gather, you are doing a reasonably good job so far. Maybe expand your search parameters a little."

    Thank-you Echo6. I'm just trying to find peace. The violence, corruption, lies, attitudes, etc...are difficult for me to handle. I'm just trying to solve the world's problems...and by so doing...solve my own problems. I want to spend more time envisioning a Perfected Humanity Living in a Perfected Solar System. In a sense...I want to live in a Dream Solar System...and I want everyone to make it...including the Regressives. This sort of thinking is what I call Positive Reality Based Science Fiction. I am trying to cultivate a Solar System View...rather than a World View. I am trying to be on Everyone's Side...even though this is probably impossible.

    I don't have a problem with interacting with Genuinely Benevolent Non-Humans.
    I don't have a problem with Globalism based upon Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom.
    I don't have a problem with Deep Underground Military long as every square-meter of them are open to our representatives and top ranking military personnel...and as long as nothing clandestine or horrific is transpiring in them. I love watching Stargate SG-1.
    I don't have a problem with Underground Cities. I think that most of the Earth's population should live underground.
    I don't have a problem with Underground Mach Whatever Leviton Trains. They should probably become the preferred method of future transportation.
    I don't have a problem with Advanced Spacecraft and Interplanetary Travel.
    I don't have a problem with Philosophically and Theologically Rethinking Everything.
    I don't have a problem with Reasonable Amnesty and Immunity for Complete Disclosure, Cooperation, and Reasonable that we can clean this mess up...and MOVE ON TO BIGGER AND BETTER THINGS. The Regressives, the Elites...AND the General Public should probably share equal blame for the mess we are in.

    I just want the Secrecy, Corruption, Violence, Starvation, War, Terrorism, Deception, STOP NOW!!!

    Here's a behind the scenes look at what happened in a Deep Underground Military Base when Gizeh Intelligence pulled the plug on Adolph Hitler in 1941. The Computer Gaming Language was just a cover for what really happened. The horror! (viewer discretion advised) Seriously...what really did happen in 1941 regarding Hitler and Gizeh Intelligence? The Roman Catholic interaction with Hitler is very interesting as well. Did Pope Pius XII and Adolph Hitler mean well in the 30's? Was Hitler not supposed to go to war...and not supposed to mistreat the Jews? Some say so. What the hell went wrong then? Will we ever know the truth? Has Gizeh Intelligence been historically necessary? Was/is it a matter of fighting fire with fire? What force stands in opposition to Gizeh Intelligence? I keep hypothesizing a Zionist vs Teutonic Zionist conflict...going way back in history. I have also recently been taking a closer look at Gabriel, Michael, Lucifer, the Luciferian Rebellion, and the War in Heaven. Was World War II simply a continuation of a conflict which began before there was Human life on Earth?

    Take a look at the following link: I found this most interesting:

    "I am going to quote Jan van Helsing from his well researched book: “Secret Societies and Their Power in the 20th Century” again and this time when comes to explaining what Agarthi/Agartha is, because his research confirms to some extent what members from Thule have told me, but is still just a part of the story. Again, Chapter X will explain it in more details:

    “ULTIMA THULE” apparently was the capital city of the first continent peopled by Aryans. This was called HYPERBOREA and was older than Lemuria and Atlantis (continents with advanced cultures since submerged). The Scandinavians have a tale of “Ultima Thule”, the wonderful land in the high North, where the sun never sets and the ancestors of the Aryan race dwell. Hyperborea was up in the North Sea and sank during an ice age. It is assumed that the Hyperboreans came from the solar system Alderbaran which is the main star in the constellation Taurus, and that they were about four meters tall, white, blond and blue-eyed. They knew no war [1] and we[r]e vegetarians (so was Hitler). According to alleged Thule texts they were technically very advanced and flew “Vril-ya”, flying machines that today we call UFOs. These flying disks were capable of levitation, extreme speeds and the maneuvers known from today’s UFOs due to two counter-rotating magnetic fields and they used the so-called Vril power as energy potential or fuel (Vril = ether, Od, Prana, Chi, Ki, cosmic force, Orgon…, but also from the academic “vri-IL” = as the highest deity = God-like), i.e., they take the energy from the earth’s magnetic field (free energy) like the “tachyon converter” of Captain Hans Coler.When HYPERBOREA began to sink the Hyperboreans are said to have burrowed with huge machines gigantic tunnels into the Earth’s crust and settled under the Himalayan region. The subterranean realm is called AGHARTA and its capital SHAMBALLAH. The Persians call this land “Aryana” the land of origin of the Aryans.

    Here we should mention that Karl Haushofer claimed that Thule was actually called Atlantis and – contrary to all other researchers of Tibet and India – he said that the surviving Thule-Atlanteans were separated into two groups, a good one and an evil one. Those who called themselves after their oracle Agharta were the good and settled in the Himalayan region, the evil ones were the Shamballah who wanted to subjugate humanity and they went West. He maintained that the fight between the people of Agharta and Shamballah had been going on for thousands of years and that in the Third Reich the Thule-Gesellschaft as Agharta’s representative continued it against the representatives of Shamballah, the Freemasons and the Zionists. This perhaps was his mission."

    Does the last paragraph describe the origins of Zionism and Teutonic Zionism? this rivalry even more ancient...possibly going back to the fabled 'War in Heaven'? I wish to make it clear that I have zero animosity toward Jewish or German people. I'm just curious regarding the true story of our past and present...rather than the sugar-coated and dumbed-down version of tripe...which passes as history.

    Aldebaran > Thule > Agharta > Altlantis > Gizeh Intelligence > Teutonic Zionism? (Followers of Lucifer?)

    Aldebaran > Thule > Shamballah > Lemuria > Zionism? (Followers of Gabriel?)

    Damned if I know.

    Your points are well taken Mercuriel. My guess is that thing led to another...and things got out of control...if they ever were in control. Is it helpful to think of Universal History as one big mess involving power struggles between powerful (but not all powerful) Reptilian and Human Gods and Goddesses? Is the concept of having ALL of the Gods and Goddesses retire...and basing everything on Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom...a valid idea? It seems reasonable to me...but I have no idea what the actual realities are throughout the Universe...or even in this Solar System. I'm just seeing very powerful hidden forces at work...and I'm very, very frightened and disillusioned. I know that I'm still really living in a dreamworld...and I don't think I could handle the full reality of the Universal Predicament. The most powerful beings in the Universe may not be in the best position to make the best decisions. Think long and hard about that one! Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely. I don't think there are any exceptions...and insanity might be part of the deal. If we really arrived at the top of the Universal Pyramid...we might not like the view...

    Here is a really wild theory: "รูปนี้คือเส้นวงโคจร" Any questions? Seriously, the translation is as follows: What if there are a lot of moons and planets orbiting Nibiru? Some say that there are.

    What if our moon was once in orbit around Nibiru? What if we all are Nibiruans spiritually or soul-wise? What if there was a rebellion - and we all got brought to Earth via the Moon? What if all of us participated in stealing fire from the gods - and the Moon was our getaway car? Might Lucifer and Michael have been the leaders of said rebellion? Was this rebellion, theft, and war - the Original Sin - which all mankind is guilty of? Now isn't that heretical? Then - what if a genetic hybridization program created many races? Who came first - the Humans or the Reptilians? Is there a star war every time Nibiru approaches Earth? Is this what the PTB are preparing for? Or - is all of this Nibiru, Annunaki, and Reptilian stuff a great big load of you know what? Did we come here 14,400 years ago? Did Nibiru try to destroy us with a global flood 10,800 years ago? What happened 7,200 and 3,600 years ago? Or - should I be following these numbers with BC? If so, Nibiru isn't due back here for another 1,500+ years! I'm getting tired of asking questions - and the answers might cause me to abandon all hope. I keep asking question after question after question - and receiving very few answers. What the hell is really going on? Lucifer??? Gabriel??? Michael??? Amen Ra??? Queen of Heaven??? Somebody talk to me!!! Google seems to be my one and only friend. See the following:

    Check this out! (Un-edited)

    "Most people suppose that some alien civilization will land and will destroy us, will exterminate us. But this will not happens, because happens millenniums ago. Honestly, the civilization that visit us, don't want to exterminate us. They simply want slaves to stole the light and the result of their job, as well the earth's jewels.
    They still rule us ...

    From Patricia Cori Atlantis Rising, we got a list of the visit of the Annunaki from 450,000 BC until Zero Point, when the Christ born. Here is the list,

    What becomes significant in our discussion of the Annunaki is how their planet's continual reentry into your system coincides with periods of great upheaval and monumental change upon the Earth. Visitations from the Annunaki have marked the following key time frames in your solar system's history:

    450,000 years ago, the Nebiruans first visit Earth, returning at regular intervals since then, approximately every 3,600 years

    97,200 BC (The Annunaki intervene in the Great Experiment- the seeding of Homo sapiens

    52,400 BC (Nebiru's entry into your solar system coincides with other celestial events which cause Planet Earth to flip its axis, initiating your most recent Ice Age

    28,800 BC (The second cycle of Atlantis comes to a close with the glaciation of the continent

    25,200 BC (The Annunaki establish military bases on Mars.)

    21,600 BC (Annunaki transit stations are created on the Moon.)

    18,000 BC (The first Annunaki settlements in the land known to you as Africa establish mining colonies of precious ores.)

    14,400 BC (The Annunaki land in Atlantis, which coincides with the beginnings of opposition in the Priesthood.)

    10,800 BC (Atlantis disappears below the ocean.)

    7200 BC (The Annunaki appear in Mesopotamia, intervening in the Sumerian civilization.)

    3600 BC (The Annunaki intervene in Egypt, a civilization established through direct intervention with Sirian and Pleiadian Light Emissaries.)

    ZERO TIME (The birthing of the Christed One.)

    Calculating a 3,600 year cycle, it is clear that the lone planet is not scheduled back into your solar system in time for the Mayan date or 21 December 2012 AD. This is of particular significance to the cosmic unfolding of events occurring at that projected point in the space-time continuum and devastating to the Nebiruans. Just as before, with the collapse of Satais, all heavenly bodies orbiting the ascending star will be pulled through the black hole and into the higher dimension. Nebiru, however, will be out there in galactic winter, at a remote point somewhere between the Sirius star system and yours, neither close enough to be pulled through with you, nor near enough to Sirius to grab orbit in our system. They are fearful, worried about their fate, and they are searching desperately for a solution.

    So, when they arrive for the first time, we were in embryo. Then, they modify our DNA. They are the so-called Dark Brothers. The Family of Light, did nothing to change this because they know how the Universe works. Their visit, was a continuous challenge for us, valid still today, but soon they will become not-operative.

    No additional comment, is necessary. Thanks, Giovanni A. Orlando."

    Treat all of this as if it were science fiction. I sample and speculate. I don't know much for certain. I guess I'm trying to place myself in the middle of life, the universe, and everything - in a somewhat neutral and non-committal manner. The more I look at all of this - the less I think I know - and the less capable I feel. I mostly point to the work and skills of others. Thank-you for the heads-up on the Andromeda Collective. I have listened to Alex Collier quite a bit in the past - and he claims to have had extensive contact with the Andromedans - but I consider his material to be a combination of fact and fiction. I really like Alex, and I am very close to his thinking editorially and politically (at least regarding his past lectures). If you are interested in further study regarding Gizeh Intelligence - I would suggest taking a very close look at the Nazi phenomenon - before, during, and after World War II. Consider all of Joseph Farrell's ('SS Brotherhood of the Bell') and Jim Marrs' ('Rule by Secrecy', 'Rise of the Fourth Reich') books, interviews, and lectures. My goal is mostly to change myself - and I do this by thinking out-loud on the internet. But, as I'm sure you know, everything is monitored. Viewing and posting on these controversial subjects probably gets one placed on dozens of lists. At this point - I don't care. I'm really trying to communicate with everyone - especially those on the inside - which would include those working for various agencies which might be monitoring sites such as this one. Hi guys and gals! The goal is to get informed - without getting mad, or going mad.

    Carol stated "As I stand rocking back and forth in my corner here OXY I really think we are too far down on the totom pole for anyone to want us on any list."

    You're probably right, Carol - but it's sort of fun to think that some mysterious and powerful agency actually gives a damn about little-old me! I sure hope that I'm not on anyone's fecal-list when the excrement hits the air-conditioning system! People start out, worrying about what people think of them. Then, they stop worrying about what people think. Finally, they realize that no one really gives a rat's @$$! I'm half-joking and half-serious when I speak of rocking back and forth in a corner. The internal conflict generated by considering life, the universe, and everything - combined with a feeling of utter uselessness and helplessness - is quite intense, at times. Wanting everything - while having nothing - is a form of mental illness which I experience each and every day. Some of us nobodies wish to be somebodies - and we engage in self-aggrandizing tempests in internet-teapots - while rocking back and forth in the corner - doing you know what...

    Even maliciously fabricated BS has value, in the sense that it provides us with a mental and spiritual workout. I like to sample a wide variety of sources and subjects. That way, I don't have to agonize as much over whether a particular person or story is genuine. I just take it all in - and formulate a hypothesis. Then I just keep working with that hypothesis, to see if it holds up. The problem I am having, is in trying to stimulate and maintain rational coversation regarding the controversial topics and theories which particularly interest me. I mostly have to talk to myself. I don't wish to walk alone - but if I have to, I will. Most of the time - only my dog will walk with me. Sometimes, he won't even go...

    I assume that I am accompanied by both good and evil unseen beings continually. This sort of tramples on the right to privacy - but what the heck. Sometimes I even swear at these beings - in a friendly way - but I don't wish for them to talk back! I'm really annoyed by the whole state of affairs - historically and presently. It seems to be utterly absurd. I mostly have to live in my own little dreamworld, to maintain my sanity - and perhaps this, in and of itself, is insanity. There are advantages and disadvantages to standing apart from the crowd. Independence is a good thing - but too much independence is disastrous. One should not be a Rebel Without a Clue. I'm actually attempting to befriend the Powers That Be (Human and Otherwise) in a rather detached, antagonistic, sarcastic, and irreverent manner. I'd love to tour the full extent of Gizeh Intelligence Facilities (throughout the solar system?) someday - but I don't wish to sell my soul to you know who - in order to be granted the privilege of doing so. I'm trying to be the worst enemy and the best buddy of the PTB. Don't try this at home kiddies...

    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 29, 2013 1:56 pm; edited 1 time in total

    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:51 am

    The following quotation is the third-chapter of Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing by Ellen G. White:

    The Spirituality of the Law

    "I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill." Matthew 5:17.

    It was Christ who, amid thunder and flame, had proclaimed the law upon Mount Sinai. The glory of God, like devouring fire, rested upon its summit, and the mountain quaked at the presence of the Lord. The hosts of Israel, lying prostrate upon the earth, had listened in awe to the sacred precepts of the law. What a contrast to the scene upon the mount of the Beatitudes! Under the summer sky, with no sound to break the stillness but the song of birds, Jesus unfolded the principles of His kingdom. Yet He who spoke to the people that day in accents of love, was opening to them the principles of the law proclaimed upon Sinai.

    When the law was given, Israel, degraded by the long bondage in Egypt, had need to be impressed with the power and majesty of God; yet He revealed Himself to them no less as a God of love.

    "The Lord came from Sinai,
    And rose from Seir unto them;
    He shined forth from Mount Paran,
    And He came from the ten thousands of holy ones:
    At His right hand was a fiery law unto them.
    Yea, He loveth the tribes;
    All their holy ones are in Thy hand:
    And they sat down at Thy feet;
    Everyone received of Thy words."
    Deuteronomy 33:2, 3, R.V., margin.

    It was to Moses that God revealed His glory in those wonderful words that have been the treasured heritage of the ages: "The Lord, The Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin." Exodus 34:6, 7.

    The law given upon Sinai was the enunciation of the principle of love, a revelation to earth of the law of heaven. It was ordained in the hand of a Mediator--spoken by Him through whose power the hearts of men could be brought into harmony with its principles. God had revealed the purpose of the law when He declared to Israel, "Ye shall be holy men unto Me." Exodus 22:31

    But Israel had not perceived the spiritual nature of the law, and too often their professed obedience was but an observance of forms and ceremonies, rather than a surrender of the heart to the sovereignty of love. As Jesus in His character and work represented to men the holy, benevolent, and paternal attributes of God, and presented the worthlessness of mere ceremonial obedience, the Jewish leaders did not receive or understand His words. They thought that He dwelt too lightly upon the requirements of the law; and when He set before them the very truths that were the soul of their divinely appointed service, they, looking only at the external, accused Him of seeking to overthrow it.

    The words of Christ, though calmly spoken, were uttered with an earnestness and power that stirred the hearts of the people. They listened for a repetition of the lifeless traditions and exactions of the rabbis, but in vain. They "were astonished at His teaching: for He taught them as one having authority, and not as their scribes." Matthew 7:29, R.V. The Pharisees noted the vast difference between their manner of instruction and that of Christ. They saw that the majesty and purity and beauty of the truth, with its deep and gentle influence, was taking firm hold upon many minds. The Saviour's divine love and tenderness drew the hearts of men to Him. The rabbis saw that by His teaching the whole tenor of the instruction they had given to the people was set at nought. He was tearing down the partition wall that had been so flattering to their pride and exclusiveness; and they feared that, if permitted, He would draw the people entirely away from them. Therefore they followed Him with determined hostility, hoping to find some occasion for bringing Him into disfavor with the multitudes and thus enabling the Sanhedrin to secure His condemnation and death.

    On the mount, Jesus was closely watched by spies; and as He unfolded the principles of righteousness, the Pharisees caused it to be whispered about that His teaching was in opposition to the precepts that God had given from Sinai. The Saviour said nothing to unsettle faith in the religion and institutions that had been given through Moses; for every ray of divine light that Israel's great leader communicated to his people was received from Christ. While many are saying in their hearts that He has come to do away with the law, Jesus in unmistakable language reveals His attitude toward the divine statutes. "Think not," He said, "that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets."

    It is the Creator of men, the Giver of the law, who declares that it is not His purpose to set aside its precepts. Everything in nature, from the mote in the sunbeam to the worlds on high, is under law. And upon obedience to these laws the order and harmony of the natural world depend. So there are great principles of righteousness to control the life of all intelligent beings, and upon conformity to these principles the well-being of the universe depends. Before this earth was called into being, God's law existed. Angels are governed by its principles, and in order for earth to be in harmony with heaven, man also must obey the divine statutes. To man in Eden Christ made known the precepts of the law "when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy." Job 38:7. The mission of Christ on earth was not to destroy the law, but by His grace to bring man back to obedience to its precepts.

    The beloved disciple, who listened to the words of Jesus on the mount, writing long afterward under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, speaks of the law as of perpetual obligation. He says that "sin is the transgression of the law" and that "whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law." 1 John 3:4. He makes it plain that the law to which he refers is "an old commandment which ye had from the beginning." 1 John 2:7. He is speaking of the law that existed at the creation and was reiterated upon Mount Sinai.

    Speaking of the law, Jesus said, "I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill." He here used the word "fulfill" in the same sense as when He declared to John the Baptist His purpose to "fulfill all righteousness" (Matthew 3:15); that is, to fill up the measure of the law's requirement, to give an example of perfect conformity to the will of God. His mission was to "magnify the law, and make it honorable." Isaiah 42:21. He was to show the spiritual nature of the law, to present its far-reaching principles, and to make plain its eternal obligation.

    The divine beauty of the character of Christ, of whom the noblest and most gentle among men are but a faint reflection; of whom Solomon by the Spirit of inspiration wrote, He is "the chiefest among ten thousand, . . . yea, He is altogether lovely" (Song of Solomon 5:10-16); of whom David, seeing Him in prophetic vision, said, "Thou art fairer than the children of men" (Psalm 45:2); Jesus, the express image of the Father's person, the effulgence of His glory; the self-denying Redeemer, throughout His pilgrimage of love on earth, was a living representation of the character of the law of God. In His life it is made manifest that heaven-born love, Christlike principles, underlie the laws of eternal rectitude.

    "Till heaven and earth pass," said Jesus, "one jot or one tittle shall in nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." By His own obedience to the law, Christ testified to its immutable character and proved that through His grace it could be perfectly obeyed by every son and daughter of Adam. On the mount He declared that not the smallest iota should pass from the law till all things should be accomplished--all things that concern the human race, all that relates to the plan of redemption. He does not teach that the law is ever to be abrogated, but He fixes the eye upon the utmost verge of man's horizon and assures us that until this point is reached the law will retain its authority so that none may suppose it was His mission to abolish the precepts of the law. So long as heaven and earth continue, the holy principles of God's law will remain. His righteousness, "like the great mountains" (Psalm 36:6), will continue, a source of blessing, sending forth streams to refresh the earth.

    Because the law of the Lord is perfect, and therefore changeless, it is impossible for sinful men, in themselves, to meet the standard of its requirement. This was why Jesus came as our Redeemer. It was His mission, by making men partakers of the divine nature, to bring them into harmony with the principles of the law of heaven. When we forsake our sins and receive Christ as our Saviour, the law is exalted. The apostle Paul asks, "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law." Romans 3:31.

    The new-covenant promise is, "I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them." Hebrews 10:16. While the system of types which pointed to Christ as the Lamb of God that should take away the sin of the world was to pass away at His death, the principles of righteousness embodied in the Decalogue are as immutable as the eternal throne. Not one command has been annulled, not a jot or tittle has been changed. Those principles that were made known to man in Paradise as the great law of life will exist unchanged in Paradise restored. When Eden shall bloom on earth again, God's law of love will be obeyed by all beneath the sun.

    "Forever, O Lord, Thy word is settled in heaven." "All His commandments are sure. They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness." "Concerning Thy testimonies, I have known of old that Thou hast founded them forever." Psalms 119:89; 111:7, 8; 119:152.

    "Whosoever . . . shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 5:19.

    That is, he shall have no place therein. For he who willfully breaks one commandment, does not, in spirit and truth, keep any of them. "Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." James 2:10.

    It is not the greatness of the act of disobedience that constitutes sin, but the fact of variance from God's expressed will in the least particular; for this shows that there is yet communion between the soul and sin. The heart is divided in its service. There is a virtual denial of God, a rebellion against the laws of His government.

    Were men free to depart from the Lord's requirements and to set up a standard of duty for themselves, there would be a variety of standards to suit different minds and the government would be taken out of the Lord's hands. The will of man would be made supreme, and the high and holy will of God-- His purpose of love toward His creatures--would be dishonored, disrespected.

    Whenever men choose their own way, they place themselves in controversy with God. They will have no place in the kingdom of heaven, for they are at war with the very principles of heaven. In disregarding the will of God, they are placing themselves on the side of Satan, the enemy of God and man. Not by one word, not by many words, but by every word that God has spoken, shall man live. We cannot disregard one word, however trifling it may seem to us, and be safe. There is not a commandment of the law that is not for the good and happiness of man, both in this life and in the life to come. In obedience to God's law, man is surrounded as with a hedge and kept from the evil. He who breaks down this divinely erected barrier at one point has destroyed its power to protect him; for he has opened a way by which the enemy can enter to waste and ruin.

    By venturing to disregard the will of God upon one point, our first parents opened the floodgates of woe upon the world. And every individual who follows their example will reap a similar result. The love of God underlies every precept of His law, and he who departs from the commandment is working his own unhappiness and ruin.

    "Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 5:20.

    The scribes and Pharisees had accused not only Christ but His disciples as sinners because of their disregard of the rabbinical rites and observances. Often the disciples had been perplexed and troubled by censure and accusation from those whom they had been accustomed to revere as religious teachers. Jesus unveiled the deception. He declared that the righteousness upon which the Pharisees set so great value was worthless. The Jewish nation had claimed to be the special, loyal people who were favored of God; but Christ represented their religion as devoid of saving faith. All their pretensions of piety, their human inventions and ceremonies, and even their boasted performance of the outward requirements of the law, could not avail to make them holy. They were not pure in heart or noble and Christlike in character.

    A legal religion is insufficient to bring the soul into harmony with God. The hard, rigid orthodoxy of the Pharisees, destitute of contrition, tenderness, or love, was only a stumbling block to sinners. They were like the salt that had lost its savor; for their influence had no power to preserve the world from corruption. The only true faith is that which "worketh by love" (Galatians 5:6) to purify the soul. It is as leaven that transforms the character.

    All this the Jews should have learned from the teachings of the prophets. Centuries before, the cry of the soul for justification with God had found voice and answer in the words of the prophet Micah: "Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and bow myself before the high God? shall I come before Him with burnt offerings, with calves of a year old? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? . . . He hath showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?" Micah 6:6-8.

    The prophet Hosea had pointed out what constitutes the very essence of Pharisaism, in the words, "Israel is an empty vine, he bringeth forth fruit unto himself." Hosea 10:1. In their professed service to God, the Jews were really working for self. Their righteousness was the fruit of their own efforts to keep the law according to their own ideas and for their own selfish benefit. Hence it could be no better than they were. In their endeavor to make themselves holy, they were trying to bring a clean thing out of an unclean. The law of God is as holy as He is holy, as perfect as He is perfect. It presents to men the righteousness of God. It is impossible for man, of himself, to keep this law; for the nature of man is depraved, deformed, and wholly unlike the character of God. The works of the selfish heart are "as an unclean thing;" and "all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags." Isaiah 64:6.

    While the law is holy, the Jews could not attain righteousness by their own efforts to keep the law. The disciples of Christ must obtain righteousness of a different character from that of the Pharisees, if they would enter the kingdom of heaven. God offered them, in His Son, the perfect righteousness of the law. If they would open their hearts fully to receive Christ, then the very life of God, His love, would dwell in them, transforming them into His own likeness; and thus through God's free gift they would possess the righteousness which the law requires. But the Pharisees rejected Christ; "being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness" (Romans 10:3), they would not submit themselves unto the righteousness of God.
    Jesus proceeded to show His hearers what it means to keep the commandments of God--that it is a reproduction in themselves of the character of Christ. For in Him, God was daily made manifest before them.

    "Everyone who is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment." Matthew 5:22, R.V.

    Through Moses the Lord had said, "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart. . . . Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Leviticus 19:17, 18. The truths which Christ presented were the same that had been taught by the prophets, but they had become obscured through hardness of heart and love of sin.

    The Saviour's words revealed to His hearers the fact that, while they were condemning others as transgressors, they were themselves equally guilty; for they were cherishing malice and hatred. Across the sea from the place where they were assembled was the country of Bashan, a lonely region, whose wild gorges and wooded hills had long been a favorite lurking ground for criminals of all descriptions. Reports of robbery and murder committed there were fresh in the minds of the people, and many were zealous in denouncing these evildoers. At the same time they were themselves passionate and contentious; they cherished the most bitter hatred of their Roman oppressors and felt themselves at liberty to hate and despise all other peoples, and even their own countrymen who did not in all things conform to their ideas. In all this they were violating the law which declares, "Thou shalt not kill."

    The spirit of hatred and revenge originated with Satan, and it led him to put to death the Son of God. Whoever cherishes malice or unkindness is cherishing the same spirit, and its fruit will be unto death. In the revengeful thought the evil deed lies enfolded, as the plant in the seed. "Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him." 1 John 3:15.

    "Whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca [vain fellow], shall be in danger of the council." In the gift of His Son for our redemption, God has shown how high a value He places upon every human soul, and He gives to no man liberty to speak contemptuously of another. We shall see faults and weaknesses in those about us, but God claims every soul as His property--His by creation, and doubly His as purchased by the precious blood of Christ. All were created in His image, and even the most degraded are to be treated with respect and tenderness. God will hold us accountable for even a word spoken in contempt of one soul for whom Christ laid down His life.

    "Who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?" "Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth." 1 Corinthians 4:7; Romans 14:4.

    "Whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of the hell of fire." R.V. In the Old Testament the word "fool" is used to designate an apostate, or one who has abandoned himself to wickedness. Jesus says that whoever shall condemn his brother as an apostate or a despiser of God shows that he himself is worthy of the same condemnation.

    Christ Himself, when contending with Satan about the body of Moses, "durst not bring against him a railing accusation." Jude 9. Had He done this, He would have placed Himself on Satan's ground, for accusation is the weapon of the evil one. He is called in Scripture, "the accuser of our brethren." Revelation 12:10. Jesus would employ none of Satan's weapons. He met him with the words, "The Lord rebuke thee." Jude 9.

    His example is for us. When we are brought in conflict with the enemies of Christ, we should say nothing in a spirit of retaliation or that would bear even the appearance of a railing accusation. He who stands as a mouthpiece for God should not utter words which even the Majesty of heaven would not use when contending with Satan. We are to leave with God the work of judging and condemning.

    "Be reconciled to thy brother." Matthew 5:24.

    The love of God is something more than a mere negation; it is a positive and active principle, a living spring, ever flowing to bless others. If the love of Christ dwells in us, we shall not only cherish no hatred toward our fellows, but we shall seek in every way to manifest love toward them.

    Jesus said, "If thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee; leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift." The sacrificial offerings expressed faith that through Christ the offerer had become a partaker of the mercy and love of God. But for one to express faith in God's pardoning love, while he himself indulged an unloving spirit, would be a mere farce.

    When one who professes to serve God wrongs or injures a brother, he misrepresents the character of God to that brother, and the wrong must be confessed, he must acknowledge it to be sin, in order to be in harmony with God. Our brother may have done us a greater wrong than we have done him, but this does not lessen our responsibility. If when we come before God we remember that another has aught against us, we are to leave our gift of prayer, of thanksgiving, of freewill offering, and go to the brother with whom we are at variance, and in humility confess our own sin and ask to be forgiven. If we have in any manner defrauded or injured our brother, we should make restitution. If we have unwittingly borne false witness, if we have misstated his words, if we have injured his influence in any way, we should go to the ones with whom we have conversed about him, and take back all our injurious misstatements.

    If matters of difficulty between brethren were not laid open before others, but frankly spoken of between themselves in the spirit of Christian love, how much evil might be prevented! How many roots of bitterness whereby many are defiled would be destroyed, and how closely and tenderly might the followers of Christ be united in His love!

    "Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." Matthew 5:28.

    The Jews prided themselves on their morality and looked with horror upon the sensual practices of the heathen. The presence of the Roman officers whom the imperial rule had brought into Palestine was a continual offense to the people, for with these foreigners had come in a flood of heathen customs, lust, and dissipation. In Capernaum, Roman officials with their gay paramours haunted the parades and promenades, and often the sound of revelry broke upon the stillness of the lake as their pleasure boats glided over the quiet waters. The people expected to hear from Jesus a stern denunciation of this class, but what was their astonishment as they listened to words that laid bare the evil of their own hearts!

    When the thought of evil is loved and cherished, however secretly, said Jesus, it shows that sin still reigns in the heart. The soul is still in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity. He who finds pleasure in dwelling upon scenes of impurity, who indulges the evil thought, the lustful look, may behold in the open sin, with its burden of shame and heart-breaking grief, the true nature of the evil which he has hidden in the chambers of the soul. The season of temptation, under which, it may be, one falls into grievous sin, does not create the evil that is revealed, but only develops or makes manifest that which was hidden and latent in the heart. As a man "thinketh in his heart, so is he;" for out of the heart "are the issues of life." Proverbs 23:7; 4:23.

    "If thy right hand causeth thee to stumble, cut it off, and cast it from thee." Matthew 5:30, R.V.

    To prevent disease from spreading to the body and destroying life, a man would submit to part even with his right hand. Much more should he be willing to surrender that which imperils the life of the soul.

    Through the gospel, souls that are degraded and enslaved by Satan are to be redeemed to share the glorious liberty of the sons of God. God's purpose is not merely to deliver from the suffering that is the inevitable result of sin, but to save from sin itself. The soul, corrupted and deformed, is to be purified, transformed, that it may be clothed in "the beauty of the Lord our God," "conformed to the image of His Son." "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him." Psalm 90:17; Romans 8:29; 1 Corinthians 2:9. Eternity alone can reveal the glorious destiny to which man, restored to God's image, may attain.

    In order for us to reach this high ideal, that which causes the soul to stumble must be sacrificed. It is through the will that sin retains its hold upon us. The surrender of the will is represented as plucking out the eye or cutting off the hand. Often it seems to us that to surrender the will to God is to consent to go through life maimed or crippled. But it is better, says Christ, for self to be maimed, wounded, crippled, if thus you may enter into life. That which you look upon as disaster is the door to highest benefit.

    God is the fountain of life, and we can have life only as we are in communion with Him. Separated from God, existence may be ours for a little time, but we do not possess life. "She that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth." 1 Timothy 5:6. Only through the surrender of our will to God is it possible for Him to impart life to us. Only by receiving His life through self-surrender is it possible, said Jesus, for these hidden sins, which I have pointed out, to be overcome.

    It is possible that you may bury them in your hearts and conceal them from human eyes, but how will you stand in God's presence? If you cling to self, refusing to yield your will to God, you are choosing death. To sin, wherever found, God is a consuming fire. If you choose sin, and refuse to separate from it, the presence of God, which consumes sin, must consume you.

    It will require a sacrifice to give yourself to God; but it is a sacrifice of the lower for the higher, the earthly for the spiritual, the perishable for the eternal. God does not design that our will should be destroyed, for it is only through its exercise that we can accomplish what He would have us do. Our will is to be yielded to Him, that we may receive it again, purified and refined, and so linked in sympathy with the Divine that He can pour through us the tides of His love and power. However bitter and painful this surrender may appear to the willful, wayward heart, yet "it is profitable for thee."

    Not until he fell crippled and helpless upon the breast of the covenant angel did Jacob know the victory of conquering faith and receive the title of a prince with God. It was when he "halted upon his thigh" (Genesis 32:31) that the armed bands of Esau were stilled before him, and the Pharaoh, proud heir of a kingly line, stooped to crave his blessing. So the Captain of our salvation was made "perfect through sufferings" (Hebrews 2:10), and the children of faith "out of weakness were made strong," and "turned to flight the armies of the aliens" (Hebrews 11:34). So do "the lame take the prey" (Isaiah 33:23), and the weak become "as David," and "the house of David . . . as the angel of the Lord" (Zechariah 12:Cool.

    "Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife?" Matthew 19:3.

    Among the Jews a man was permitted to put away his wife for the most trivial offenses, and the woman was then at liberty to marry again. This practice led to great wretchedness and sin. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus declared plainly that there could be no dissolution of the marriage tie, except for unfaithfulness to the marriage vow. "Everyone," He said, "that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adulteress: and whosoever shall marry her when she is put away committeth adultery." R.V.

    When the Pharisees afterward questioned Him concerning the lawfulness of divorce, Jesus pointed His hearers back to the marriage institution as ordained at creation. "Because of the hardness of your hearts," He said, Moses "suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so." Matthew 19:8. He referred them to the blessed days of Eden, when God pronounced all things "very good." Then marriage and the Sabbath had their origin, twin institutions for the glory of God in the benefit of humanity. Then, as the Creator joined the hands of the holy pair in wedlock, saying, A man shall "leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one" (Genesis 2:24), He enunciated the law of marriage for all the children of Adam to the close of time. That which the Eternal Father Himself had pronounced good was the law of highest blessing and development for man.

    Like every other one of God's good gifts entrusted to the keeping of humanity, marriage has been perverted by sin; but it is the purpose of the gospel to restore its purity and beauty. In both the Old and the New Testament the marriage relation is employed to represent the tender and sacred union that exists between Christ and His people, the redeemed ones whom He has purchased at the cost of Calvary. "Fear not," He says; "thy Maker is thine husband; the Lord of hosts is His name; and thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel." "Turn, O backsliding children, saith the Lord; for I am married unto you." Isaiah 54:4, 5; Jeremiah 3:14. In the "Song of Songs" we hear the bride's voice saying, "My Beloved is mine, and I am His." And He who is to her "the chiefest among ten thousand," speaks to His chosen one, "Thou art all fair, My love; there is no spot in thee." Song of Solomon 2:16; 5:10; 4:7.

    In later times Paul the apostle, writing to the Ephesian Christians, declares that the Lord has constituted the husband the head of the wife, to be her protector, the house-band, binding the members of the family together, even as Christ is the head of the church and the Saviour of the mystical body. Therefore he says, "As the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave Himself for it; that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that He might present it to Himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives." Ephesians 5:24-28. The grace of Christ, and this alone, can make this institution what God designed it should be--an agent for the blessing and uplifting of humanity. And thus the families of earth, in their unity and peace and love, may represent the family of heaven.

    Now, as in Christ's day, the condition of society presents a sad comment upon heaven's ideal of this sacred relation. Yet even for those who have found bitterness and disappointment where they had hoped for companionship and joy, the gospel of Christ offers a solace. The patience and gentleness which His Spirit can impart will sweeten the bitter lot. The heart in which Christ dwells will be so filled, so satisfied, with His love that it will not be consumed with longing to attract sympathy and attention to itself. And through the surrender of the soul to God, His wisdom can accomplish what human wisdom fails to do. Through the revelation of His grace, hearts that were once indifferent or estranged may be united in bonds that are firmer and more enduring than those of earth--the golden bonds of a love that will bear the test of trial.

    "Swear not at all." Matthew 5:34.

    The reason for this command is given: We are not to swear "by the heaven, for it is the throne of God; nor by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, for thou canst not make one hair white or black." R.V.

    All things come of God. We have nothing that we have not received; and, more than this, we have nothing that has not been purchased for us by the blood of Christ. Everything we possess comes to us stamped with the cross, bought with the blood that is precious above all estimate, because it is the life of God. Hence there is nothing that we have a right to pledge, as if it were our own, for the fulfillment of our word.

    The Jews understood the third commandment as prohibiting the profane use of the name of God; but they thought themselves at liberty to employ other oaths. Oath taking was common among them. Through Moses they had been forbidden to swear falsely, but they had many devices for freeing themselves from the obligation imposed by an oath. They did not fear to indulge in what was really profanity, nor did they shrink from perjury so long as it was veiled by some technical evasion of the law.

    Jesus condemned their practices, declaring that their custom in oath taking was a transgression of the commandment of God. Our Saviour did not, however, forbid the use of the judicial oath, in which God is solemnly called to witness that what is said is truth and nothing but the truth. Jesus Himself, at His trial before the Sanhedrin, did not refuse to testify under oath. The high priest said unto Him, "I adjure Thee by the living God, that Thou tell us whether Thou be the Christ, the Son of God." Jesus answered, "Thou hast said." Matthew 26:63, 64. Had Christ in the Sermon on the Mount condemned the judicial oath, He would at His trial have reproved the high priest and thus, for the benefit of His followers, have enforced His own teaching.

    There are very many who do not fear to deceive their fellow men, but they have been taught, and have been impressed by the Spirit of God, that it is a fearful thing to lie to their Maker. When put under oath they are made to feel that they are not testifying merely before men, but before God; that if they bear false witness, it is to Him who reads the heart and who knows the exact truth. The knowledge of the fearful judgments that have followed this sin has a restraining influence upon them.

    But if there is anyone who can consistently testify under oath, it is the Christian. He lives constantly as in the presence of God, knowing that every thought is open to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do; and when required to do so in a lawful manner, it is right for him to appeal to God as a witness that what he says is the truth, and nothing but the truth.

    Jesus proceeded to lay down a principle that would make oath taking needless. He teaches that the exact truth should be the law of speech. "Let your speech be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: and whatsoever is more than these is of the evil one." R.V.

    These words condemn all those meaningless phrases and expletives that border on profanity. They condemn the deceptive compliments, the evasion of truth, the flattering phrases, the exaggerations, the misrepresentations in trade, that are current in society and in the business world. They teach that no one who tries to appear what he is not, or whose words do not convey the real sentiment of his heart, can be called truthful.

    If these words of Christ were heeded, they would check the utterance of evil surmising and unkind criticism; for in commenting upon the actions and motives of another, who can be certain of speaking the exact truth? How often pride, passion, personal resentment, color the impression given! A glance, a word, even an intonation of the voice, may be vital with falsehood. Even facts may be so stated as to convey a false impression. And "whatsoever is more than" truth, "is of the evil one."

    Everything that Christians do should be as transparent as the sunlight. Truth is of God; deception, in every one of its myriad forms, is of Satan; and whoever in any way departs from the straight line of truth is betraying himself into the power of the wicked one. Yet it is not a light or an easy thing to speak the exact truth. We cannot speak the truth unless we know the truth; and how often preconceived opinions, mental bias, imperfect knowledge, errors of judgment, prevent a right understanding of matters with which we have to do! We cannot speak the truth unless our minds are continually guided by Him who is truth.

    Through the apostle Paul, Christ bids us, "Let your speech be alway with grace." "Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers." Colossians 4:6; Ephesians 4:29. In the light of these scriptures the words of Christ upon the mount are seen to condemn jesting, trifling, and unchaste conversation. They require that our words should be not only truthful, but pure.

    Those who have learned of Christ will "have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness." Ephesians 5:11. In speech, as in life, they will be simple, straightforward, and true; for they are preparing for the fellowship of those holy ones in whose mouth "was found no guile." Revelation 14:5.

    "Resist not him that is evil: but whosoever smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." Matthew 5:39, R.V.

    Occasions of irritation to the Jews were constantly arising from their contact with the Roman soldiery. Detachments of troops were stationed at different points throughout Judea and Galilee, and their presence reminded the people of their own degradation as a nation. With bitterness of soul they heard the loud blast of the trumpet and saw the troops forming around the standard of Rome and bowing in homage to this symbol of her power. Collisions between the people and the soldiers were frequent, and these inflamed the popular hatred. Often as some Roman official with his guard of soldiers hastened from point
    to point, he would seize upon the Jewish peasants who were laboring in the field and compel them to carry burdens up the mountainside or render any other service that might be needed. This was in accordance with the Roman law and custom, and resistance to such demands only called forth taunts and cruelty. Every day deepened in the hearts of the people the longing to cast off the Roman yoke. Especially among the bold, rough-handed Galileans the spirit of insurrection was rife. Capernaum, being a border town, was the seat of a Roman garrison, and even while Jesus was teaching, the sight of a company of soldiers recalled to His hearers the bitter thought of Israel's humiliation. The people looked eagerly of Christ, hoping that He was the One who was to humble the pride of Rome.

    With sadness Jesus looks into the upturned faces before Him. He notes the spirit of revenge that has stamped its evil imprint upon them, and knows how bitterly the people long for power to crush their oppressors. Mournfully He bids them, "Resist not him that is evil: but whosoever smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also."

    These words were but a reiteration of the teaching of the Old Testament. It is true that the rule, "Eye for eye, tooth for tooth" (Leviticus 24:20), was a provision in the laws given through Moses; but it was a civil statute. None were justified in avenging themselves, for they had the words of the Lord: "Say not thou, I will recompense evil." "Say not, I will do so to him as he hath done to me." "Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth." "If he that hateth thee be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink." Proverbs 20:22; 24:29, 17; 25:21, 22, R.V., margin.

    The whole earthly life of Jesus was a manifestation of this principle. It was to bring the bread of life to His enemies that our Saviour left His home in heaven. Though calumny and persecution were heaped upon Him from the cradle to the grave, they called forth from Him only the expression of forgiving love. Through the prophet Isaiah He says, "I gave My back to the smiters, and My cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: I hid not My face from shame and spitting." "He was oppressed, and He was afflicted, yet He opened not His mouth: He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so He openeth not His mouth." Isaiah 50:6; 53:7. And from the cross of Calvary there come down through the ages His prayer for His murderers and the message of hope to the dying thief.

    The Father's presence encircled Christ, and nothing befell Him but that which infinite love permitted for the blessing of the world. Here was His source of comfort, and it is for us. He who is imbued with the Spirit of Christ abides in Christ. The blow that is aimed at him falls upon the Saviour, who surrounds him with His presence. Whatever comes to him comes from Christ. He has no need to resist evil, for Christ is his defense. Nothing can touch him except by our Lord's permission, and "all things" that are permitted "work together for good to them that love God." Romans 8:28.

    "If any man would go to law with thee, and take away thy coat [tunic], let him have thy cloak [mantle] also. And whosoever shall impress thee to go one mile, go with him twain." R.V., margin.

    Jesus bade His disciples, instead of resisting the demands of those in authority, to do even more than was required of them. And, so far as possible, they should discharge every obligation, even if it were beyond what the law of the land required. The law, as given through Moses, enjoined a very tender regard for the poor. When a poor man gave his garment as a pledge, or as security for a debt, the creditor was not permitted to enter the dwelling to obtain it; he must wait in the street for the pledge to be brought to him. And whatever the circumstances the pledge must be returned to its owner at nightfall. Deuteronomy 24:10-13. In the days of Christ these merciful provisions were little regarded; but Jesus taught His disciples to submit to the decision of the court, even though this should demand more than the law of Moses authorized. Though it should demand a part of their raiment, they were to yield. More than this, they were to give to the creditor his due, if necessary surrendering even more than the court gave him authority to seize. "If any man would go to law with thee," He said, "and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also." R.V. And if the couriers require you to go a mile with them, go two miles.

    Jesus added, "Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away." The same lesson had been taught through Moses: "Thou shalt not harden thine heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother: but thou shalt open
    thine hand wide unto him, and shalt surely lend him sufficient for his need, in that which he wanteth." Deuteronomy 15:7, 8. This scripture makes plain the meaning of the Saviour's words. Christ does not teach us to give indiscriminately to all who ask for charity; but He says, "Thou shalt surely lend him sufficient for his need;" and this is to be a gift, rather than a loan; for we are to "lend, hoping for nothing again." Luke 6:35. "Who gives himself with his alms feeds three, Himself, his hungering neighbor, and Me." "Love your enemies." Matthew 5:44.

    The Saviour's lesson, "Resist not him that is evil," was a hard saying for the revengeful Jews, and they murmured against it among themselves. But Jesus now made a still stronger declaration:

    "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you; that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven."

    Such was the spirit of the law which the rabbis had misinterpreted as a cold and rigid code of exactions. They regarded themselves as better than other men, and as entitled to the special favor of God by virtue of their birth as Israelites; but Jesus pointed to the spirit of forgiving love as that which would give evidence that they were actuated by any higher motives than even the publicans and sinners, whom they despised. He pointed His hearers to the Ruler of the universe, under the new name, "Our Father." He would have them understand how tenderly the heart of God yearned over them. He teaches that God cares for every lost soul; that "like as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear Him." Psalm 103:13. Such a conception of God was never given to the world by any religion but that of the Bible. Heathenism teaches men to look upon the Supreme Being as an object of fear rather than of love--a malign deity to be appeased by sacrifices, rather than a Father pouring upon His children the gift of His love. Even the people of Israel had become so blinded to the precious teaching of the prophets concerning God that this revelation of His paternal love was as an original subject, a new gift to the world.

    The Jews held that God loved those who served Him,--according to their view, those who fulfilled the requirements of the rabbis,--and that all the rest of the world lay under His frown and curse. Not so, said Jesus; the whole world, the evil and the good, lies in the sunshine of His love. This truth you should have learned from nature itself; for God "maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust."

    It is not because of inherent power that year by year the earth produces her bounties and continues her motion round the sun. The hand of God guides the planets and keeps them in position in their orderly march through the heavens. It is through His power that summer and winter, seedtime and harvest, day and night follow each other in their regular succession. It is by His word that vegetation flourishes, that the leaves appear and the flowers bloom. Every good thing we have, each ray of sunshine and shower of rain, every morsel of food, every moment of life, is a gift of love.

    While we were yet unloving and unlovely in character, "hateful, and hating one another," our heavenly Father had mercy on us. "After that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us." Titus 3:3-5. His love received, will make us, in like manner, kind and tender, not merely toward those who please us, but to the most faulty and erring and sinful.

    The children of God are those who are partakers of His nature. It is not earthly rank, nor birth, nor nationality, nor religious privilege, which proves that we are members of the family of God; it is love, a love that embraces all humanity. Even sinners whose hearts are not utterly closed to God's Spirit, will respond to kindness; while they may give hate for hate, they will also give love for love. But it is only the Spirit of God that gives love for hatred. To be kind to the unthankful and to the evil, to do good hoping for nothing again, is the insignia of the royalty of heaven, the sure token by which the children of the Highest reveal their high estate.

    "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." Matthew 5:48.

    The word "therefore" implies a conclusion, an inference from what has gone before. Jesus has been describing to His hearers the unfailing mercy and love of God, and He bids them therefore to be perfect. Because your heavenly Father "is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil" (Luke 6:35), because He has stooped to lift you up, therefore, said Jesus, you may become like Him in character, and stand without fault in the presence of men and angels.

    The conditions of eternal life, under grace, are just what they were in Eden--perfect righteousness, harmony with God, perfect conformity to the principles of His law. The standard of character presented in the Old Testament is the same that is presented in the New Testament. This standard is not one to which we cannot attain. In every command or injunction that God gives there is a promise, the most positive, underlying the command. God has made provision that we may become like unto Him, and He will accomplish this for all who do not interpose a perverse will and thus frustrate His grace.

    With untold love our God has loved us, and our love awakens toward Him as we comprehend something of the length and breadth and depth and height of this love that passeth knowledge. By the revelation of the attractive loveliness of Christ, by the knowledge of His love expressed to us while we were yet sinners, the stubborn heart is melted and subdued, and the sinner is transformed and becomes a child of heaven. God does not employ compulsory measures; love is the agent which He uses to expel sin from the heart. By it He changes pride into humility, and enmity and unbelief into love and faith.

    The Jews had been wearily toiling to reach perfection by their own efforts, and they had failed. Christ had already told them that their righteousness could never enter the kingdom of heaven. Now He points out to them the character of the righteousness that all who enter heaven will possess. Throughout the Sermon on the Mount He describes its fruits, and now in one sentence He points out its source and its nature: Be perfect as God is perfect. The law is but a transcript of the character of God. Behold in your heavenly Father a perfect manifestation of the principles which are the foundation of His government.

    God is love. Like rays of light from the sun, love and light and joy flow out from Him to all His creatures. It is His nature to give. His very life is the outflow of unselfish love.

    "His glory is His children's good;
    His joy, His tender Fatherhood."

    He tells us to be perfect as He is, in the same manner. We are to be centers of light and blessing to our little circle, even as He is to the universe. We have nothing of ourselves, but the light of His love shines upon us, and we are to reflect its brightness. "In His borrowed goodness good," we may be perfect in our sphere, even as God is perfect in His.

    Jesus said, Be perfect as your Father is perfect. If you are the children of God you are partakers of His nature, and you cannot but be like Him. Every child lives by the life of his father. If you are God's children, begotten by His Spirit, you live by the life of God. In Christ dwells "all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" (Colossians 2:9); and the life of Jesus is made manifest "in our mortal flesh" (2 Corinthians 4:11). That life in you will produce the same character and manifest the same works as it did in Him. Thus you will be in harmony with every precept of His law; for "the law of the Lord is perfect, restoring the soul." Psalm 19:7, margin. Through love "the righteousness of the law" will be "fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Romans 8:4.

    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:53 am

    The Psalms in the King James Version of the Holy Bible (Continued)
    Psalm 91: 1 He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty. 2 I will say of the LORD, He is my refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust . 3 Surely he shall deliver thee from the snare of the fowler, and from the noisome pestilence. 4 He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust : his truth shall be thy shield and buckler. 5 Thou shalt not be afraid for the terror by night; nor for the arrow that flieth by day; 6 Nor for the pestilence that walketh in darkness; nor for the destruction that wasteth at noonday. 7 A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand; but it shall not come nigh thee. 8 Only with thine eyes shalt thou behold and see the reward of the wicked. 9 Because thou hast made the LORD, which is my refuge, even the most High, thy habitation; 10 There shall no evil befall thee, neither shall any plague come nigh thy dwelling. 11 For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways. 12 They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone. 13 Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder: the young lion and the dragon shalt thou trample under feet . 14 Because he hath set his love upon me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set him on high , because he hath known my name. 15 He shall call upon me, and I will answer him: I will be with him in trouble; I will deliver him, and honour him. 16 With long life will I satisfy him, and shew him my salvation.

    Psalm 92: 1 It is a good thing to give thanks unto the LORD, and to sing praises unto thy name, O most High: 2 To shew forth thy lovingkindness in the morning, and thy faithfulness every night, 3 Upon an instrument of ten strings, and upon the psaltery; upon the harp with a solemn sound. 4 For thou, LORD, hast made me glad through thy work: I will triumph in the works of thy hands. 5 O LORD, how great are thy works! and thy thoughts are very deep . 6 A brutish man knoweth not; neither doth a fool understand this. 7 When the wicked spring as the grass, and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish ; it is that they shall be destroyed for ever: 8 But thou, LORD, art most high for evermore. 9 For, lo, thine enemies , O LORD, for, lo, thine enemies shall perish ; all the workers of iniquity shall be scattered . 10 But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil. 11 Mine eye also shall see my desire on mine enemies, and mine ears shall hear my desire of the wicked that rise up against me. 12 The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree: he shall grow like a cedar in Lebanon. 13 Those that be planted in the house of the LORD shall flourish in the courts of our God. 14 They shall still bring forth fruit in old age; they shall be fat and flourishing; 15 To shew that the LORD is upright: he is my rock, and there is no unrighteousness in him.

    Psalm 93: 1 The LORD reigneth , he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished , that it cannot be moved . 2 Thy throne is established of old: thou art from everlasting. 3 The floods have lifted up , O LORD, the floods have lifted up their voice; the floods lift up their waves. 4 The LORD on high is mightier than the noise of many waters, yea, than the mighty waves of the sea. 5 Thy testimonies are very sure : holiness becometh thine house, O LORD, for ever .

    Psalm 94: 1 O LORD God, to whom vengeance belongeth; O God, to whom vengeance belongeth, shew thyself. 2 Lift up thyself, thou judge of the earth: render a reward to the proud. 3 LORD, how long shall the wicked, how long shall the wicked triumph ? 4 How long shall they utter and speak hard things? and all the workers of iniquity boast themselves? 5 They break in pieces thy people, O LORD, and afflict thine heritage. 6 They slay the widow and the stranger, and murder the fatherless. 7 Yet they say , The LORD shall not see , neither shall the God of Jacob regard it. 8 Understand , ye brutish among the people: and ye fools, when will ye be wise ? 9 He that planted the ear, shall he not hear ? he that formed the eye, shall he not see ? 10 He that chastiseth the heathen, shall not he correct ? he that teacheth man knowledge, shall not he know? 11 The LORD knoweth the thoughts of man, that they are vanity. 12 Blessed is the man whom thou chastenest , O LORD, and teachest him out of thy law; 13 That thou mayest give him rest from the days of adversity, until the pit be digged for the wicked. 14 For the LORD will not cast off his people, neither will he forsake his inheritance. 15 But judgment shall return unto righteousness: and all the upright in heart shall follow it. 16 Who will rise up for me against the evildoers ? or who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity? 17 Unless the LORD had been my help, my soul had almost dwelt in silence. 18 When I said , My foot slippeth ; thy mercy, O LORD, held me up . 19 In the multitude of my thoughts within me thy comforts delight my soul. 20 Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with thee, which frameth mischief by a law? 21 They gather themselves together against the soul of the righteous, and condemn the innocent blood. 22 But the LORD is my defence; and my God is the rock of my refuge. 23 And he shall bring upon them their own iniquity, and shall cut them off in their own wickedness; yea, the LORD our God shall cut them off .

    Psalm 95: 1 O come , let us sing unto the LORD: let us make a joyful noise to the rock of our salvation. 2 Let us come before his presence with thanksgiving, and make a joyful noise unto him with psalms. 3 For the LORD is a great God, and a great King above all gods. 4 In his hand are the deep places of the earth: the strength of the hills is his also. 5 The sea is his, and he made it: and his hands formed the dry land. 6 O come , let us worship and bow down : let us kneel before the LORD our maker . 7 For he is our God; and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand. To day if ye will hear his voice, 8 Harden not your heart, as in the provocation, and as in the day of temptation in the wilderness: 9 When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my work. 10 Forty years long was I grieved with this generation, and said , It is a people that do err in their heart, and they have not known my ways: 11 Unto whom I sware in my wrath that they should not enter into my rest.

    Psalm 96: 1 O sing unto the LORD a new song: sing unto the LORD, all the earth. 2 Sing unto the LORD, bless his name; shew forth his salvation from day to day. 3 Declare his glory among the heathen, his wonders among all people. 4 For the LORD is great, and greatly to be praised : he is to be feared above all gods. 5 For all the gods of the nations are idols: but the LORD made the heavens. 6 Honour and majesty are before him: strength and beauty are in his sanctuary. 7 Give unto the LORD, O ye kindreds of the people, give unto the LORD glory and strength. 8 Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name: bring an offering, and come into his courts. 9 O worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness: fear before him, all the earth. 10 Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth : the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved : he shall judge the people righteously. 11 Let the heavens rejoice , and let the earth be glad ; let the sea roar , and the fulness thereof. 12 Let the field be joyful , and all that is therein: then shall all the trees of the wood rejoice 13 Before the LORD: for he cometh , for he cometh to judge the earth: he shall judge the world with righteousness, and the people with his truth.

    Psalm 97: 1 The LORD reigneth ; let the earth rejoice ; let the multitude of isles be glad thereof. 2 Clouds and darkness are round about him: righteousness and judgment are the habitation of his throne. 3 A fire goeth before him, and burneth up his enemies round about. 4 His lightnings enlightened the world: the earth saw , and trembled . 5 The hills melted like wax at the presence of the LORD, at the presence of the Lord of the whole earth. 6 The heavens declare his righteousness, and all the people see his glory. 7 Confounded be all they that serve graven images, that boast themselves of idols: worship him, all ye gods. 8 Zion heard , and was glad ; and the daughters of Judah rejoiced because of thy judgments, O LORD. 9 For thou, LORD, art high above all the earth: thou art exalted far above all gods. 10 Ye that love the LORD, hate evil: he preserveth the souls of his saints; he delivereth them out of the hand of the wicked. 11 Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart. 12 Rejoice in the LORD, ye righteous; and give thanks at the remembrance of his holiness.

    Psalm 98: 1 O sing unto the LORD a new song; for he hath done marvellous things : his right hand, and his holy arm, hath gotten him the victory . 2 The LORD hath made known his salvation: his righteousness hath he openly shewed in the sight of the heathen. 3 He hath remembered his mercy and his truth toward the house of Israel: all the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God. 4 Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all the earth: make a loud noise , and rejoice , and sing praise. 5 Sing unto the LORD with the harp; with the harp, and the voice of a psalm. 6 With trumpets and sound of cornet make a joyful noise before the LORD, the King. 7 Let the sea roar , and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein. 8 Let the floods clap their hands: let the hills be joyful together 9 Before the LORD; for he cometh to judge the earth: with righteousness shall he judge the world, and the people with equity.

    Psalm 99: 1 The LORD reigneth ; let the people tremble : he sitteth between the cherubims; let the earth be moved . 2 The LORD is great in Zion; and he is high above all the people. 3 Let them praise thy great and terrible name; for it is holy. 4 The king's strength also loveth judgment; thou dost establish equity, thou executest judgment and righteousness in Jacob. 5 Exalt ye the LORD our God, and worship at his footstool ; for he is holy. 6 Moses and Aaron among his priests, and Samuel among them that call upon his name; they called upon the LORD, and he answered them. 7 He spake unto them in the cloudy pillar: they kept his testimonies, and the ordinance that he gave them. 8 Thou answeredst them, O LORD our God: thou wast a God that forgavest them, though thou tookest vengeance of their inventions. 9 Exalt the LORD our God, and worship at his holy hill; for the LORD our God is holy.

    Psalm 100: 1 Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all ye lands. 2 Serve the LORD with gladness: come before his presence with singing. 3 Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture. 4 Enter into his gates with thanksgiving, and into his courts with praise: be thankful unto him, and bless his name. 5 For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations.

    Psalm 101: 1 I will sing of mercy and judgment: unto thee, O LORD, will I sing . 2 I will behave myself wisely in a perfect way. O when wilt thou come unto me? I will walk within my house with a perfect heart. 3 I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes: I hate the work of them that turn aside; it shall not cleave to me. 4 A froward heart shall depart from me: I will not know a wicked person. 5 Whoso privily slandereth his neighbour, him will I cut off : him that hath an high look and a proud heart will not I suffer . 6 Mine eyes shall be upon the faithful of the land, that they may dwell with me: he that walketh in a perfect way, he shall serve me. 7 He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight. 8 I will early destroy all the wicked of the land; that I may cut off all wicked doers from the city of the LORD.

    Psalm 102: 1 Hear my prayer, O LORD, and let my cry come unto thee. 2 Hide not thy face from me in the day when I am in trouble; incline thine ear unto me: in the day when I call answer me speedily. 3 For my days are consumed like smoke, and my bones are burned as an hearth. 4 My heart is smitten , and withered like grass; so that I forget to eat my bread. 5 By reason of the voice of my groaning my bones cleave to my skin. 6 I am like a pelican of the wilderness: I am like an owl of the desert. 7 I watch , and am as a sparrow alone upon the house top. 8 Mine enemies reproach me all the day; and they that are mad against me are sworn against me. 9 For I have eaten ashes like bread, and mingled my drink with weeping, 10 Because of thine indignation and thy wrath: for thou hast lifted me up , and cast me down . 11 My days are like a shadow that declineth ; and I am withered like grass. 12 But thou, O LORD, shalt endure for ever; and thy remembrance unto all generations. 13 Thou shalt arise , and have mercy upon Zion: for the time to favour her, yea, the set time, is come . 14 For thy servants take pleasure in her stones, and favour the dust thereof. 15 So the heathen shall fear the name of the LORD, and all the kings of the earth thy glory. 16 When the LORD shall build up Zion, he shall appear in his glory. 17 He will regard the prayer of the destitute, and not despise their prayer. 18 This shall be written for the generation to come: and the people which shall be created shall praise the LORD. 19 For he hath looked down from the height of his sanctuary; from heaven did the LORD behold the earth; 20 To hear the groaning of the prisoner; to loose those that are appointed to death; 21 To declare the name of the LORD in Zion, and his praise in Jerusalem; 22 When the people are gathered together, and the kingdoms, to serve the LORD. 23 He weakened my strength in the way; he shortened my days. 24 I said , O my God, take me not away in the midst of my days: thy years are throughout all generations. 25 Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and the heavens are the work of thy hands. 26 They shall perish , but thou shalt endure : yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be changed : 27 But thou art the same, and thy years shall have no end . 28 The children of thy servants shall continue , and their seed shall be established before thee.

    Psalm 103: 1 Bless the LORD, O my soul: and all that is within me, bless his holy name. 2 Bless the LORD, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits: 3 Who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all thy diseases; 4 Who redeemeth thy life from destruction; who crowneth thee with lovingkindness and tender mercies; 5 Who satisfieth thy mouth with good things; so that thy youth is renewed like the eagle's. 6 The LORD executeth righteousness and judgment for all that are oppressed . 7 He made known his ways unto Moses, his acts unto the children of Israel. 8 The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy. 9 He will not always chide : neither will he keep his anger for ever. 10 He hath not dealt with us after our sins; nor rewarded us according to our iniquities. 11 For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him. 12 As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us. 13 Like as a father pitieth his children, so the LORD pitieth them that fear him. 14 For he knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust. 15 As for man, his days are as grass: as a flower of the field, so he flourisheth . 16 For the wind passeth over it, and it is gone; and the place thereof shall know it no more. 17 But the mercy of the LORD is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto children's children; 18 To such as keep his covenant, and to those that remember his commandments to do them. 19 The LORD hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all. 20 Bless the LORD, ye his angels, that excel in strength, that do his commandments, hearkening unto the voice of his word. 21 Bless ye the LORD, all ye his hosts; ye ministers of his, that do his pleasure. 22 Bless the LORD, all his works in all places of his dominion: bless the LORD, O my soul.

    Psalm 104: 1 Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great ; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. 2 Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain: 3 Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters: who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind: 4 Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire: 5 Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever . 6 Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment: the waters stood above the mountains. 7 At thy rebuke they fled ; at the voice of thy thunder they hasted away. 8 They go up by the mountains; they go down by the valleys unto the place which thou hast founded for them. 9 Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over ; that they turn not again to cover the earth. 10 He sendeth the springs into the valleys, which run among the hills. 11 They give drink to every beast of the field: the wild asses quench their thirst. 12 By them shall the fowls of the heaven have their habitation , which sing among the branches. 13 He watereth the hills from his chambers: the earth is satisfied with the fruit of thy works. 14 He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the service of man: that he may bring forth food out of the earth; 15 And wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine , and bread which strengtheneth man's heart. 16 The trees of the LORD are full of sap; the cedars of Lebanon, which he hath planted ; 17 Where the birds make their nests : as for the stork, the fir trees are her house. 18 The high hills are a refuge for the wild goats; and the rocks for the conies. 19 He appointed the moon for seasons: the sun knoweth his going down. 20 Thou makest darkness, and it is night: wherein all the beasts of the forest do creep forth. 21 The young lions roar after their prey, and seek their meat from God. 22 The sun ariseth , they gather themselves together , and lay them down in their dens. 23 Man goeth forth unto his work and to his labour until the evening. 24 O LORD, how manifold are thy works! in wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches. 25 So is this great and wide sea, wherein are things creeping innumerable, both small and great beasts. 26 There go the ships: there is that leviathan, whom thou hast made to play therein. 27 These wait all upon thee; that thou mayest give them their meat in due season. 28 That thou givest them they gather : thou openest thine hand, they are filled with good. 29 Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled : thou takest away their breath, they die , and return to their dust. 30 Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created : and thou renewest the face of the earth. 31 The glory of the LORD shall endure for ever: the LORD shall rejoice in his works. 32 He looketh on the earth, and it trembleth : he toucheth the hills, and they smoke . 33 I will sing unto the LORD as long as I live: I will sing praise to my God while I have my being. 34 My meditation of him shall be sweet : I will be glad in the LORD. 35 Let the sinners be consumed out of the earth, and let the wicked be no more. Bless thou the LORD, O my soul. Praise ye the LORD.

    Psalm 105: 1 O give thanks unto the LORD; call upon his name: make known his deeds among the people. 2 Sing unto him, sing psalms unto him: talk ye of all his wondrous works . 3 Glory ye in his holy name: let the heart of them rejoice that seek the LORD. 4 Seek the LORD, and his strength: seek his face evermore. 5 Remember his marvellous works that he hath done ; his wonders, and the judgments of his mouth; 6 O ye seed of Abraham his servant, ye children of Jacob his chosen. 7 He is the LORD our God: his judgments are in all the earth. 8 He hath remembered his covenant for ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations. 9 Which covenant he made with Abraham, and his oath unto Isaac; 10 And confirmed the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant: 11 Saying , Unto thee will I give the land of Canaan, the lot of your inheritance: 12 When they were but a few men in number; yea, very few, and strangers in it. 13 When they went from one nation to another, from one kingdom to another people; 14 He suffered no man to do them wrong : yea, he reproved kings for their sakes; 15 Saying, Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm . 16 Moreover he called for a famine upon the land: he brake the whole staff of bread. 17 He sent a man before them, even Joseph, who was sold for a servant: 18 Whose feet they hurt with fetters: he was laid in iron: 19 Until the time that his word came : the word of the LORD tried him. 20 The king sent and loosed him; even the ruler of the people, and let him go free . 21 He made him lord of his house, and ruler of all his substance: 22 To bind his princes at his pleasure; and teach his senators wisdom . 23 Israel also came into Egypt; and Jacob sojourned in the land of Ham. 24 And he increased his people greatly; and made them stronger than their enemies. 25 He turned their heart to hate his people, to deal subtilly with his servants. 26 He sent Moses his servant; and Aaron whom he had chosen . 27 They shewed his signs among them, and wonders in the land of Ham. 28 He sent darkness, and made it dark ; and they rebelled not against his word. 29 He turned their waters into blood, and slew their fish. 30 Their land brought forth frogs in abundance , in the chambers of their kings. 31 He spake , and there came divers sorts of flies, and lice in all their coasts. 32 He gave them hail for rain, and flaming fire in their land. 33 He smote their vines also and their fig trees; and brake the trees of their coasts. 34 He spake , and the locusts came , and caterpillers, and that without number, 35 And did eat up all the herbs in their land, and devoured the fruit of their ground. 36 He smote also all the firstborn in their land, the chief of all their strength. 37 He brought them forth also with silver and gold: and there was not one feeble person among their tribes. 38 Egypt was glad when they departed : for the fear of them fell upon them. 39 He spread a cloud for a covering; and fire to give light in the night. 40 The people asked , and he brought quails, and satisfied them with the bread of heaven. 41 He opened the rock, and the waters gushed out ; they ran in the dry places like a river. 42 For he remembered his holy promise, and Abraham his servant. 43 And he brought forth his people with joy, and his chosen with gladness: 44 And gave them the lands of the heathen: and they inherited the labour of the people; 45 That they might observe his statutes, and keep his laws. Praise ye the LORD.

    Psalm 106: 1 Praise ye the LORD. O give thanks unto the LORD; for he is good: for his mercy endureth for ever. 2 Who can utter the mighty acts of the LORD? who can shew forth all his praise? 3 Blessed are they that keep judgment, and he that doeth righteousness at all times. 4 Remember me, O LORD, with the favour that thou bearest unto thy people: O visit me with thy salvation; 5 That I may see the good of thy chosen, that I may rejoice in the gladness of thy nation, that I may glory with thine inheritance. 6 We have sinned with our fathers, we have committed iniquity , we have done wickedly . 7 Our fathers understood not thy wonders in Egypt; they remembered not the multitude of thy mercies; but provoked him at the sea, even at the Red sea. 8 Nevertheless he saved them for his name's sake, that he might make his mighty power to be known . 9 He rebuked the Red sea also, and it was dried up : so he led them through the depths, as through the wilderness. 10 And he saved them from the hand of him that hated them, and redeemed them from the hand of the enemy . 11 And the waters covered their enemies: there was not one of them left . 12 Then believed they his words; they sang his praise. 13 They soon forgat his works; they waited not for his counsel: 14 But lusted exceedingly in the wilderness, and tempted God in the desert. 15 And he gave them their request; but sent leanness into their soul. 16 They envied Moses also in the camp, and Aaron the saint of the LORD. 17 The earth opened and swallowed up Dathan, and covered the company of Abiram. 18 And a fire was kindled in their company; the flame burned up the wicked. 19 They made a calf in Horeb, and worshipped the molten image. 20 Thus they changed their glory into the similitude of an ox that eateth grass. 21 They forgat God their saviour , which had done great things in Egypt; 22 Wondrous works in the land of Ham, and terrible things by the Red sea. 23 Therefore he said that he would destroy them, had not Moses his chosen stood before him in the breach, to turn away his wrath, lest he should destroy them. 24 Yea, they despised the pleasant land, they believed not his word: 25 But murmured in their tents, and hearkened not unto the voice of the LORD. 26 Therefore he lifted up his hand against them, to overthrow them in the wilderness: 27 To overthrow their seed also among the nations, and to scatter them in the lands. 28 They joined themselves also unto Baalpeor, and ate the sacrifices of the dead . 29 Thus they provoked him to anger with their inventions: and the plague brake in upon them. 30 Then stood up Phinehas, and executed judgment : and so the plague was stayed . 31 And that was counted unto him for righteousness unto all generations for evermore. 32 They angered him also at the waters of strife , so that it went ill with Moses for their sakes: 33 Because they provoked his spirit, so that he spake unadvisedly with his lips. 34 They did not destroy the nations, concerning whom the LORD commanded them: 35 But were mingled among the heathen, and learned their works. 36 And they served their idols: which were a snare unto them. 37 Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils, 38 And shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood. 39 Thus were they defiled with their own works, and went a whoring with their own inventions. 40 Therefore was the wrath of the LORD kindled against his people, insomuch that he abhorred his own inheritance. 41 And he gave them into the hand of the heathen; and they that hated them ruled over them. 42 Their enemies also oppressed them, and they were brought into subjection under their hand. 43 Many times did he deliver them; but they provoked him with their counsel, and were brought low for their iniquity. 44 Nevertheless he regarded their affliction, when he heard their cry: 45 And he remembered for them his covenant, and repented according to the multitude of his mercies. 46 He made them also to be pitied of all those that carried them captives . 47 Save us, O LORD our God, and gather us from among the heathen, to give thanks unto thy holy name, and to triumph in thy praise. 48 Blessed be the LORD God of Israel from everlasting to everlasting: and let all the people say , Amen. Praise ye the LORD.

    Psalm 107: 1 O give thanks unto the LORD, for he is good: for his mercy endureth for ever. 2 Let the redeemed of the LORD say so, whom he hath redeemed from the hand of the enemy; 3 And gathered them out of the lands, from the east, and from the west, from the north, and from the south. 4 They wandered in the wilderness in a solitary way; they found no city to dwell in. 5 Hungry and thirsty, their soul fainted in them. 6 Then they cried unto the LORD in their trouble, and he delivered them out of their distresses. 7 And he led them forth by the right way, that they might go to a city of habitation. 8 Oh that men would praise the LORD for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men! 9 For he satisfieth the longing soul, and filleth the hungry soul with goodness. 10 Such as sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, being bound in affliction and iron; 11 Because they rebelled against the words of God, and contemned the counsel of the most High: 12 Therefore he brought down their heart with labour; they fell down , and there was none to help . 13 Then they cried unto the LORD in their trouble, and he saved them out of their distresses. 14 He brought them out of darkness and the shadow of death, and brake their bands in sunder . 15 Oh that men would praise the LORD for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men! 16 For he hath broken the gates of brass, and cut the bars of iron in sunder . 17 Fools because of their transgression, and because of their iniquities, are afflicted . 18 Their soul abhorreth all manner of meat; and they draw near unto the gates of death. 19 Then they cry unto the LORD in their trouble, and he saveth them out of their distresses. 20 He sent his word, and healed them, and delivered them from their destructions. 21 Oh that men would praise the LORD for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men! 22 And let them sacrifice the sacrifices of thanksgiving, and declare his works with rejoicing. 23 They that go down to the sea in ships, that do business in great waters; 24 These see the works of the LORD, and his wonders in the deep. 25 For he commandeth , and raiseth the stormy wind, which lifteth up the waves thereof. 26 They mount up to the heaven, they go down again to the depths: their soul is melted because of trouble. 27 They reel to and fro , and stagger like a drunken man, and are at their wits' end . 28 Then they cry unto the LORD in their trouble, and he bringeth them out of their distresses. 29 He maketh the storm a calm, so that the waves thereof are still . 30 Then are they glad because they be quiet ; so he bringeth them unto their desired haven. 31 Oh that men would praise the LORD for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men! 32 Let them exalt him also in the congregation of the people, and praise him in the assembly of the elders. 33 He turneth rivers into a wilderness, and the watersprings into dry ground; 34 A fruitful land into barrenness, for the wickedness of them that dwell therein. 35 He turneth the wilderness into a standing water, and dry ground into watersprings . 36 And there he maketh the hungry to dwell , that they may prepare a city for habitation; 37 And sow the fields, and plant vineyards, which may yield fruits of increase. 38 He blesseth them also, so that they are multiplied greatly; and suffereth not their cattle to decrease . 39 Again, they are minished and brought low through oppression, affliction, and sorrow. 40 He poureth contempt upon princes, and causeth them to wander in the wilderness, where there is no way. 41 Yet setteth he the poor on high from affliction, and maketh him families like a flock. 42 The righteous shall see it, and rejoice : and all iniquity shall stop her mouth. 43 Whoso is wise, and will observe these things, even they shall understand the lovingkindness of the LORD.

    Psalm 108: 1 O God, my heart is fixed ; I will sing and give praise , even with my glory. 2 Awake , psaltery and harp: I myself will awake early. 3 I will praise thee, O LORD, among the people: and I will sing praises unto thee among the nations. 4 For thy mercy is great above the heavens: and thy truth reacheth unto the clouds. 5 Be thou exalted , O God, above the heavens: and thy glory above all the earth; 6 That thy beloved may be delivered : save with thy right hand, and answer me. 7 God hath spoken in his holiness; I will rejoice , I will divide Shechem, and mete out the valley of Succoth. 8 Gilead is mine; Manasseh is mine; Ephraim also is the strength of mine head; Judah is my lawgiver ; 9 Moab is my washpot ; over Edom will I cast out my shoe; over Philistia will I triumph . 10 Who will bring me into the strong city? who will lead me into Edom? 11 Wilt not thou, O God, who hast cast us off ? and wilt not thou, O God, go forth with our hosts? 12 Give us help from trouble: for vain is the help of man. 13 Through God we shall do valiantly: for he it is that shall tread down our enemies.

    Psalm 109: 1 Hold not thy peace , O God of my praise; 2 For the mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful are opened against me: they have spoken against me with a lying tongue. 3 They compassed me about also with words of hatred; and fought against me without a cause. 4 For my love they are my adversaries : but I give myself unto prayer. 5 And they have rewarded me evil for good, and hatred for my love. 6 Set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand. 7 When he shall be judged , let him be condemned: and let his prayer become sin. 8 Let his days be few; and let another take his office. 9 Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow. 10 Let his children be continually vagabonds , and beg : let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places. 11 Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and let the strangers spoil his labour. 12 Let there be none to extend mercy unto him: neither let there be any to favour his fatherless children. 13 Let his posterity be cut off ; and in the generation following let their name be blotted out . 14 Let the iniquity of his fathers be remembered with the LORD; and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out . 15 Let them be before the LORD continually, that he may cut off the memory of them from the earth. 16 Because that he remembered not to shew mercy, but persecuted the poor and needy man, that he might even slay the broken in heart. 17 As he loved cursing, so let it come unto him: as he delighted not in blessing, so let it be far from him. 18 As he clothed himself with cursing like as with his garment, so let it come into his bowels like water, and like oil into his bones. 19 Let it be unto him as the garment which covereth him, and for a girdle wherewith he is girded continually. 20 Let this be the reward of mine adversaries from the LORD, and of them that speak evil against my soul. 21 But do thou for me, O GOD the Lord, for thy name's sake: because thy mercy is good, deliver thou me. 22 For I am poor and needy, and my heart is wounded within me. 23 I am gone like the shadow when it declineth : I am tossed up and down as the locust. 24 My knees are weak through fasting; and my flesh faileth of fatness. 25 I became also a reproach unto them: when they looked upon me they shaked their heads. 26 Help me, O LORD my God: O save me according to thy mercy: 27 That they may know that this is thy hand; that thou, LORD, hast done it. 28 Let them curse , but bless thou: when they arise , let them be ashamed ; but let thy servant rejoice . 29 Let mine adversaries be clothed with shame, and let them cover themselves with their own confusion, as with a mantle. 30 I will greatly praise the LORD with my mouth; yea, I will praise him among the multitude. 31 For he shall stand at the right hand of the poor, to save him from those that condemn his soul.

    Psalm 110: 1 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool . 2 The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies . 3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth. 4 The LORD hath sworn , and will not repent , Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek. 5 The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath. 6 He shall judge among the heathen, he shall fill the places with the dead bodies; he shall wound the heads over many countries. 7 He shall drink of the brook in the way: therefore shall he lift up the head.

    Psalm 111: 1 Praise ye the LORD. I will praise the LORD with my whole heart, in the assembly of the upright, and in the congregation. 2 The works of the LORD are great, sought out of all them that have pleasure therein. 3 His work is honourable and glorious: and his righteousness endureth for ever. 4 He hath made his wonderful works to be remembered: the LORD is gracious and full of compassion. 5 He hath given meat unto them that fear him: he will ever be mindful of his covenant. 6 He hath shewed his people the power of his works, that he may give them the heritage of the heathen. 7 The works of his hands are verity and judgment; all his commandments are sure . 8 They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness. 9 He sent redemption unto his people: he hath commanded his covenant for ever: holy and reverend is his name. 10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding have all they that do his commandments: his praise endureth for ever.

    Psalm 112: 1 Praise ye the LORD. Blessed is the man that feareth the LORD, that delighteth greatly in his commandments. 2 His seed shall be mighty upon earth: the generation of the upright shall be blessed . 3 Wealth and riches shall be in his house: and his righteousness endureth for ever. 4 Unto the upright there ariseth light in the darkness: he is gracious, and full of compassion, and righteous. 5 A good man sheweth favour , and lendeth : he will guide his affairs with discretion. 6 Surely he shall not be moved for ever: the righteous shall be in everlasting remembrance. 7 He shall not be afraid of evil tidings: his heart is fixed , trusting in the LORD. 8 His heart is established , he shall not be afraid , until he see his desire upon his enemies. 9 He hath dispersed , he hath given to the poor; his righteousness endureth for ever; his horn shall be exalted with honour. 10 The wicked shall see it, and be grieved ; he shall gnash with his teeth, and melt away : the desire of the wicked shall perish .

    Psalm 113: 1 Praise ye the LORD. Praise , O ye servants of the LORD, praise the name of the LORD. 2 Blessed be the name of the LORD from this time forth and for evermore. 3 From the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same the LORD'S name is to be praised . 4 The LORD is high above all nations, and his glory above the heavens. 5 Who is like unto the LORD our God, who dwelleth on high , 6 Who humbleth himself to behold the things that are in heaven, and in the earth! 7 He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth the needy out of the dunghill; 8 That he may set him with princes, even with the princes of his people. 9 He maketh the barren woman to keep house, and to be a joyful mother of children. Praise ye the LORD.

    Psalm 114: 1 When Israel went out of Egypt, the house of Jacob from a people of strange language ; 2 Judah was his sanctuary, and Israel his dominion. 3 The sea saw it, and fled : Jordan was driven back. 4 The mountains skipped like rams, and the little hills like lambs . 5 What ailed thee, O thou sea, that thou fleddest ? thou Jordan, that thou wast driven back? 6 Ye mountains, that ye skipped like rams; and ye little hills, like lambs ? 7 Tremble , thou earth, at the presence of the Lord, at the presence of the God of Jacob; 8 Which turned the rock into a standing water, the flint into a fountain of waters.

    Psalm 115: 1 Not unto us, O LORD, not unto us, but unto thy name give glory, for thy mercy, and for thy truth's sake. 2 Wherefore should the heathen say , Where is now their God? 3 But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased . 4 Their idols are silver and gold, the work of men's hands. 5 They have mouths, but they speak not: eyes have they, but they see not: 6 They have ears, but they hear not: noses have they, but they smell not: 7 They have hands, but they handle not: feet have they, but they walk not: neither speak they through their throat. 8 They that make them are like unto them; so is every one that trusteth in them. 9 O Israel, trust thou in the LORD: he is their help and their shield. 10 O house of Aaron, trust in the LORD: he is their help and their shield. 11 Ye that fear the LORD, trust in the LORD: he is their help and their shield. 12 The LORD hath been mindful of us: he will bless us; he will bless the house of Israel; he will bless the house of Aaron. 13 He will bless them that fear the LORD, both small and great. 14 The LORD shall increase you more and more, you and your children. 15 Ye are blessed of the LORD which made heaven and earth. 16 The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD'S: but the earth hath he given to the children of men. 17 The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence. 18 But we will bless the LORD from this time forth and for evermore. Praise the LORD.

    Psalm 116: 1 I love the LORD, because he hath heard my voice and my supplications. 2 Because he hath inclined his ear unto me, therefore will I call upon him as long as I live. 3 The sorrows of death compassed me, and the pains of hell gat hold upon me: I found trouble and sorrow. 4 Then called I upon the name of the LORD; O LORD, I beseech thee, deliver my soul. 5 Gracious is the LORD, and righteous; yea, our God is merciful . 6 The LORD preserveth the simple: I was brought low , and he helped me. 7 Return unto thy rest, O my soul; for the LORD hath dealt bountifully with thee. 8 For thou hast delivered my soul from death, mine eyes from tears, and my feet from falling. 9 I will walk before the LORD in the land of the living. 10 I believed , therefore have I spoken : I was greatly afflicted : 11 I said in my haste , All men are liars . 12 What shall I render unto the LORD for all his benefits toward me? 13 I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of the LORD. 14 I will pay my vows unto the LORD now in the presence of all his people. 15 Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of his saints. 16 O LORD, truly I am thy servant; I am thy servant, and the son of thine handmaid: thou hast loosed my bonds. 17 I will offer to thee the sacrifice of thanksgiving, and will call upon the name of the LORD. 18 I will pay my vows unto the LORD now in the presence of all his people, 19 In the courts of the LORD'S house, in the midst of thee, O Jerusalem. Praise ye the LORD.

    Psalm 117: 1 O praise the LORD, all ye nations: praise him, all ye people. 2 For his merciful kindness is great toward us: and the truth of the LORD endureth for ever. Praise ye the LORD.

    Psalm 118: 1 O give thanks unto the LORD; for he is good: because his mercy endureth for ever. 2 Let Israel now say , that his mercy endureth for ever. 3 Let the house of Aaron now say , that his mercy endureth for ever. 4 Let them now that fear the LORD say , that his mercy endureth for ever. 5 I called upon the LORD in distress: the LORD answered me, and set me in a large place. 6 The LORD is on my side; I will not fear : what can man do unto me? 7 The LORD taketh my part with them that help me: therefore shall I see my desire upon them that hate me. 8 It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man. 9 It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in princes. 10 All nations compassed me about : but in the name of the LORD will I destroy them. 11 They compassed me about ; yea, they compassed me about : but in the name of the LORD I will destroy them. 12 They compassed me about like bees; they are quenched as the fire of thorns: for in the name of the LORD I will destroy them. 13 Thou hast thrust sore at me that I might fall : but the LORD helped me. 14 The LORD is my strength and song, and is become my salvation. 15 The voice of rejoicing and salvation is in the tabernacles of the righteous: the right hand of the LORD doeth valiantly. 16 The right hand of the LORD is exalted : the right hand of the LORD doeth valiantly. 17 I shall not die , but live , and declare the works of the LORD. 18 The LORD hath chastened me sore : but he hath not given me over unto death. 19 Open to me the gates of righteousness: I will go into them, and I will praise the LORD: 20 This gate of the LORD, into which the righteous shall enter . 21 I will praise thee: for thou hast heard me, and art become my salvation. 22 The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner. 23 This is the LORD'S doing; it is marvellous in our eyes. 24 This is the day which the LORD hath made ; we will rejoice and be glad in it. 25 Save now, I beseech thee, O LORD: O LORD, I beseech thee, send now prosperity . 26 Blessed be he that cometh in the name of the LORD: we have blessed you out of the house of the LORD. 27 God is the LORD, which hath shewed us light : bind the sacrifice with cords, even unto the horns of the altar. 28 Thou art my God, and I will praise thee: thou art my God, I will exalt thee. 29 O give thanks unto the LORD; for he is good: for his mercy endureth for ever.

    Psalm 119: 1 ALEPH. Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the LORD. 2 Blessed are they that keep his testimonies, and that seek him with the whole heart. 3 They also do no iniquity: they walk in his ways. 4 Thou hast commanded us to keep thy precepts diligently. 5 O that my ways were directed to keep thy statutes! 6 Then shall I not be ashamed , when I have respect unto all thy commandments. 7 I will praise thee with uprightness of heart, when I shall have learned thy righteous judgments. 8 I will keep thy statutes: O forsake me not utterly. 9 BETH. Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word. 10 With my whole heart have I sought thee: O let me not wander from thy commandments. 11 Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee. 12 Blessed art thou, O LORD: teach me thy statutes. 13 With my lips have I declared all the judgments of thy mouth. 14 I have rejoiced in the way of thy testimonies, as much as in all riches. 15 I will meditate in thy precepts, and have respect unto thy ways. 16 I will delight myself in thy statutes: I will not forget thy word. 17 GIMEL. Deal bountifully with thy servant, that I may live , and keep thy word. 18 Open thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law. 19 I am a stranger in the earth: hide not thy commandments from me. 20 My soul breaketh for the longing that it hath unto thy judgments at all times. 21 Thou hast rebuked the proud that are cursed , which do err from thy commandments. 22 Remove from me reproach and contempt; for I have kept thy testimonies. 23 Princes also did sit and speak against me: but thy servant did meditate in thy statutes. 24 Thy testimonies also are my delight and my counsellors . 25 DALETH. My soul cleaveth unto the dust: quicken thou me according to thy word. 26 I have declared my ways, and thou heardest me: teach me thy statutes. 27 Make me to understand the way of thy precepts: so shall I talk of thy wondrous works . 28 My soul melteth for heaviness: strengthen thou me according unto thy word. 29 Remove from me the way of lying: and grant me thy law graciously . 30 I have chosen the way of truth: thy judgments have I laid before me. 31 I have stuck unto thy testimonies: O LORD, put me not to shame . 32 I will run the way of thy commandments, when thou shalt enlarge my heart. 33 HE. Teach me, O LORD, the way of thy statutes; and I shall keep it unto the end. 34 Give me understanding , and I shall keep thy law; yea, I shall observe it with my whole heart. 35 Make me to go in the path of thy commandments; for therein do I delight . 36 Incline my heart unto thy testimonies, and not to covetousness. 37 Turn away mine eyes from beholding vanity; and quicken thou me in thy way. 38 Stablish thy word unto thy servant, who is devoted to thy fear. 39 Turn away my reproach which I fear : for thy judgments are good. 40 Behold, I have longed after thy precepts: quicken me in thy righteousness. 41 VAU. Let thy mercies come also unto me, O LORD, even thy salvation, according to thy word. 42 So shall I have wherewith to answer him that reproacheth me: for I trust in thy word. 43 And take not the word of truth utterly out of my mouth; for I have hoped in thy judgments. 44 So shall I keep thy law continually for ever and ever. 45 And I will walk at liberty: for I seek thy precepts. 46 I will speak of thy testimonies also before kings, and will not be ashamed . 47 And I will delight myself in thy commandments, which I have loved . 48 My hands also will I lift up unto thy commandments, which I have loved ; and I will meditate in thy statutes. 49 ZAIN. Remember the word unto thy servant, upon which thou hast caused me to hope . 50 This is my comfort in my affliction: for thy word hath quickened me. 51 The proud have had me greatly in derision : yet have I not declined from thy law. 52 I remembered thy judgments of old, O LORD; and have comforted myself. 53 Horror hath taken hold upon me because of the wicked that forsake thy law. 54 Thy statutes have been my songs in the house of my pilgrimage. 55 I have remembered thy name, O LORD, in the night, and have kept thy law. 56 This I had, because I kept thy precepts. 57 CHETH. Thou art my portion, O LORD: I have said that I would keep thy words. 58 I intreated thy favour with my whole heart: be merciful unto me according to thy word. 59 I thought on my ways, and turned my feet unto thy testimonies. 60 I made haste , and delayed not to keep thy commandments. 61 The bands of the wicked have robbed me: but I have not forgotten thy law. 62 At midnight I will rise to give thanks unto thee because of thy righteous judgments. 63 I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts. 64 The earth, O LORD, is full of thy mercy: teach me thy statutes. 65 TETH. Thou hast dealt well with thy servant, O LORD, according unto thy word. 66 Teach me good judgment and knowledge: for I have believed thy commandments. 67 Before I was afflicted I went astray : but now have I kept thy word. 68 Thou art good, and doest good ; teach me thy statutes. 69 The proud have forged a lie against me: but I will keep thy precepts with my whole heart. 70 Their heart is as fat as grease; but I delight in thy law. 71 It is good for me that I have been afflicted ; that I might learn thy statutes. 72 The law of thy mouth is better unto me than thousands of gold and silver. 73 JOD. Thy hands have made me and fashioned me: give me understanding , that I may learn thy commandments. 74 They that fear thee will be glad when they see me; because I have hoped in thy word. 75 I know , O LORD, that thy judgments are right, and that thou in faithfulness hast afflicted me. 76 Let, I pray thee, thy merciful kindness be for my comfort , according to thy word unto thy servant. 77 Let thy tender mercies come unto me, that I may live : for thy law is my delight. 78 Let the proud be ashamed ; for they dealt perversely with me without a cause: but I will meditate in thy precepts. 79 Let those that fear thee turn unto me, and those that have known thy testimonies. 80 Let my heart be sound in thy statutes; that I be not ashamed . 81 CAPH. My soul fainteth for thy salvation: but I hope in thy word. 82 Mine eyes fail for thy word, saying , When wilt thou comfort me? 83 For I am become like a bottle in the smoke; yet do I not forget thy statutes. 84 How many are the days of thy servant? when wilt thou execute judgment on them that persecute me? 85 The proud have digged pits for me, which are not after thy law. 86 All thy commandments are faithful: they persecute me wrongfully; help thou me. 87 They had almost consumed me upon earth; but I forsook not thy precepts. 88 Quicken me after thy lovingkindness; so shall I keep the testimony of thy mouth. 89 LAMED. For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven. 90 Thy faithfulness is unto all generations: thou hast established the earth, and it abideth . 91 They continue this day according to thine ordinances: for all are thy servants. 92 Unless thy law had been my delights, I should then have perished in mine affliction. 93 I will never forget thy precepts: for with them thou hast quickened me. 94 I am thine, save me; for I have sought thy precepts. 95 The wicked have waited for me to destroy me: but I will consider thy testimonies. 96 I have seen an end of all perfection: but thy commandment is exceeding broad. 97 MEM. O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day. 98 Thou through thy commandments hast made me wiser than mine enemies : for they are ever with me. 99 I have more understanding than all my teachers : for thy testimonies are my meditation. 100 I understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts. 101 I have refrained my feet from every evil way, that I might keep thy word. 102 I have not departed from thy judgments: for thou hast taught me. 103 How sweet are thy words unto my taste! yea, sweeter than honey to my mouth! 104 Through thy precepts I get understanding : therefore I hate every false way. 105 NUN. Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. 106 I have sworn , and I will perform it, that I will keep thy righteous judgments. 107 I am afflicted very much: quicken me, O LORD, according unto thy word. 108 Accept , I beseech thee, the freewill offerings of my mouth, O LORD, and teach me thy judgments. 109 My soul is continually in my hand: yet do I not forget thy law. 110 The wicked have laid a snare for me: yet I erred not from thy precepts. 111 Thy testimonies have I taken as an heritage for ever: for they are the rejoicing of my heart. 112 I have inclined mine heart to perform thy statutes alway, even unto the end. 113 SAMECH. I hate vain thoughts: but thy law do I love . 114 Thou art my hiding place and my shield: I hope in thy word. 115 Depart from me, ye evildoers : for I will keep the commandments of my God. 116 Uphold me according unto thy word, that I may live : and let me not be ashamed of my hope. 117 Hold thou me up , and I shall be safe : and I will have respect unto thy statutes continually. 118 Thou hast trodden down all them that err from thy statutes: for their deceit is falsehood. 119 Thou puttest away all the wicked of the earth like dross: therefore I love thy testimonies. 120 My flesh trembleth for fear of thee; and I am afraid of thy judgments. 121 AIN. I have done judgment and justice: leave me not to mine oppressors . 122 Be surety for thy servant for good: let not the proud oppress me. 123 Mine eyes fail for thy salvation, and for the word of thy righteousness. 124 Deal with thy servant according unto thy mercy, and teach me thy statutes. 125 I am thy servant; give me understanding , that I may know thy testimonies. 126 It is time for thee, LORD, to work : for they have made void thy law. 127 Therefore I love thy commandments above gold; yea, above fine gold. 128 Therefore I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to be right ; and I hate every false way. 129 PE. Thy testimonies are wonderful: therefore doth my soul keep them. 130 The entrance of thy words giveth light ; it giveth understanding unto the simple. 131 I opened my mouth, and panted : for I longed for thy commandments. 132 Look thou upon me, and be merciful unto me, as thou usest to do unto those that love thy name. 133 Order my steps in thy word: and let not any iniquity have dominion over me. 134 Deliver me from the oppression of man: so will I keep thy precepts. 135 Make thy face to shine upon thy servant; and teach me thy statutes. 136 Rivers of waters run down mine eyes, because they keep not thy law. 137 TZADDI. Righteous art thou, O LORD, and upright are thy judgments. 138 Thy testimonies that thou hast commanded are righteous and very faithful. 139 My zeal hath consumed me, because mine enemies have forgotten thy words. 140 Thy word is very pure : therefore thy servant loveth it. 141 I am small and despised : yet do not I forget thy precepts. 142 Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth. 143 Trouble and anguish have taken hold on me: yet thy commandments are my delights. 144 The righteousness of thy testimonies is everlasting: give me understanding , and I shall live . 145 KOPH. I cried with my whole heart; hear me, O LORD: I will keep thy statutes. 146 I cried unto thee; save me, and I shall keep thy testimonies. 147 I prevented the dawning of the morning, and cried : I hoped in thy word. 148 Mine eyes prevent the night watches, that I might meditate in thy word. 149 Hear my voice according unto thy lovingkindness: O LORD, quicken me according to thy judgment. 150 They draw nigh that follow after mischief: they are far from thy law. 151 Thou art near, O LORD; and all thy commandments are truth. 152 Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever. 153 RESH. Consider mine affliction, and deliver me: for I do not forget thy law. 154 Plead my cause, and deliver me: quicken me according to thy word. 155 Salvation is far from the wicked: for they seek not thy statutes. 156 Great are thy tender mercies, O LORD: quicken me according to thy judgments. 157 Many are my persecutors and mine enemies; yet do I not decline from thy testimonies. 158 I beheld the transgressors , and was grieved ; because they kept not thy word. 159 Consider how I love thy precepts: quicken me, O LORD, according to thy lovingkindness. 160 Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever. 161 SCHIN. Princes have persecuted me without a cause: but my heart standeth in awe of thy word. 162 I rejoice at thy word, as one that findeth great spoil. 163 I hate and abhor lying: but thy law do I love . 164 Seven times a day do I praise thee because of thy righteous judgments. 165 Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them. 166 LORD, I have hoped for thy salvation, and done thy commandments. 167 My soul hath kept thy testimonies; and I love them exceedingly. 168 I have kept thy precepts and thy testimonies: for all my ways are before thee. 169 TAU. Let my cry come near before thee, O LORD: give me understanding according to thy word. 170 Let my supplication come before thee: deliver me according to thy word. 171 My lips shall utter praise, when thou hast taught me thy statutes. 172 My tongue shall speak of thy word: for all thy commandments are righteousness. 173 Let thine hand help me; for I have chosen thy precepts. 174 I have longed for thy salvation, O LORD; and thy law is my delight. 175 Let my soul live , and it shall praise thee; and let thy judgments help me. 176 I have gone astray like a lost sheep; seek thy servant; for I do not forget thy commandments.

    Psalm 120: 1 In my distress I cried unto the LORD, and he heard me. 2 Deliver my soul, O LORD, from lying lips, and from a deceitful tongue. 3 What shall be given unto thee? or what shall be done unto thee, thou false tongue? 4 Sharp arrows of the mighty, with coals of juniper. 5 Woe is me, that I sojourn in Mesech, that I dwell in the tents of Kedar! 6 My soul hath long dwelt with him that hateth peace. 7 I am for peace: but when I speak , they are for war.

    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:55 am

    Trying to discuss solar system governance is like talking to a brick-wall. Once again, I may need to be reminded to be a bad@ss banker-warrior in my next incarnation -- in order to get some respect and attention. Perhaps another War in Heaven will get everyone's attention. Is Earth-Humanity worth fighting for? What do you think?? Do you give a damn?? Is this whole thing a failed project?? Do you all wish to be what we were before we were human?? Do you NOT want responsible-freedom?? What the hell do you want??? I'm slowly learning to not care if anyone pays any attention to what I post, or not. This is just my little secret society which is available to anyone -- worldwide -- yet which very few will view. I've sort of begged for internet friends -- but I really don't care anymore. I haven't become more tolerant. I simply don't give a damn -- especially if no one else does. I realize that I'm an intellectual lightweight. I realize that I'm not an entertainer. I realize that I don't have connections. I realize that I don't know people who know people. I think I'm a reject in more ways than even I can imagine. I'm just going to keep doing what I'm doing -- and watch. This is going to be interesting. Very interesting indeed. I'll just use this thread as a study-guide -- to prepare myself for my next incarnation -- which I intend to make VERY different than this stupid attempt to think properly and honestly. Hopefully, I'll know better next time -- but someone PLEASE remind me that this whole mess is not about being reasonable and doing the right thing. It's about Money, Power, and Appearances. Right?????

    Here are the links to my threads on AV1 and MOA. I included them here because they are really an ongoing research project. I'm trying to change myself - and I am trying to encourage others to think in unconventional yet productive ways. This is a unique approach - which may make it of some value to someone somewhere or somewhen. This thread is an experiment (aren't they all?)...which includes mostly threads based on videos...or threads which contain many video links...which I have started. I'm not particularly bright or noteworthy...but the videos which I have viewed...especially when viewed as a group...are earth shattering to me. The threads are a healthy mixture of problems and solutions. If you have the time...which is doubtful...please look at all of these threads...and look for commonalities. There is a bit of a theological slant...but certainly not an orthodox or Bible thumping slant. Prepare to be get be enlightened...and to experience the Eureka Phenomenon!

    I would love to read a twenty page critique of all of these threads - written by a Jesuit or a CIA analyst - complete with a psychological evaluation, etc. I'm very serious. I don't need to be right. I just don't feel as though anyone has seriously considered these threads. They were designed to make people think - and then to arrive at their own conclusions - but I don't think that happened at all. I honestly feel as though Gabriel, Michael, Lucifer, and a couple of alphabet agents and Jesuits are the only ones who looked at this material with a penetrating gaze. Even if I was very close to the mark - I wasn't a threat (I didn't try to be) - because no one seemed to pay much attention to any of it. I had hoped for some very detailed and passionate debating. The 'Amen Ra' thread seemed to generate the most interest (13,200 views and counting) - but I have no idea what the reactions were and are now that AV1 is closed to posting. I feel very empty and lost in all of this. I feel as though I wasted my time and energy - accomplishing nothing. I am making a renewed call for help - into the vast regions of space and cyberspace - to seriously look at this material as a group - and tell me what you think - positive or negative. Where are the scholars? Is there any intelligent life out there that isn't so high and mighty that they can't take a few hours to make a proper evaluation of all of this? Come down out of your ivory tower - I dare you! The water's warm. Come-on in! I'm waiting - but I'm not holding my breath. You important people with your degrees and badges have more important things to do - don't you? Like getting us into even more trouble than we're already in? Don't take what I just said too seriously. I am impatient and frustrated - and I'm simply taking my dissatisfaction with life out on those who don't deserve it. Life isn't fair - is it?

    1. God, Jesus, Satan, Lucifer, et al:

    2. Secrets of the Vatican:

    3. Tell Me Who I Am:

    4. Waco Revisited:

    5. Al Bielek - Philadelphia Experiment and Montauk Project:

    6. Xcon Potpurri:

    7. Kevin Trudeau with Alex Jones - 5-26-09:

    8. Red Letter Church:

    9. Reptilians and Mind Control:

    10. 'V' Movie(Series) Revisited:

    11. Jesus: The Last Pharaoh?:

    12. Important Mass Manipulation Video:

    13. 1990's Prophets: Vindicated or Debunked?:

    14. Alien Advice:

    15. Cool Music Videos:

    16. NASA: Triumph and Tragedy:

    17. United Nations Charter:

    18. In the Shadow of the Moon:

    19. TWA 800 Revisited:

    20. Unique War Video:

    21. Bilderberg Video:

    22. Dogon Sirius Mystery - C2C:

    23. The Point:

    24. The Washington Mutual Story:

    25. Oklahoma City Bombing Revisited:

    26. The United States of the Solar System:

    27. What is Giza Intelligence?

    28. Called to Be Free - a Video:

    29. Lucifer: Deity of the Elite:

    30. Tesla: Master of Lightning:

    31. Secret Mysteries of America's Beginnings:

    32. The Dulce Book:

    33. New World Order: Devil in the Vatican:

    34. The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil:

    35. Enron Video:

    36. No End In Sight: Iraq War Documentary:

    37. Ted Gunderson Interviews Chip Tatum (CIA, Drugs, Etc.):

    38. Sirius Issues:

    39. Superimposed Parallel Universes:

    40. Lawyerese Goes Galactic:

    41. Stargate SG-1:

    42. Amen Ra:

    43. The Dark Side of the Moon Mission:

    44. Open Letter to the Beings of the Universe:

    45. Moonraker:

    46. Who Are Gabriel, Michael, and Lucifer?

    47. Krlll:

    48. Cartoon Aliens:

    49. Thuban Thoughts:

    50. Thuban Thoughts II:

    51. Very Cool Short Videos:

    52. Violent Movies, Books, Games, Cartoons, and Toys:

    53. Abortion, Euthanasia, Suicide, and Murder:

    54. Prevention is Central to Healthcare:

    55. I Have a Dream! Free at Last!

    I may have been a bit harsh, self-pitying, and self-centered in that introduction. Lots of very bright people did participate on those threads - and I didn't have to pay them. The top people with top clearances, degrees and badges probably don't dare open-up on the internet - and for good reason. Many of them may have had to sell their souls to you know who, to get where they are. The higher up one goes (especially regarding the subjects in question) the more controlled and watched one may become. I have attended so many classes which involved people with doctorate degrees - discussing this and that - especially theological issues - that I know what a high tension academic discussion feels like - and I have extrapolated to know what a behind closed doors academic discussion would feel like - and I crave this. Of course - if I got what I wanted - I probably still wouldn't be happy!

    Thank-you for your interest. Dogs have owners. Cats have staff. I'm just trying to put together something which is neither traditional religion or new age. I lost my faith - and I'm trying to establish a new faith. I keep thinking I need to stop - but then I keep thinking that if we don't arrive at a proper understanding regarding all of this - that the long term consequences will be devastating. I really shouldn't have been so brash regarding top people with top clearances. I have no idea what they have to deal with. I'm just frustrated and impatient. I'm flying blind - and I have no idea if I'm helping or hurting legitimate efforts to save the world - and make it a better place. I'm almost feeling as though I'm trying to partner (uninvited) with the best aspects of the secret government - so as to edge out the worst aspects. I don't wish to be a crusading rebel without a clue - and I don't wish to be a dumb dog who will not bark. It seems to me that it will take an almost superhuman effort to really get this right.

    Thank-you Linda and Carol for your very thoughtful comments. Have either of you studied comparative gods, goddesses, theologies, and mythologies - rather than simply comparative religions? I'm leaning toward Humanist Christocentric Egyptological Science Fiction to try to salvage my shattered faith. Most people stop studying theology when they lose their faith. People should study theology twice as much after they lose their faith! I'm actually more angry with myself than I am with anyone else. I guess I have the most problems with the extremes and absurdities. History is a mess. Something has been very wrong. I actually would welcome an ideal world and solar system government which operates like a well-run corporation (with the U.S. Constitution and Teachings of Jesus at it's core). On the one hand - I rail against the corrupt and incompetent powers that be. On the other hand - I rail against the stupid general public sheeple. I'm actually trying to redesign world and solar system government - and imagine myself as being an active participant in it. I just started a novel to that effect. And I just gave up on proceding with this novel. The first page scared the heck out of me. This is all a big cause and effect game. Life is a game. The Most Dangerous Game. We are all players in the Game of the Millenium. We are all actors and actresses on the stage of the Theater of the Universe. I'm really trying to figure out who the *&%$#! script-writer is. Hello Lucifer! Smile!

    I'm not going to keep commenting on my own threads to try to generate interest. The ball is in your court. There are some other threads I wish to follow - but I think I'm done with my threads for the foreseeable future. This does not imply a lack of interest or a change of heart. I just don't wish to play the part of the crusader. I might try to visit the United Nations, Washington D.C., the City of London, and the Vatican once again (I visited them many years ago). I will continue to fantasize about being a part of a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System which includes the U.N., Washington D.C., the City of London, the Vatican, the Underground Bases, and the Secret Space Program - except that in my dreamworld there is no secrecy or corruption. Once again - I don't wish to fight the New World Order - I wish to HI-JACK IT!! 'Take me to Nirvana!!' I'd love to put the dream into practice - but I'm not going to push it right now. If someone wants to pick me up in a UFO, and take me to the Darkside of the Moon to meet with Lucifer - I'll be ready to go at a moments notice. What am I saying?

    Are Satan, Lucifer, the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, the Royal Family, and the Vatican the biggest seed-money rock stars on the planet - who are doing the most to make the world a better place? Trickle down theory voodoo economics? Where are the Billionaire Ghandi's? Jesus was pretty tough on rich people. Are billionaires the most socially responsible people on the planet? Did they gain their money through socially responsible activities? Can wealth become anticompetitive at some point? Should those with the most money have the greatest political clout? Should those with the gold - RULE? One of the greatest tragedies of history is the non compassionate use of accumulated wealth. I know that a lot of contactees and gurus are opposed to money - but I disagree. Money and private property are expressions of freedom. The problem with money is the irresponsible pursuit and use of money. Perhaps the billionaires should be placed under the scanning electron microscope to look for illegality and irresponsibility. Blood Money, Drug Money, and Destructive Money of All Kinds - should be repaid to society - with interest and penalties. I'm also not a big fan of ET Mentoring. Have the Gods, Goddesses, Angels, Archangels, ET's, and Ascended Masters been promoting Responsibility, Freedom, and Human Sovereignty (other than the Andromedans)? Boy - I sure got a lot out of my system - and I didn't even feel hostile. It must've been something I ate - or maybe the devil made me do it.

    Having said all of the above - I'm getting tired of being an internet warrior. It seems to be a monumental waste of time. Remember what Jesus said about pearls and such? Money Talks and BS Walks. The Bottom Line is the Bottom Line. Winning Isn't Everything. It's the Only Thing. Perhaps the secret is to be a Humanitarian on the Surface - and a Shrewd and Ruthless SOB Below the Radar. Could the Worship of Fame, Fortune, and Power - rather than the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - help to explain why the Corrupt Rule the Stupid? Is Greed Good? I need to go for a long walk with my dog - and then perhaps I need to create a ten-year business plan. Who knows - in ten years I might have to change my tune and eat my words...

    OK...I'm back from my walk...and I decided that the Corrupt Will Always Rule the Stupid - because both the Corrupt and the Stupid are happy with the arrangement - despite all outward appearances. Additionally - Both the Corrupt and the Stupid are Threatened by Non-Corrupt Highly Intelligent People - and will Fight Them Vigorously. Think about THAT... Perhaps this is why no one has REALLY followed the Red Letter Teachings of Jesus for 2,000 years - and why they probably never will... Narrow is the way. Read Revelation 20:12. Is December 21, 2012 really Judgement Day?

    I'm on the verge of pusuing a business plan which is neither corrupt or stupid - and which will be executed in a manner which threatens neither the corrupt or the stupid. I may simply live a life of quiet decadence...and leave the corrupt and the stupid to their own devices...

    When Avalon 1 was closed to posting - I decided not to participate in any other forum sites (including Avalon 2) - so I just posted on YouTube. I really enjoyed posting on a wide variety of videos - not just on the esoteric or controversial ones. Now that I'm back on a forum site - I see the strengths and weaknesses of such an approach. There is a HUGE amount of information and insight on Avalon 1 & 2, and Mists of Avalon - but the participants can get into a rut - and can even become desensitized and irritable. I just decided not to post more threads, or add to the ones I have already posted. Preaching to the choir is a major reason for this. I'll probably keep looking at Avalon and Mists of Avalon - and I may post on someone elses thread once in a while - but I'm going to spend a lot more time on business and on getting out in nature. Growing food, buying organic food, being vegetarian, eating raw food, exercising in nature, seeing a naturopathic physician, and listening to inspiring music - are excellent ways to cultivate physical, mental, and spiritual health. Too much esoteric, conspiracy, religious, and political info-warring (on the internet or otherwise) is probably a recipe for disaster. Nuff said. Now I'm going for another walk with my dog.


    I have freely admitted that I am emotionally-challenged, intellectually-limited, and a perpetual-speculator - but have I seriously gotten it wrong over the past couple of years? This madness is an ongoing-test and a paradigm-shift. I really don't know where I will ultimately end up - but I am concerned that alternative thinking seems to lack a common center. Like it or not - the major religions have a depth which comes from discipline, repetition, and sheer numbers. Perhaps this is why I am thinking of myself as sort of a Renegade Roman Catholic - even though I have never been one. I continue to try to harmonize the Teachings of Jesus, the U.S. Constitution, and the Latin Mass. My existence is a very strange one - and it seems to be getting stranger every day. I am also imagining myself to be a part of a Non-Corrupt and Completely-Open Solar System Government. When I finally end up in the nut-house - the shrinks are gonna go nucking futs!!

    I think I'm beginning to mellow a bit. I really don't wish to be shrill toward anyone - even toward the really b@d@$$ nasties - human or otherwise. But I still think we need a Solar System Exorcism of sorts - a Galactic Time-Out - for the worst of the worst. You b@$t@rds know who you are!!! Try watching the Star Wars movies with all of these threads in mind - especially regarding a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System - based upon Responsibility and the U.S. Constitution. Again - this is a test. This is only a test.

    The avatar is the work of an artist named Harry Anderson - and was probably painted in the 60's. It depicts Jesus Christ knocking on the United Nations (as a giant door) and attempting to gain admission. "Behold - I stand at the door, and knock." From what I have seen - Jesus is still knocking - and U.N. troops may be on the way to deal with the 'threat'! Here is some more of Harry Anderson's art:

    Carol, your post completely caught me off guard, and blew me away! Thank-you for the appreciation, and thank-you for the hybridization information. All types of technology have the potential for good or evil - but I keep getting the feeling that technology is out of control - and that secret laboratories are spawning all types of very dangerous products of technology. How should technology be properly managed throughout the solar system? And yes, if the entire solar system is not covered - some very horrible experimentation might be proceeding unchecked on Phobos or Iapetus. My internet posting is really catharsis. What worries me is that most people don't have the time or energy to really sift through all of the conflicting and confusing information - and that they won't be able handle what we are presently discussing. Heck - couples fight over how toothpaste gets squeezed out! People look out of it and dazed as it is. I work with the public every day, and half the people barely make eye contact with me. I'm sensing an insensitivity and lostness which will make it very difficult for the general public to understand and cope with what's been going on under our noses, over our heads, and under our feet - for a very long time - seemingly using tax money, drug money, and even blood money.

    You mentioned Paola Harris, and I immediately thought of Col. Philip Corso, and I watched part of one of Paola's lectures, and noted that Col. Corso was Head of Intelligence (U.S) in Rome, from 1944-47 (and was heavily involved in Project Paperclip, if I'm not mistaken). I'm presently leaning toward the theory that Roswell 1947 and Muroc 1954 were staged by the Secret Government and Secret Space Program, of which Project Paperclip was no doubt an integral part. I suspect that real UFO's and PGLF's or Hybrids were used - but that they originated from Earth Underground Bases rather than Distant Stars or Planets. Underground Bases, Hybridization Programs, Ancient UFO Technology, and Occult Wisdom and Spirituality - going back thousands of years - may explain most of the Alien and UFO phenomenon. That's my theory - and I'm sticking to it - at least for now. Have there been any recent interviews or books by Philip Corso, Jr.? He seems to know a heck of a lot - but seems reluctant to really open up - for understandable reasons.

    Once again - I'm trying to imagine being on the inside of a non-corrupt solar system government - as a mechanism for dealing with the historical madness and this present darkness. If the ideal and the reality can gradually be brought closer together - we might actually survive - and emerge as a model solar system. Hope springs eternal. I'm trying to imagine living inside of the United Nations, Washington D.C., the City of London, the Vatican, the Secret Government, the Secret Space Program, and the Underground Bases - throughout the solar system - as sort of an observer and facilitator - obviously in a delusional dreamworld. "Mr. Smith Goes to the Darkside of the Moon!" Perhaps this is a coping mechanism. I think I'm going to start reading the CFR journal 'Foreign Affairs' again - just to foster a creative link between little old me - and Megalomaniacs Anonymous. I want to try to be a non-corrupt 'One of Them' - rather than fighting with the PTB from the 'outside'. This is very tricky territory, and if it isn't done properly, I could see someone going downhill in a great big hurry. My preoccupation with an 'Anna', 'Kali', or 'Lucifer' character, who rules over all of us, might be an indication that I'm picking up speed on the slippery slope to perdition. The horror...

    Thank-you for your detailed and thoughtful reply. You have obviously done a huge amount of research. The alien reincarnating into a human story is fascinating because I am fixated on the hybridization theory of the alien presence - that we are really them - and they are really us. I ironically posted an internet page a couple of years ago, where I 'claimed' to be a human reincarnation of the alien KRLLL - and that I had gone turncoat - and sided with the human race. I received a very angry response from someone stating that I was claiming 'godship' and that I would be severely punished!! I don't doubt that ancient aliens came to Earth (possibly from Sirius and Aldebaran). We may be some of those aliens. What I am enamored with is the idea of a Lucifer/Shiva/Kali/Anna figure being in charge of Earth - lifetime after lifetime - possibly as a hermaphroditic hybrid goddess of sorts - with complete reincarnational recall, with 100% use of their brain capacity - unlimited access to possibly stolen ancient advanced technology and wisdom - and so on. Could such a hypothetical figure have created most of our mythologies and theologies - secretly ruling over us with deception and force? I'm not questioning that a very real event occurred at Roswell in 1947 - involving real otherworldly technology and beings. But I am considering that the Secret Government is the same one which has been ruling Earth for thousands of years - and controls the megalomaniacs we love to hate.

    Monday, February 18, 2008

    I am known to humans as KRLLL. I am known to humans as an alien. I have been living on Planet Earth since the middle of the twentieth century. My planet of origin is located in the Pleiades. It is known as Pleon. I bring peace and wisdom. There is another alien force on Planet Earth who is your master. This alien force is not your friend, and yet you obey. I bring liberation, and yet you do not listen. Time is running out. Change course or forever face enslavement.

    Here is something for you to consider:

    1. Evolution of Everything (Physical & Spiritual).

    2. Genetic Engineering & Rule by Good Aliens/Spirits (God) in the Garden of Eden (Ancient Earth). General Peace & Harmony.

    3. Attack/Deception/War of Evil Aliens/Spirits against the Good Aliens/Spirits/Humans. The Good Aliens/Spirits are driven from the Garden of Eden (Ancient Earth). Humanity made a mistake of Biblical proportions. Genesis reads a bit differently, doesn't it? But what makes more sense? The Reptillian Devil was in charge, which is why Genesis reads the way it does!

    4. Genetic Engineering & Rule by Evil Aliens/Spirits with Humans fighting with each other. Ancient religion emerges (Summarian, Egyptian, etc. - created by Evil Aliens/Spirits to control Humans).

    5. Moses & Others rebel against the Evil Aliens/Spirits/Religions with the help of Good Aliens/Spirits. The Bible (Old Testament) is a mixture of Good & Evil. One has to carefully read between the lines to figure out what is really going on. The truth had to be disguised. Some activity atributed to God is really evil and of Satanic origin. Atrocities and sacrifices are examples.

    6. Jesus intensifies the rebellion and establishes a condensed, non-corrupt version of the Old Testament religion promoted by Moses and Others. The Teachings of Jesus are generally ignored by the Christian Church for 2,000 years. Thus, the Evil Aliens/Spirits/Religions retain their control of Planet Earth.

    7. People finally do what Jesus said to do (they haven't so far), and the Battle of Armageddon results. Good Aliens/Spirits/People battle Evil Aliens/Spirits/People for control of Planet Earth.

    8. The Evil Aliens/Spirits/People are driven from Planet Earth and onto Nibiru, which becomes the Devil's Island Prison Planet of the Universe. The Good Aliens/Spirits/People gain total control of Planet Earth. This is the Garden of Eden regained, and what is known as Heaven or Paradise.

    Proceed wisely.


    Here is the response I received on April 7, 2008:

    "You know this isn't funny! The Lord God will judge you for claiming God ship. Just because God showed you a little bit of His secrets you think you know everything. He will NOT have mercy on you!"

    I'm thinking that my AV1 and MOA threads - combined with my YouTube posting will ultimately benefit mostly myself. I know that sounds selfish - and it probably is - but trying to convince others to travel the same road that I am on is probably an exercise in futility. I am starting to go through my old threads - and I am enjoying this immensely. I didn't do market research - and then tell people what they wanted to hear, and give them what they wanted. Some of my areas of study, my questions and conclusions - are downright politically incorrect and blasphemous. At a later date - some of them could be outlawed as being hate speech. Who knows - I may eventually be arrested - or worse. When will the excrement really hit the air-conditioning system? Obedience can be a good thing. Obedience can be a bad thing. I will ultimately go along with anything which is reasonable and rational - even if it isn't my own idea. I have been trying to quietly influence the infowar. So far - this worldwide infowar has been a cold-war - and I hope that it will continue to be so - but judging from history - it may very well turn violent at some point. I suspect that infiltration and instigation will be used to get people all riled-up and running in the streets - again judging from history. Then the noose will be tightened to 'restore and maintain order'. I obviously support law and order - but the best way to control the masses is to teach them responsibility and self-control. Unfortunately - I don't see this being done. The Irresponsible are leading the Irresponsible. The Corrupt are ruling the Stupid. The Blind are leading the Blind. The Bland are leading the Bland. This is very, very sad...

    Don't be afraid. I mean no harm. This is just a modification of my previous 'out of here' message. I am going to retrace my steps - and really attempt to absorb the territory I have covered so hastily and hesitatingly - and really attempt to separate the wheat from the chaff. I will also attempt to internalize the wheat - and to walk the walk. I have tried to bring others along with me on my journey - and this may have been a mistake. But I really do think that the areas covered are key - and that they should be studied carefully. What I should probably do - is proceed as though I were writing a doctoral dissertation - and produce a 1,000 page scholarly book - with 100 pages of footnotes. I doubt that such a lofty goal will materialize - judging from my limited track record - but someone needs to do this. Joseph Farrell - where are you?

    I'm also going to read a bunch of fringe books - and watch a bunch of sci-fi DVD's. I'm really going to try to post a lot less - but I'm not mad. Speaking of which - the more calm and passive the discovery process, the better. The disclosure material itself is so explosive - that one should probably go out of their way to take it slow and easy. I'm still interested in a job which helps to facilitate a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System - which involves access without authority. Hell - I just want to fly in a UFO - without getting shipped off to a slave-labor yttrium mine on Planet 666 - and then used as food when I slow down. I really and truly hope that this solar system is in the process of becoming much more reasonable and ethical - with or without me. Namaste. I am of peace. Always.

    I found it time consuming to dig up the old threads...and sometimes the search would not produce the long lost threads. Also...there is a progression of thought which has occurred...although some might call it a digression. At this point...I am filled with a mixture of dispair and hope. These threads are not intended to make anyone happy. They are intended to approach the reality of what is really going on in this universe...and then to facilitate the most positive long-term outcome possible...for all beings...throughout the universe. I want to view all of the gory details...and then begin to create order out of chaos...and rise to new heights...sort of like the Flight of the Phoenix.

    Thank-you Anchor. All I can do is point in directions where I see light. I have nothing original...yet I can sense when other people are on the right track...I think. I don't have everything figured out. I'm just struggling and thinking out loud. One probably shouldn't do that in public...but I don't consider this forum to be public. The groupings of the videos seemed to be important to me. They fit together...and complement each other. The puzzle is quite large and complex. Smoke is just pouring out of my ears.

    I just keep hoping that people will be able to adjust to all of the new information without becoming violent or going insane. There is so much upsetting and conflicting information out there. Plus...I believe there is an unseen battle on a supernatural level. We are getting pushed and pulled in all directions...and we all have breaking points. Each person must find their own way in their own time. In many ways...I think the transition is going well. It could be going a hell of a lot worse.

    I'm going to go through all of the above threads...and watch all of the videos. The people in these videos are not the last word...but many of them are trail blazers or pioneers who should not be ignored...and who can help us discern the truth or error in subsequent prophets or whistle-blowers. I like to consider information which is at least five years order to evaluate the validity of the then new information or predictions. People need to win my trust. But no one is perfect. Some of my favorites had very serious flaws. I like Bill Cooper a lot, for example...but he struggled with alcohol and temper issues. He was very confrontational with authorities...and sometimes did not know when to stop. In other one should become an idol or a god.

    When I listed these threads...I realized that they were not particularly profound...but that they covered some territory which I hadn't found elsewhere on this site. I guess this is just another potential piece of the puzzle...and what a puzzle it is! Good luck everyone!

    I would love to meet with a group of scholars regarding the above threads...and have a completely blunt...non politically correct...take off the gloves...12 hour marathon discussion/debate. This group might include Jesuits, Alphabet Agency Representatives, Reptilians, Greys, Researchers, Lucifer, etc. the end of the 12 hours...I would know way, way too much...and we all know what that would mean. Actually, I would probably be so depressed...that they wouldn't have to do a thing...if you know what I mean. I feel like we are just scratching the surface here in this forum...but we may all need much thicker skin to be able to properly handle the full truth. In a sense...we may need to go to hell...before we can go to heaven. I tend to think that many leaders fear that the human race would go to hell...and stay there if they were told the full uncensored truth. This may be a major reason why there is not full disclosure. There are some legitimate reasons for secrecy...but I think that most of the reasons are evil and corrupt as hell. This forum may be an see how non-insiders react or respond to the gradual release of inside information. This may help non-corrupt powers that be to properly introduce the new information to the general public. Just a thought.

    Thank-you. I love it when they all find out that the aircraft engineer is a toy plane designer!! Surprise! What if the person who has the most to offer to get us out of this mess...has absolutely no credentials or credibility?! Do we evaluate ideas based strictly upon merit...or do we worship titles and resumes? Haven't the experts of the world gotten us into this mess? Why should we trust them to get us out of this mess? What if a being in the form of a young lady...runs the solar system?

    Step right up! Pick a thread! Any thread! But be prepared to have your preconceived notions completely unravel. :shocked:

    You know...I would love to see a file on my posting activity...done by a seasoned C.I.A. analyst. Maybe someday I will see such a the hands of a prosecuting attorney. I hope not...but these are very crazy times. I have absolutely no idea whether these any other postings on this site and YouTube...are in any way, shape, or form...considered to be a problem by any any level. I tend to think that so few people view this material...that the effect is really inconsequential. And of those few people...the ones who actually connect the dots may actually be non-existent. But for those in the know...I have a sneaking hunch that they see exactly what I am seeing...and that this composite picture is quite startling...and potentially destabilizing.

    At this point...I don't really see what the point of all this really is. I open myself up to being placed on lists of troublemakers. Very few people are influenced. And these few are probably less happy after seeing some of what I'm seeing. So I'm thinking that maybe we really are sheep who cannot lead ourselves...and that efforts to change this may be futile at best...and detrimental and destabilizing at worst.

    I keep saying that I am going to take a break...but I just can't stop posting. Well...I'm going to try again.

    I'm trying to take a break from posting...but I just couldn't resist requesting that someone make a critical study of these threads...and issue a verdict. I'm too close to this be objective. They are sort of a road less traveled. Be honest about the overall picture which emerges. Thank-you in advance.

    I'm transmitting a request for help into the vast regions of space and cyberspace...for conversation regarding these threads. Is there intelligent life out there? The threads are very diverse...yet there is a common thread. I'm just trying to figure things out...and I don't have the answers...or even the questions. Again, I'm too close to these threads to really be objective...and I need some criticism...constructive or otherwise. Consider these threads to be Orthodoxymoron University. Upon will receive a Disoriented to the nth Degree. :shocked: And you think you have problems now?

    I'm running out of steam (if I had any to begin with). On an ongoing basis...over many months...the subjects and concepts which I am interested in...seem to spark very little interest in others. I can understand this...but I don't know where to continue my quest...or if I should be a quester at all. Any ideas? If I had lied...and claimed to be a hybrid abductee with all the answers...and dire predictions…complete with dates...there would probably be huge interest! What the hell is going on?

    GOING...Going...almost gone...

    Because the search function continues to be non-functional...I thought I'd bump this thread to see if there are any takers. 'Come into my threads'...orthodoxymoron said to the unsuspecting Avalon members.

    Thank-you JesterTerrestrial. I don't know what to do. For now...I'm going on a bump-strike. I'm going to bump this thread every few days until the search function is completely restored! I wanna talk about some of these threads. Maybe I should reincarnate to the forum as a claimed ET from Planet BS...and do a mentoring thread titled 'The New Attitude of Gratitude and Servitude'...full of bs and exotic terminology aka intergalactic mumbo jumbo aka the universal language. Then there would probably be tens of thousands of views and hundreds of comments. Then I could write a book...and move out of this dump. You sneak and peak guys know what I'm talking about. Please flush the toilet next time...

    Thank-you. They know more about us than we know about ourselves.

    I like to think that we are the best buddies of the non-corrupt powers that be...because we are rationally examining some very controversial subjects...rather than going crazy. I like to think that we are sort of a buffer...which will help to keep society balanced. I like to think that we are a part of a low-key disclosure project...where a lot of the secrets of the universe...and dark secrets...are gradually being integrated into the public an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary manner.

    I'm still looking for unsuspecting mortals to communicate with. I'm just trying to build on what I have examined thus far. I'm not new to thinking about spiritual things and science...but I am new to looking at all of the relatively new information available on the internet. It's quite startling and overwhelming to me. I'm looking for a unified field theory of the alien presence. I have a feeling that when we research everything to a free and open society...we will be astonished at how simple and obvious things will turn out to be. We seem to be presently wallowing in a fog of illusions, smoke, and mirrors. I feel like I'm at sea most of the time. I want things to start clarifying and solidifying...even if I don't like the reality which emerges.

    The most important thread to me is the 'United States of the Solar System' thread. I'm trying to pull all of the theological and metaphysical stuff into the orbit of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of a non-theocratic union of spirituality and state. It may seem dry and boring at first...but I think there are a lot of dazzling possibilities in this approach. I'm not a constitutional scholar...but I am sold on the concept of Constitutional Responsible Freedom. I don't know where this will lead...but I am going to attempt to take this concept as far as I can...and hopefully more capable people will take the concept where it deserves to go. I'm just a crazy mixed-up pseudo-intellectual who is trying to find peace and happiness in a very crazy universe. I am completely convinced that facing reality...including the realities of historical atrocities and enslavements...will pave the way for a better universe. We may have to wade through an unbelievable amount of negative material in order to see the light. The threads can be somewhat negative...but there is always an attempt to find solutions and to emerge with a stronger paradigm.

    The second most important thread to me is the one on 'God, Jesus, Satan, Lucifer, Etc.' This thread is quite irreverent...but a stronger spiritual foundation is that which is desired. I believe that this thread dovetails with 'The United States of the Solar System' thread. I confess that I am a heretic...but I'm really trying to exorcise the demons from the church and from the solar system. All of the ufo/alien/spiritual/religious/political discussion should be addressed from a theological and constitutional perspective.

    So please take a look at both of these threads, if you haven't already...or take another look. Most of the other threads are instructive regarding these two primary threads. Oh what a tangled web I'm weaving...and I'm not practicing deceiving. Just the opposite.

    Thank-you Noela. The link seems to not be functional. Here is a link which works. Here is a link to a Dr. Michael Heiser interview. It's really quite good. I love this sort of thing! Here is a video of an Old Testament scholar who has a doctorate from the University of Edinburgh...Dr. Alden Thompson. I have one of his books 'Who's Afraid of the Old Testament God?' He is a very pastoral scholar who presents problems...or hints at problems...and then resolves them in a soothing and pastoral manner. I once told him that I didn't think that Jesus was God. He unsuccessfully attempted to change my mind. I like him a lot...but I am taking a radical surgery approach presently...and hoping that the patient doesn't die while I attempt to remove the theocratic-cancer which I believe is growing on the human race. I am attempting to replace a Universal Church Theocracy with Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom. I can't be fired for my radical views. My livelihood is not tied to my editorial bias. I think that we need to stop beating around the burning bush. We need to be very, very honest...even if this results in severe pain and suffering. We need to take a swig of whiskey...bite the bullet...and get on with it. Avalon seems to be an appropriate place to attempt this. I would never try this in a church setting. The resulting controversy would be an intellectual and spiritual Armageddon. There is a time and a place for everything. I'm admittedly a pseudo-intellectual bull in a theological china closet...a real loose cannon...armed with a tactical nuke! "Calling all Jesuits! Calling all Jesuits! Be on the lookout for orthodoxymoron! That cursed Judas!"

    Seriously...I would love to be present during a top-level Jesuit theological discussion. They fascinate me...and they terrify me. They could do much to promote Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom...and to breathe spiritual and ethical life into it...once Lucifer (or equivalent) retires...and they are freely able to integrate their discipline, organization, and education into modern life. I'm serious. They know better...but their hands seem to be tied...and they are obedient servants. They need to be free. That's what I think anyway...but what do I know? I don't want the church to disappear. I want the church to be completely reformed and purified. I'm not sure about the details.

    I like listening to people who know how to combine academic freedom with pastoral responsibility. The two people in the previous post (Heiser and Thompson) know how to do this very well.

    Jordan Maxwell has a Roman Catholic background...and as a child listened in on conversations regarding Vatican intrigue. I have heard him hint that the Vatican does what it is told to do (by non-humans who are not necessarily good). He properly understands that the historical and contemporary Vatican does not view the United States and the U.S. Constitution as a positive development on the world say the least.

    Now I'm going to listen to Jordan Maxwell. I still find it interesting how his lecture at Awake and Aware was seemingly cut short while he was talking about the Vatican being the biggest enemy of the United States. I think this is true...but I don't think the Vatican really wants to be...but they do what they are told to do.

    This may sound crazy...but the Draconians may have to decide that Responsible Freedom is in their best interest...before the Vatican can really do the right thing. I think the historical and present hierarchical arrangement of the universe is all wrong...but what do I know?

    I'm sorry you wasted your time on the WCG video. I have noticed a decided preference for the sensational throughout society...and not just on this site. Hollywood has trained us well to expect to be entertained...while we as a society ignorantly head straight toward the hot place. I hope that the new 'V' series will combine attention-grabbing sensationalism with a solid dose of reality regarding the trouble we are really in.

    However boring they may be...documentaries which chronicle how people have been misled and manipulated...can prevent untold disillusionment and heartache. I see people jumping out of the frying pan...right into the fire...every single day.

    Jordan Maxwell seems to have a crystal clear view of the trouble we are in. He convincingly presents the problems. Unfortunately...he offers few solutions. I have feebly offered some of my solutions here in Avalon. Unfortunately...there seems to be almost no interest in them. Jordan may be right. We may be so apathetic and desensitized...that we are past the point of no return regarding the New World Order Theocracy scenario.

    The cynical views of Sigmund Freud and Edwin Bernays may be spot-on. Does anyone know what I'm talking about? Anyone?

    Welcome beren...and thank-you. I agree with Jordan Maxwell that we are in a spiritual war...which could help to explain why valid solutions are skipped-over, ignored, or actively opposed. If we could see the unseen forces which I believe surround each and every one of us...we would probably be horrified. Ignorance is bliss...but it can get us enslaved and exterminated.

    See you on the Jordan Maxwell thread.

    The battles which go on just beyond our perceptions must be something to behold. I still think that evil entities can tempt, harass and annoy us...despite angelic protection. Obviously I don't know the details. This is just what I think.

    Power Corrupts. Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely. Are there any beings in the universe who are exempt from the truth of this concept? I don't think so. Has universal history consisted of tyrants replacing tyrants replacing tyrants replacing tyrants? I think so. How long does it take for a good-guy to become a bad-guy once they achieve Absolute Power? Not very my view.

    I have not read J.R.R. Tolkein's books...but I have read several C.S. Lewis books. My favorite is 'Screwtape Letters'.

    You rightly understand the relationship between freedom and responsibility. I'm just starting to grasp this subject. This is the key to everything. This is the truth which will set us free.

    If we choose to do the right thing...the bad-guys are going to try to keep us from doing the right thing. To believe that believers are somehow exempt from competition with evil entities is naive in my view. We are in the middle of a spiritual war.

    Thank-you for your insights.

    I'm just thinking out loud here...which is what I do every day here...for better or for worse. I'm going to renew my vow to review these threads. Sometimes repetition is essential. Churches use repetition...week after week after week. This is partly good and partly bad. The alternative crowd runs around like chickens with their heads cut off! I guess what I'm that I'm going to try to build on a foundation. I'm considering the United States of the Solar System thread to be the foundational thread...with the other 52 threads as supporting evidence. I doubt that anyone else has the time, motivation, or energy to help me do this...but one never knows.

    It's no secret that I'm burned-out big-time with traditional religions of all kinds. I seem to pick on the Roman Catholics...but they're just the biggest game in town...which most of the others follow...whether they realize it or not. I don't hate any of them...but I'm still burned-out. I am equally suspicious of New Age philosophies, religions, and programming’s. I'm really one miserable S.O.L.S.O.B. But misery loves here is my invitation to accompany me on my spiritual quest...but don't expect it to make you happy. I just want the truth. I don't care about the happy part. The PTB will give you what you want...and tell you what you want to they lead you down the primrose path...on the Highway to Hell...paved with bad intentions.

    I hope no one takes any of these threads too seriously. I'm just trying to make everyone think...sometimes by being a bit contrarian and irreverent. I want to stop posting...but I just can't seem to help myself. The areas of study are more important than any conclusions I have seemed to reach. Your answers are more important than my answers.

    Which is more important and desirable...Peaceful Dialogue or Triumphant Victory? Which of these two options should the most powerful factions in our Solar System choose to pursue?

    I don't really know...because I don't really know the facts. All I know is that what has been (and is presently) really $crewed-up. Just look at the carnage and misery of the past 100 years. And we're supposed to be 'civilized'. For shame.

    I'm having a bad day. I don't want a solution. I just wanna bitch.

    The most recent Avalon meltdown screwed up most of the video links...and I have been spending hours repairing the damage. I made a post...just before the meltdown...where I questioned whether I should post it or not. Well...when I tried to...I got that database problem screen repeatedly. I went to another site...and when I returned...the message had posted. Shortly thereafter...the site went down. I'm sure there was no connection...but it made me wonder at the time. Also right after I made that questionable post...I could have sworn that something supernatural briefly appeared between me and the monitor. Probably just my imagination...but it made me wonder at the time. This whole thing seems to be an uphill battle...with few rewards...and many possible problems...such as getting on lists for discussing controversial topics in a public forum. It really seems to be an exercise in futility and a tempest in a teapot. Gotta go take my medicine...before I really get going. Over and out.

    Thank-you Jacqui D. I'm just dealing with the kid's-stuff...and even that is scaring the heck out of me. :shocked:

    To all the new people...I have been stumbling around the internet for a while now...and this is a collection of some of my escapades. Please take a look...and tell me what you think. I think the regulars got tired of me a long time maybe I can pick a fight with some of you newbies...before you get me all figured out! These threads probably won't make you happy. They might cause you to become very be forewarned. My goal is to make you think...and not to spoon-feed anyone with anything. I keep saying that I don't know...and I really don't. I'm just trying to deal with the crazy world and universe we live in. I see things getting worse...before they get better. We are going through a trial by fire...on the way to bigger and better things.

    Some of the links in the threads may be ruined. There was a site meltdown...and it destroyed most of the links on my threads. I've reconstructed some of them...but it may be a few days before I finish repairing the damage.

    Just another invitation for conversation. I'm not trying to make anyone happy. I'm just trying to relentlessly pursue the truth...and not necessarily according to SaLuSa. If you want to be happy...move to Oregon and smoke weed. :smoke:

    Rational conversations and concepts do not seem to succeed. Fame, fortune, power, and pleasure seem to do very well. We also seem to be sitting ducks for exciting, sensational, and entertaining things...even if these things are not ultimately in our best interest. It may be past time to move on. I think I wore out my welcome a long time ago. I often feel as though I got dropped off on this planet by mistake. I don't feel like I belong here. Maybe I don't. I've been neglecting my personal finances and home maintenance. Idealistic dreamers may always lose to greedy b@$t@rd$. The bottom-line may be the bottom-line after all.

    This is just an renewed invitation to talk to me about some of these threads. The subjects were not chosen with malice and forethought. They were pretty much random choices of roads less traveled. I have encountered few kindred spirits throughout my life...but hope springs eternal. I'm still searching.

    This is pointless. I'm out of here. I need to concentrate on doing what pays the rent. I also feel like I'm grandstanding and self promoting...and I don't like that. Also...this stuff is too controversial...and I want to try to get myself off of the lists before the theocracy and enslavement really kicks in. I have learned the hard way that people really do not want to be free...and I certainly do not wish to force freedom on anyone. That would be an oxymoron.

    I am still interested in discussing these threads. Is this an appropriate forum to do so? Is there another forum which might be more interested and receptive? Should I join the crowd...and Groove with the Thubans? Maybe I should start channeling...conjure up UFO's...or have an intimate relationship with a Reptilian. It's got to be sensational...doesn't it? Give 'em what they want...right? Tell 'em what they want to hear...right? Maybe I should do some market research...and post accordingly. Any ideas?

    I'm still interested in some rational conversation on these quite diverse and random threads. There is a common editorial slant...which should become clear as you sample the various threads. It's sort of a road less traveled...but that might make all the difference. I don't try to make people scared or angry...and I don't claim special powers or there is limited interest. However...simple and boring might be the way out of this mess.

    I'm trying to let go of a lot of this stuff. One side of me wants to be a crusader for The United States of the Solar System. The other side of me wants to shut the @#$% up...and just live...especially since it appears that most of us are not interested in being responsibly free or in the self-rule of this Solar System. I completely identify with Jordan Maxwell's comments at the end of the Camelot interview. I have sensed the same thing in many other progressive and profound thinkers.

    I may just gather what I have done on the site...and craft it into something...I don't know what. I just need to do something different. Maybe I'll just review everything. I've been trying to build some sort of a in philosophical and theological roots...which would actually work for everyone. I think I just need to go through all of the threads...and rethink everything. A little bit of knowledge...and a lot of emotion...can be very dangerous...and I don't wish to be dangerous. Just the opposite. So...I'm going to try to post a lot less. I've tried to do this before...but the abraxasinas situation and my first ufo sighting sort of wore me down to an all-time low.

    I really think you might find these 52 threads to be a profitable road less travelled. I've tried to be honest...but I am a master of none of the subjects. I claim very little. I just wanted to discuss various topics which mostly were not the latest craze. I have longed for some academic analysis of my speculations and thinking...but so far...this has not occurred...and I doubt that it ever will. I guess I'll just have to keep using my explore these roads less traveled. Perhaps that will make all the difference.

    Thank-you for your wise words Devakas. The whole world contains much wisdom...and that includes India. I'm trying to think of myself as a citizen of Earth...and open to all cultures, races, and religions. I live in the United States...but I don't think of myself as an a nationalistic or protectionist sense. I like the principles and concepts of the founders and the founding documents...but I consider myself to be a citizen of India as much as a citizen of the U.S.

    Thank-you lisa. I'm often more shallow and gullible...than I am truly open. But I'm working on it. It takes an open person to know an open person...and you seem to be equally open. Namaste. People have lives. They have families. They have jobs. They have problems. They don't have the time, energy, and inclination to basically become monks...and think everything though...with much pain and suffering. It's a nasty job...but someone's gotta do it! Thank-you for the tip on the meditation course. Of problem may be that I meditate too much! I vegetate too much? Some call it laziness. I call it deep thought! Forget Deep-Throat. Listen to Deep-Thought! Everyone's too involved!

    What if nearly everything is BS? What if we are all deluded? What if our battles are really delusions in conflict? What if we need to start from scratch? I'm just considering these threads to be my attempt to sample various modalities of thinking. The real answers may yet be on the horizon. I feel very unsatisfied with nearly everyone and everything. The United States of the Solar System is my best idea for a next step. If we do this...the stage may be set for doing something of a more refined nature in 100 years. I believe in evolutionary change...and this seems to be a logical next step. But I think we're just scratching the surface of considering the possibilities regarding what things should really be like here in this Solar System. Please think long, hard, and independently...but don't get angry or go crazy. Good Luck!!

    I just want everyone to be happy and get along with each other. This is the goal behind all of my threads and posts...even the most controversial ones. I'm thinking that I've pretty much made my point...and that I probably should not post nearly as much. I probably won't go to Avalon 2...but I'll always be lurking in the shadows. Thanks to all who have helped me to learn about life, the universe, and everything...and that includes you abraxasinas.

    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:57 am

    Consider Abortion. You've Come a Long Way Baby. My take on this madness is that probably 99% of all abortions should NOT occur. There are reasonable exceptions to most rules. Doctors, parents, attorneys, clergy, social-workers, ethics-committees, et al would have to sort out which abortions might be ABSOLUTELY necessary -- but it seems to me that second and third trimester abortions should almost NEVER occur. Abortion seems to be an Irresponsible-Activity to Deal with an Irresponsible Activity. We Need to Teach RESPONSIBILITY. I almost threw-up making this post. Aren't we just so goddamn civilized and sophisticated??!! Speaking of God -- with Three Jewish, and Six Roman Catholic Supreme Court Justices -- why in the hell is Rowe v Wade still the Law of the Land??!! Which God do these Supreme Court Justices answer to (and/or take orders from)?? There will be a helluva lot of weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth in the Final Judgment IMHO. Perhaps it is high-time to utter those dreadful words "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still." I do NOT desire the extermination of humanity or the souls animating humanity -- but justice must somehow be served -- and righteousness must be reestablished in this solar system. Perhaps a Workers-Purgatory Prison-Planet Titan might serve as at least a temporary remedy for sin -- while a more permanent solution is sought. Just a thought.

    Abortion is the termination of pregnancy by the removal or expulsion from the uterus of a fetus or embryo prior to viability.[note 1] An abortion can occur spontaneously, in which case it is usually called a miscarriage, or it can be purposely induced. The term abortion most commonly refers to the induced abortion of a human pregnancy.

    Abortion, when induced in the developed world in accordance with local law, is among the safest procedures in medicine.[1] However, unsafe abortions result in approximately 70,000 maternal deaths and 5 million hospital admissions per year globally.[2] An estimated 44 million abortions are performed globally each year, with slightly under half of those performed unsafely.[3] The incidence of abortion has stabilized in recent years,[3] having previously spent decades declining as access to family planning education and contraceptive services increased.[4] Forty percent of the world's women have access to induced abortions (within gestational limits).[5]

    Induced abortion has a long history and has been facilitated by various methods including herbal abortifacients, the use of sharpened tools, physical trauma, and other traditional methods. Contemporary medicine utilizes medications and surgical procedures to induce abortion. The legality, prevalence, cultural and religious status of abortion vary substantially around the world. Its legality can depend on specific conditions such as incest, rape, fetal defects, socioeconomic factors or the mother's health being at risk. In many parts of the world there is prominent and divisive public controversy over the ethical and legal issues of abortion.



    Approximately 205 million pregnancies occur each year worldwide. Over a third are unintended and about a fifth end in induced abortion.[3][6] Most abortions result from unintended pregnancies.[7][8] A pregnancy can be intentionally aborted in several ways. The manner selected often depends upon the gestational age of the embryo or fetus, which increases in size as the pregnancy progresses.[9][10] Specific procedures may also be selected due to legality, regional availability, and doctor or patient preference.

    Reasons for procuring induced abortions are typically characterized as either therapeutic or elective. An abortion is medically referred to as a therapeutic abortion when it is performed to save the life of the pregnant woman; prevent harm to the woman's physical or mental health; terminate a pregnancy where indications are that the child will have a significantly increased chance of premature morbidity or mortality or be otherwise disabled; or to selectively reduce the number of fetuses to lessen health risks associated with multiple pregnancy.[11][12] An abortion is referred to as an elective or voluntary abortion when it is performed at the request of the woman for non-medical reasons.[12] Confusion sometimes arises over the term "elective" because "elective surgery" generally refers to all scheduled surgery, whether medically necessary or not.[13]


    Spontaneous abortion, also known as miscarriage, is the unintentional expulsion of an embryo or fetus before the 24th week of gestation.[14] A pregnancy that ends before 37 weeks of gestation resulting in a live-born infant is known as a "premature birth" or a "preterm birth".[15] When a fetus dies in utero after viability, or during delivery, it is usually termed "stillborn".[16] Premature births and stillbirths are generally not considered to be miscarriages although usage of these terms can sometimes overlap.[17]

    Only 30 to 50% of conceptions progress past the first trimester.[18] The vast majority of those that do not progress are lost before the woman is aware of the conception,[12] and many pregnancies are lost before medical practitioners can detect an embryo.[19] Between 15% and 30% of known pregnancies end in clinically apparent miscarriage, depending upon the age and health of the pregnant woman.[20]

    The most common cause of spontaneous abortion during the first trimester is chromosomal abnormalities of the embryo or fetus,[12][21] accounting for at least 50% of sampled early pregnancy losses.[22] Other causes include vascular disease (such as lupus), diabetes, other hormonal problems, infection, and abnormalities of the uterus.[21] Advancing maternal age and a patient history of previous spontaneous abortions are the two leading factors associated with a greater risk of spontaneous abortion.[22] A spontaneous abortion can also be caused by accidental trauma; intentional trauma or stress to cause miscarriage is considered induced abortion or feticide.[23]


    Medical abortion

    Medical abortions are those induced by abortifacient pharmaceuticals. Medical abortion became an alternative method of abortion with the availability of prostaglandin analogs in the early 1970s and the antiprogestogen mifepristone in the 1980s.[24][25][26]

    The most common early first-trimester medical abortion regimens use mifepristone in combination with a prostaglandin analog (misoprostol or gemeprost) up to 9 weeks gestational age, methotrexate in combination with a prostaglandin analog up to 7 weeks gestation, or a prostaglandin analog alone.[24] Mifepristone–misoprostol combination regimens work faster and are more effective at later gestational ages than methotrexate–misoprostol combination regimens, and combination regimens are more effective than misoprostol alone.[25] This regime is effective in the second trimester.[27]

    In very early abortions, up to 7 weeks gestation, medical abortion using a mifepristone–misoprostol combination regimen is considered to be more effective than surgical abortion (vacuum aspiration), especially when clinical practice does not include detailed inspection of aspirated tissue.[28] Early medical abortion regimens using mifepristone, followed 24–48 hours later by buccal or vaginal misoprostol are 98% effective up to 9 weeks gestational age.[29] If medical abortion fails, surgical abortion must be used to complete the procedure.[30]

    Early medical abortions account for the majority of abortions before 9 weeks gestation in Britain,[31][32] France,[33] Switzerland,[34] and the Nordic countries.[35] In the United States, the percentage of early medical abortions is far lower.[36][37]

    Medical abortion regimens using mifepristone in combination with a prostaglandin analog are the most common methods used for second-trimester abortions in Canada, most of Europe, China and India,[26] in contrast to the United States where 96% of second-trimester abortions are performed surgically by dilation and evacuation.[38]


    Up to 15 weeks' gestation, suction-aspiration or vacuum aspiration are the most common surgical methods of induced abortion.[39] Manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) consists of removing the fetus or embryo, placenta, and membranes by suction using a manual syringe, while electric vacuum aspiration (EVA) uses an electric pump. These techniques differ in the mechanism used to apply suction, in how early in pregnancy they can be used, and in whether cervical dilation is necessary.

    MVA, also known as "mini-suction" and "menstrual extraction", can be used in very early pregnancy, and does not require cervical dilation. Dilation and curettage (D&C), the second most common method of surgical abortion, is a standard gynecological procedure performed for a variety of reasons, including examination of the uterine lining for possible malignancy, investigation of abnormal bleeding, and abortion. Curettage refers to cleaning the walls of the uterus with a curette. The World Health Organization recommends this procedure, also called sharp curettage, only when MVA is unavailable.[40]

    From the 15th week of gestation until approximately the 26th, other techniques must be used. Dilation and evacuation (D&E) consists of opening the cervix of the uterus and emptying it using surgical instruments and suction. Premature labor and delivery can be induced with prostaglandin; this can be coupled with injecting the amniotic fluid with hypertonic solutions containing saline or urea. After the 16th week of gestation, abortions can also be induced by intact dilation and extraction (IDX) (also called intrauterine cranial decompression), which requires surgical decompression of the fetus's head before evacuation. IDX is sometimes called "partial-birth abortion," which has been federally banned in the United States.

    In the third trimester of pregnancy, abortion may be performed by IDX as described above, induction of labor, or by hysterotomy. Hysterotomy abortion is a procedure similar to a caesarean section and is performed under general anesthesia. It requires a smaller incision than a caesarean section and is used during later stages of pregnancy.[41]

    First-trimester procedures can generally be performed using local anesthesia, while second-trimester methods may require deep sedation or general anesthesia.[37]

    Other methods

    Historically, a number of herbs reputed to possess abortifacient properties have been used in folk medicine: tansy, pennyroyal, black cohosh, and the now-extinct silphium (see history of abortion).[42] The use of herbs in such a manner can cause serious—even lethal—side effects, such as multiple organ failure, and is not recommended by physicians.[43]

    Abortion is sometimes attempted by causing trauma to the abdomen. The degree of force, if severe, can cause serious internal injuries without necessarily succeeding in inducing miscarriage.[44] In Southeast Asia, there is an ancient tradition of attempting abortion through forceful abdominal massage.[45] One of the bas reliefs decorating the temple of Angkor Wat in Cambodia depicts a demon performing such an abortion upon a woman who has been sent to the underworld.[45]

    Reported methods of unsafe, self-induced abortion include misuse of misoprostol, and insertion of non-surgical implements such as knitting needles and clothes hangers into the uterus. These methods are rarely seen in developed countries where surgical abortion is legal and available.[46]


    The health risks of abortion depend on whether the procedure is performed safely or unsafely. The World Health Organization defines unsafe abortions as those performed by unskilled individuals, with hazardous equipment, or in unsanitary facilities.[47] Legal abortions performed in the developed world are among the safest procedures in medicine.[1][48] In the US, the risk of maternal death from abortion is 0.6 per 100,000 procedures, making abortion about 14 times safer than childbirth (8.8 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births).[49][50] The risk of abortion-related mortality increases with gestational age, but remains lower than that of childbirth through at least 21 weeks' gestation.[51][52][53]

    Vacuum aspiration in the first trimester is the safest method of surgical abortion, and can be performed in a primary care office, abortion clinic, or hospital. Complications are rare and can include uterine perforation, pelvic infection, and retained products of conception requiring a second procedure to evacuate.[54] Preventive antibiotics (such as doxycycline or metronidazole) are typically given before elective abortion,[55] as they are believed to substantially reduce the risk of postoperative uterine infection.[37][56] Complications after second-trimester abortion are similar to those after first-trimester abortion, and depend somewhat on the method chosen.

    There is little difference in terms of safety and efficacy between medical abortion using a combined regimen of mifepristone and misoprostol and surgical abortion (vacuum aspiration) in early first trimester abortions up to 9 weeks gestation.[28] Medical abortion using the prostaglandin analog misoprostol alone is less effective and more painful than medical abortion using a combined regimen of mifepristone and misoprostol or surgical abortion.[57][58]

    Some purported risks of abortion are promoted primarily by anti-abortion groups, but lack scientific support.[59] For example, the question of a link between induced abortion and breast cancer has been investigated extensively. Major medical and scientific bodies (including the World Health Organization, the US National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) have concluded that abortion does not cause breast cancer,[60] although such a link continues to be promoted by anti-abortion groups.[59]

    Similarly, current scientific evidence indicates that induced abortion does not cause mental-health problems.[61][62] The American Psychological Association has concluded that a single abortion is not a threat to women's mental health, and that women are no more likely to have mental-health problems after a first-trimester abortion than after carrying an unwanted pregnancy to term.[63][64] Abortions performed after the first trimester because of fetal abnormalities are not thought to cause mental-health problems.[65] Some proposed negative psychological effects of abortion have been referred to by anti-abortion advocates as a separate condition called "post-abortion syndrome", which is not recognized by any medical or psychological organization.[66]

    Unsafe abortion

    Soviet poster circa 1925, warning against midwives performing abortions. Title translation: "Abortions performed by either trained or self-taught midwives not only maim the woman, they also often lead to death."
    Main article: Unsafe abortion

    Women seeking to terminate their pregnancies sometimes resort to unsafe methods, particularly when access to legal abortion is restricted. They may attempt to self-abort or rely on another person who does not have proper medical training or access to proper facilities. This has a tendency to lead to severe complications, such as incomplete abortion, sepsis, hemorrhage, and damage to internal organs.[67]

    Unsafe abortions are a major cause of injury and death among women worldwide. Although data are imprecise, it is estimated that approximately 20 million unsafe abortions are performed annually, with 97% taking place in developing countries.[1] Unsafe abortion is believed to result in millions of injuries and approximately 68,000 deaths annually,[1][68] accounting for 13% of all maternal deaths.[69] Groups such as the World Health Organization have advocated a public-health approach to addressing unsafe abortion, emphasizing the legalization of abortion, the training of medical personnel, and ensuring access to reproductive-health services.[70]

    The legality of abortion is one of the main determinants of its safety. Countries with restrictive abortion laws have significantly higher rates of unsafe abortion (and similar overall abortion rates) compared to those where abortion is legal and available.[2][3][70][71][72][73] For example, the 1996 legalization of abortion in South Africa had an immediate positive impact on the frequency of abortion-related complications,[74] with abortion-related deaths dropping by more than 90%.[75] In addition, a lack of access to effective contraception contributes to unsafe abortion. It has been estimated that the incidence of unsafe abortion could be reduced by up to 75% (from 20 million to 5 million annually) if modern family planning and maternal health services were readily available globally.[76]

    Forty percent of the world's women are able to access therapeutic and elective abortions within gestational limits,[5] while an additional 35 percent have access to legal abortion if they meet certain physical, mental, or socioeconomic criteria.[77] While maternal mortality seldom results from safe abortions, unsafe abortions result in 70,000 deaths and 5 million disabilities per year.[2] Complications of unsafe abortion account for approximately an eighth of maternal mortalities worldwide,[78] though this varies by region.[79] Secondary infertility caused by an unsafe abortion affects an estimated 24 million women.[72] The rate of unsafe abortions has increased from 44% to 49% between 1995 and 2008.[3] Health education, access to family planning, and improvements in health care during and after abortion have been proposed to address this phenomenon.[80]


    There are two commonly used methods of measuring the incidence of abortion:
    Abortion rate – number of abortions per 1000 women between 15 and 44 years of age
    Abortion percentage – number of abortions out of 100 known pregnancies (pregnancies include live births, abortions and miscarriages)

    The number of abortions performed worldwide has remained stable in recent years, with 41.6 million having been performed in 2003 and 43.8 million having been performed in 2008.[3] The abortion rate worldwide was 28 per 1000 women, though it was 24 per 1000 women for developed countries and 29 per 1000 women for developing countries.[3] The same 2012 study indicated that in 2008, the estimated abortion percentage of known pregnancies was at 21% worldwide, with 26% in developed countries and 20% in developing countries. [3]

    On average, the incidence of abortion is similar in countries with restrictive abortion laws and those with more liberal access to abortion. However, restrictive abortion laws are associated with increases in the percentage of abortions which are performed unsafely.[5][81][82] The unsafe abortion rate in developing countries is partly attributable to lack of access to modern contraceptives; according to the Guttmacher Institute, providing access to contraceptives would result in about 14.5 million fewer unsafe abortions and 38,000 fewer deaths from unsafe abortion annually worldwide.[83]

    The incidence of induced abortion varies extensively worldwide. The ratio of induced abortion ranges from ten to thirty percent; figures in the developing world vary widely and are often incomplete.[84]

    Abortion rates also vary depending on the stage of pregnancy and the method practiced. In 2003, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that 26% of abortions in the United States were known to have been obtained at less than 6 weeks' gestation, 18% at 7 weeks, 15% at 8 weeks, 4.1% at 16 through 20 weeks and 1.4% at more than 21 weeks. 90.9% of these were classified as having been done by "curettage" (suction-aspiration, dilation and curettage, dilation and evacuation), 7.7% by "medical" means (mifepristone), 0.4% by "intrauterine instillation" (saline or prostaglandin), and 1.0% by "other" (including hysterotomy and hysterectomy).[85] According to the CDC, due to data collection difficulties the data must be viewed as tentative and some fetal deaths reported beyond 20 weeks may be natural deaths erroneously classified as abortions if the removal of the fetus is accomplished by the same procedure as an induced abortion.[86]

    The Guttmacher Institute estimated there were 2,200 intact dilation and extraction procedures in the US during 2000; this accounts for 0.17% of the total number of abortions performed that year.[87] Similarly, in England and Wales in 2006, 89% of terminations occurred at or under 12 weeks, 9% between 13 to 19 weeks, and 1.5% at or over 20 weeks. 64% of those reported were by vacuum aspiration, 6% by D&E, and 30% were medical.[88] Later abortions are more common in China, India, and other developing countries than in developed countries.[89]

    Personal and social factors

    The reasons why women have abortions are diverse and vary dramatically across the world. Some of the most common reasons are to postpone childbearing to a more suitable time or to focus energies and resources on existing children. Others include being unable to afford a child either in terms of the direct costs of raising a child or the loss of income while she is caring for the child, lack of support from the father, inability to afford additional children, desire to provide schooling for existing children, disruption of one's own education, relationship problems with their partner, a perception of being too young to have a child, unemployment, and not being willing to raise a child conceived as a result of rape or incest, among others.[90][91] An additional factor is risk to maternal or fetal health, which was cited as the primary reason for abortion in over a third of cases in some countries and as a significant factor in only a single-digit percentage of abortions in other countries.[86][90]

    An American study in 2002 concluded that about half of women having abortions were using a form of contraception at the time of becoming pregnant. Inconsistent use was reported by half of those using condoms and three-quarters of those using the birth-control pill; 42% of those using condoms reported failure through slipping or breakage.[92] The Guttmacher Institute estimated that "most abortions in the United States are obtained by minority women" because minority women "have much higher rates of unintended pregnancy."[93]

    Some abortions are undergone as the result of societal pressures. These might include the preference for children of a specific sex, disapproval of single or early motherhood, stigmatization of people with disabilities, insufficient economic support for families, lack of access to or rejection of contraceptive methods, or efforts toward population control (such as China's one-child policy). These factors can sometimes result in compulsory abortion or sex-selective abortion.


    "French Periodical Pills." An example of a clandestine advertisement published in an 1845 edition of the Boston Daily Times.
    Main article: History of abortion

    Induced abortion has long history, and can be traced back to civilizations as varied as China under Shennong (c. 2700 BCE), Ancient Egypt with its Ebers Papyrus (c. 1550 BCE), and the Roman Empire in the time of Juvenal (c. 200 CE).[94] There is evidence to suggest that pregnancies were terminated through a number of methods, including the administration of abortifacient herbs, the use of sharpened implements, the application of abdominal pressure, and other techniques.

    Some medical scholars and abortion opponents have suggested that the Hippocratic Oath forbade Ancient Greek physicians from performing abortions;[94] other scholars disagree with this interpretation,[94] and note the medical texts of Hippocratic Corpus contain descriptions of abortive techniques.[95] Aristotle, in his treatise on government Politics (350 BCE), condemns infanticide as a means of population control. He preferred abortion in such cases, with the restriction[96] "[that it] must be practised on it before it has developed sensation and life; for the line between lawful and unlawful abortion will be marked by the fact of having sensation and being alive."[97]In Christianity, Pope Sixtus V (1585–90) is noted as the first Pope to declare that abortion is homicide regardless of the stage of pregnancy;[98] the Catholic Church had previously been divided on whether if believed that abortion was murder, and did not begin vigorously opposing abortion until the 19th century.[94] Islamic tradition has traditionally permitted abortion until a point in time when Muslims believe the soul enters the fetus,[94] considered by various theologians to be at conception, 40 days after conception, 120 days after conception, or quickening.[99] However, abortion is largely heavily restricted or forbidden in areas of high Islamic faith such as the Middle East and North Africa.[100]

    In Europe and North America, abortion techniques advanced starting in the 17th century. However, conservatism by most physicians with regards to sexual matters prevented the wide expansion of safe abortion techniques.[94] Other medical practitioners in addition to some physicians advertised their services, and they were not widely regulated until the 19th century, when the practice was banned in both the United States and the United Kingdom.[94] Church groups as well as physicians were highly influential in anti-abortion movements.[94] In the US, abortion was more dangerous than childbirth until about 1930 when incremental improvements in abortion procedures relative to childbirth made abortion safer.[note 2] The Soviet Union (1919), Iceland (1935) and Sweden (1938) were among the first countries to legalize certain or all forms of abortion.[101] In 1935 Nazi Germany, a law was passed permitting abortions for those deemed "hereditarily ill," while women considered of German stock were specifically prohibited from having abortions.[102] Beginning in the second half of the twentieth century, abortion was legalized in a greater number of countries.[94]

    Abortion debate

    Induced abortion has long been the source of considerable debate, controversy, and activism. An individual's position concerning the complex ethical, moral, philosophical, biological, and legal issues which surround abortion is often related to his or her value system. Opinions of abortion may be described as being a combination of beliefs about abortion's morality the proper extent of governmental authority in public policy; and on the rights and responsibilities of the woman seeking to have an abortion. Religious ethics also has an influence on both personal opinion and the greater debate over abortion.

    In both public and private debate, arguments presented in favor of or against abortion access focus on either the moral permissibility of an induced abortion, or justification of laws permitting or restricting abortion. Abortion debates, especially pertaining to abortion laws, are often spearheaded by groups advocating one of these two positions. Anti-abortion groups who favor greater legal restrictions on abortion, including complete prohibition, most often describe themselves as "pro-life" while abortion rights groups who are against such legal restrictions describe themselves as "pro-choice". Generally, the former position argues that a human fetus is a human being with a right to live, making abortion morally the same as murder. The latter position argues that a woman has certain reproductive rights, especially the choice whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term.

    Abortion law

    Current laws pertaining to abortion are diverse. Religious, moral, and cultural sensibilities continue to influence abortion laws throughout the world. The right to life, the right to liberty, the right to security of person, and the right to reproductive health are major issues of human rights that are sometimes used as justification for the existence or absence of laws controlling abortion.

    In jurisdictions where abortion is legal, certain requirements must often be met before a woman may obtain a safe, legal abortion (an abortion performed without the woman's consent is considered feticide). These requirements usually depend the age of the fetus, often using a trimester-based system to regulate the window of legality. Some jurisdictions require a waiting period before the procedure, prescribe the distribution of information on fetal development, or require that parents be contacted if their minor daughter requests an abortion.[105] Other jurisdictions may require that a woman obtain the consent of the fetus' father before aborting the fetus, that abortion providers inform patients of health risks of the procedure—sometimes including "risks" not supported by the medical literature—and that multiple medical authorities certify that the abortion is either medically or socially necessary. Many restrictions are waived in emergency situations.

    Other jurisdictions ban abortion almost entirely. Many, but not all, of these allow legal abortions in a variety of circumstances. These circumstances vary based on jurisdiction, but may include whether the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest, the fetus' development is impaired, the woman's physical or mental well-being is endangered, or socioeconomic considerations make childbirth a hardship.[77] In countries where abortion is banned entirely, such as Nicaragua, medical authorities have recorded rises in maternal death directly and indirectly due to pregnancy as well as deaths due to doctors' fears of prosecution if they treat other gynecological emergencies.[106][107] Some countries, such as Bangladesh, that nominally ban abortion, may also support clinics that perform abortions under the guise of menstrual hygiene.[108] This is also a terminology in traditional medicine.[109] In places where abortion is illegal or carries heavy social stigma, pregnant women may engage in medical tourism and travel to countries where they can terminate their pregnancies.[110] Women without the means to travel can resort to providers of illegal abortions or attempt to perform an abortion by themselves.[111]

    Emergency contraception is generally available in countries that have not restricted abortion and is also sometimes available in countries that have otherwise banned abortion, such as Chile.[112][113] This has caused controversy, as some anti-abortion groups assert that certain forms of emergency contraception are not contraceptives but abortifacients (See, e.g., Abortion in the Dominican Republic.)

    Sex-selective abortion

    Sonography and amniocentesis allow parents to determine sex before childbirth. The development of this technology has led to sex-selective abortion, or the termination of a fetus based on sex. The selective termination of a female fetus is most common.

    Sex-selective abortion is partially responsible for the noticeable disparities between the birth rates of male and female children in some countries. The preference for male children is reported in many areas of Asia, and abortion used to limit female births has been reported in Taiwan, South Korea, India, and China.[114] This deviation from the standard birth rates of males and females occurs despite the fact that the country in question may have officially banned sex-selective abortion or even sex-screening.[115][116][117][118] In China, a historical preference for a male child has been exacerbated by the one-child policy, which was enacted in 1979.[119]

    Many countries have taken legislative steps to reduce the incidence of sex-selective abortion. At the International Conference on Population and Development in 1994 over 180 states agreed to eliminate "all forms of discrimination against the girl child and the root causes of son preference",[120] which was also condemned by a PACE resolution in 2011.[121] The World Health Organization and UNICEF, along with other United Nations agencies, have found that measures to reduce access to abortion are much less effective at reducing sex-selective abortions than measures to reduce gender inequality.[120]

    Anti-abortion violence

    In a number of cases, abortion providers and these facilities have been subjected to various forms of violence, including murder, attempted murder, kidnapping, stalking, assault, arson, and bombing. Anti-abortion violence is classified by both governmental and scholarly sources as terrorism.[122][123] Only a small fraction of those opposed to abortion commit violence, often rationalizing their actions as justifiable homicide or defense of others, committed in order to protect the lives of fetuses. Invasion of privacy and stalking of doctors, clinic workers, and patients, even by police officers, is similarly justified.[124]

    In the United States, four physicians who performed abortions have been murdered: David Gunn (1993), John Britton (1994), Barnett Slepian (1998), and George Tiller (2009). Also murdered, in the U.S. and Australia, have been other personnel at abortion clinics, including receptionists and security guards such as James Barrett, Shannon Lowney, Lee Ann Nichols, and Robert Sanderson. Woundings (e.g., Garson Romalis) and attempted murders have also taken place in the United States and Canada, Hundreds of bombings, arsons, acid attacks, invasions, and incidents of vandalism against abortion providers have also occurred.[125][126] Notable perpetrators of anti-abortion violence include Eric Robert Rudolph, Scott Roeder, Shelley Shannon, and Paul Jennings Hill, the first person to be executed in the United States for murdering an abortion provider.[127]

    Legal protection of access to abortion has been brought into some countries where abortion is legal. These laws typically seek to protect abortion clinics from obstruction, vandalism, picketing, and other actions, or to protect patients and employees of such facilities from threats and harassment.

    Art, literature and film

    A Bas-relief at Angkor Wat, Cambodia, c. 1150, depicts a demon inducing an abortion by pounding the abdomen of a pregnant woman with a pestle.[45][128]

    Art serves to humanize the abortion issue and illustrates the myriad of decisions and consequences it has. One of the earliest known representations of abortion is in a bas relief at Angkor Wat (c. 1150). Anti-abortion activist Børre Knudsen was linked to a 1994 art theft as part of an anti-abortion drive in Norway surrounding the 1994 Winter Olympics.[129] A Swiss gallery removed a piece from a Chinese art collection in 2005, that had the head of a fetus attached to the body of a bird.[130] In 2008, a Yale student proposed using aborted excretions and the induced abortion itself as a performance art project.[131]

    The Cider House Rules (novel 1985, film 1999) follows the story of Dr. Larch an orphanage director who is a reluctant abortionist after seeing the consequences of back-alley abortions, and his orphan medical assistant Homer who is against abortion.[132] Feminist novels such as Braided Lives (1997) by Marge Piercy emphasize the struggles women had in dealing with unsafe abortion in various circumstances prior to legalization.[133] Physician Susan Wicklund wrote This Common Secret (2007) about how a personal traumatic abortion experience hardened her resolve to provide compassionate care to women who decide to have an abortion. As Wicklund crisscrosses the West to provide abortion services to remote clinics, she tells the stories of women she's treated and the sacrifices she and her loved ones made.[134] In 2009, Irene Vilar revealed her past abuse and addiction to abortion in Impossible Motherhood, where she aborted 15 pregnancies in 17 years. According to Vilar it was the result of a dark psychological cycle of power, rebellion and societal expectations.[135] In Annie Finch's mythic epic poem and opera libretto Among the Goddesses (2010), the heroine's abortion is contextualized spiritually by the goddesses Demeter, Kali, and Inanna.[136]

    Various options and realities of abortion have been dramatized in film. In Riding in Cars with Boys (2001) an underage woman carries her pregnancy to term as abortion is not an affordable option, moves in with the father and finds herself involved with drugs, has no opportunities, and questioning if she loves her child. In Juno (2007) a 16-year-old initially goes to have an abortion but decides to bear the child and allow a wealthy couple to adopt it. The films Dirty Dancing (1987) and If These Walls Could Talk (1996) explore the availability, affordability and dangers of illegal abortions. The emotional impact of dealing with an unwanted pregnancy alone is the focus of Things You Can Tell Just By Looking at Her (2000) and Circle of Friends (1995). In The Godfather Part II (1974) Kay informed Michael Corleone that she had obtained an abortion without his knowledge nor consent.[137] On the abortion debate, an irresponsible drug addict is used as a pawn in a power struggle between abortion rights and anti-abortion groups in Citizen Ruth (1996).[138] The Law & Order television episode "Dignity" deals with the trial of a man who killed a late-term abortion doctor; the storyline was inspired by the assassination of abortion provider George Tiller.[139]

    In other animals

    Spontaneous abortion occurs in various animals. For example, in sheep, it may be caused by crowding through doors, or being chased by dogs.[140] In cows, abortion may be caused by contagious disease, such as Brucellosis or Campylobacter, but can often be controlled by vaccination.[141] Eating pine needles can also induce abortions in cows.[142][143] In horses, a fetus may be aborted or resorbed if it has Lethal white syndrome (congenital intestinal aganglionosis). Foal embryos that are homozygous for the dominant white gene (WW) are often resorbed before birth.[144]

    Viral infection can cause abortion in dogs.[145] Cats can experience spontaneous abortion for many reasons, including hormonal imbalance. A combined abortion and spaying is performed on pregnant cats, especially in Trap-Neuter-Return programs, to prevent unwanted kittens from being born.[146][147][148]

    Abortion may also be induced in animals, in the context of animal husbandry. For example, abortion may be induced in mares that have been mated improperly, or that have been purchased by owners who did not realize the mares were pregnant, or that are pregnant with twin foals.[149] Feticide can occur in horses and zebras due to male harassment of pregnant mares or forced copulation,[150][151][152] although the frequency in the wild has been questioned.[153] Male gray langur monkeys may attack females following male takeover, causing miscarriage.[154]


    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 29, 2013 10:01 am

    You've Come a Long Way Baby. Abortion Continued. My take on this madness is that probably 99% of all abortions should NOT occur. There are reasonable exceptions to most rules. Doctors, parents, attorneys, clergy, social-workers, ethics-committees, et al would have to sort out which abortions might be ABSOLUTELY necessary -- but it seems to me that second and third trimester abortions should almost NEVER occur. Abortion seems to be an Irresponsible-Activity to Deal with an Irresponsible Activity. We Need to Teach RESPONSIBILITY. I almost threw-up making this post. Aren't we just so goddamn civilized and sophisticated??!! Speaking of God -- with Three Jewish, and Six Roman Catholic Supreme Court Justices -- why in the hell is Rowe v Wade still the Law of the Land??!! Which God do these Supreme Court Justices answer to (and/or take orders from)?? There will be a helluva lot of weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth in the Final Judgment IMHO. Perhaps it is high-time to utter those dreadful words "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still." I do NOT desire the extermination of humanity or the souls animating humanity -- but justice must somehow be served -- and righteousness must be reestablished in this solar system. Perhaps a Workers-Purgatory Prison-Planet Titan might serve as at least a temporary remedy for sin -- while a more permanent solution is sought. Just a thought.


    1.^ a b c d Grimes, D. A.; Benson, J.; Singh, S.; Romero, M.; Ganatra, B.; Okonofua, F. E.; Shah, I. H. (2006). "Unsafe abortion: The preventable pandemic" (PDF). The Lancet 368 (9550): 1908–1919. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69481-6. PMID 17126724.
    2.^ a b c Shah, I.; Ahman, E. (December 2009). "Unsafe abortion: global and regional incidence, trends, consequences, and challenges" (PDF). Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada 31 (12): 1149–58. PMID 20085681.
    3.^ a b c d e f g h Sedgh, G.; Singh, S.; Shah, I. H.; Åhman, E.; Henshaw, S. K.; Bankole, A. (2012). "Induced abortion: Incidence and trends worldwide from 1995 to 2008". The Lancet 379 (9816): 625–632. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61786-8. PMID 22264435.
    4.^ Sedgh G, Henshaw SK, Singh S, Bankole A, Drescher J (September 2007). "Legal abortion worldwide: incidence and recent trends". Int Fam Plan Perspect 33 (3): 106–116. doi:10.1363/ifpp.33.106.07. PMID 17938093.
    5.^ a b c Culwell KR, Vekemans M, de Silva U, Hurwitz M (July 2010). "Critical gaps in universal access to reproductive health: Contraception and prevention of unsafe abortion". International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 110: S13–16. doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2010.04.003. PMID 20451196.
    6.^ Cheng L. (1 November 2008). "Surgical versus medical methods for second-trimester induced abortion". The WHO Reproductive Health Library. World Health Organization. Archived from the original on 17 June 2011. Retrieved 17 June 2011.
    7.^ Bankole et al. (1998). "Reasons Why Women Have Induced Abortions: Evidence from 27 Countries". International Family Planning Perspectives 24 (3): 117–127 & 152.
    8.^ Finer, Lawrence B.; Frohwirth, Lori F.; Dauphinee, Lindsay A.; Singh, Susheela; Moore, Ann M. (2005). "Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives" (PDF). Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 37 (3): 110–118. doi:10.1111/j.1931-2393.2005.tb00045.x. PMID 16150658.
    9.^ Stubblefield, Phillip G. (2002). "10. Family Planning". In Berek, Jonathan S.. Novak's Gynecology (13 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. ISBN 978-0-7817-3262-8.
    10.^ Bartlett, LA; Berg, CJ; Shulman, HB; Zane, SB; Green, CA; Whitehead, S; Atrash, HK (2004). "Risk factors for legal induced abortion-related mortality in the United States" (PDF). Obstetrics & Gynecology 103 (4): 729–37. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000116260.81570.60. PMID 15051566.
    11.^ Roche, Natalie E. (28 September 2004). "Therapeutic Abortion". eMedicine. Archived from the original on 14 December 2004. Retrieved 19 June 2011.
    12.^ a b c d Schorge, John O.; Schaffer, Joseph I.; Halvorson, Lisa M.; Hoffman, Barbara L.; Bradshaw, Karen D.; Cunningham, F. Gary, eds. (2008). "6. First-Trimester Abortion". Williams Gynecology (1 ed.). McGraw-Hill Medical. ISBN 978-0-07-147257-9.
    13.^ "Elective surgery". Encyclopedia of Surgery. Retrieved 2012-12-17. "An elective surgery is a planned, non-emergency surgical procedure. It may be either medically required (e.g., cataract surgery), or optional (e.g., breast augmentation or implant) surgery.
    14.^ Churchill Livingstone medical dictionary. Edinburgh New York: Churchill Livingstone Elsevier. 2008. ISBN 978-0-443-10412-1. "The preferred term for unintentional loss of the product of conception prior to 24 weeks' gestation is miscarriage."
    15.^ Annas, George J.; Elias, Sherman (2007). "51. Legal and Ethical Issues in Obstetric Practice". In Gabbe, Steven G.; Niebyl, Jennifer R.; Simpson, Joe Leigh. Obstetrics: Normal and Problem Pregnancies (5 ed.). Churchill Livingstone. p. 669. ISBN 978-0-443-06930-7. "A preterm birth is defined as one that occurs before the completion of 37 menstrual weeks of gestation, regardless of birth weight."
    16.^ "Stillbirth". Concise Medical Dictionary. Oxford University Press. 2010. "birth of a fetus that shows no evidence of life (heartbeat, respiration, or independent movement) at any time later than 24 weeks after conception"
    17.^ "Documenting Stillbirth (Fetal Death)" (PDF). United States Department of State. 18 February 2011. Archived from the original on 27 June 2011. Retrieved 27 June 2011.
    18.^ Annas, George J.; Elias, Sherman (2007). "24. Pregnancy loss". In Gabbe, Steven G.; Niebyl, Jennifer R.; Simpson, Joe Leigh. Obstetrics: Normal and Problem Pregnancies (5 ed.). Churchill Livingstone. ISBN 978-0-443-06930-7.
    19.^ Katz, Vern L. (2007). "16. Spontaneous and Recurrent Abortion – Etiology, Diagnosis, Treatment". In Katz, Vern L.; Lentz, Gretchen M.; Lobo, Rogerio A. et al. Katz: Comprehensive Gynecology (5 ed.). Mosby. ISBN 978-0-323-02951-3.
    20.^ Stovall, Thomas G. (2002). "17. Early Pregnancy Loss and Ectopic Pregnancy". In Berek, Jonathan S.. Novak's Gynecology (13 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. ISBN 978-0-7817-3262-8.
    21.^ a b Stöppler, Melissa Conrad. "Miscarriage (Spontaneous Abortion)". In Shiel, William C., Jr. WebMD. Retrieved 2009-04-07.
    22.^ a b Jauniaux E, Kaminopetros P, El-Rafaey H (1999). "Early pregnancy loss". In Whittle MJ, Rodeck CH. Fetal medicine: basic science and clinical practice. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone. p. 837. ISBN 978-0-443-05357-3. OCLC 42792567.
    23.^ "Fetal Homicide Laws". National Conference of State Legislatures. Archived from the original on 29 March 2009. Retrieved 2009-04-07.
    24.^ a b Kulier R, Kapp N, Gülmezoglu AM, Hofmeyr GJ, Cheng L, Campana A (2011). "Medical methods for first trimester abortion". Cochrane Database Syst Rev 11 (11): CD002855. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD002855.pub4. PMID 22071804.
    25.^ a b Creinin MD, Gemzell-Danielsson K (2009). "Medical abortion in early pregnancy". In Paul M, Lichtenberg ES, Borgatta L, Grimes DA, Stubblefield PG, Creinin MD (eds.). Management of unintended and abnormal pregnancy: comprehensive abortion care. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 111–134. ISBN 1-4051-7696-2.
    26.^ a b Kapp N, von Hertzen H (2009). "Medical methods to induce abortion in the second trimester". In Paul M, Lichtenberg ES, Borgatta L, Grimes DA, Stubblefield PG, Creinin MD (eds.). Management of unintended and abnormal pregnancy: comprehensive abortion care. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 178–192. ISBN 1-4051-7696-2.
    27.^ Wildschut, H; Both, MI; Medema, S; Thomee, E; Wildhagen, MF; Kapp, N (2011 Jan 19). "Medical methods for mid-trimester termination of pregnancy.". Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (1): CD005216. PMID 21249669.
    28.^ a b WHO Department of Reproductive Health and Research (23 November 2006). Frequently asked clinical questions about medical abortion. Geneva: World Health Organization. ISBN 92-4-159484-5. Retrieved 2011-11-22.
    29.^ Fjerstad M, Sivin I, Lichtenberg ES, Trussell J, Cleland K, Cullins V (September 2009). "Effectiveness of medical abortion with mifepristone and buccal misoprostol through 59 gestational days". Contraception 80 (3): 282–286. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2009.03.010. PMID 19698822. The regimen (200 mg of mifepristone, followed 24–48 hours later by 800 mcg of vaginal misoprostol) previously used by Planned Parenthood clinics in the United States from 2001 to March 2006 was 98.5% effective through 63 days gestation—with an ongoing pregnancy rate of about 0.5%, and an additional 1% of patients having uterine evacuation for various reasons, including problematic bleeding, persistent gestational sac, clinician judgment or patient request. The regimen (200 mg of mifepristone, followed 24–48 hours later by 800 mcg of buccal misoprostol) currently used by Planned Parenthood clinics in the United States since April 2006 is 98.3% effective through 59 days gestation.
    30.^ Holmquist S, Gilliam M (2008). "Induced abortion". In Gibbs RS, Karlan BY, Haney AF, Nygaard I (eds.). Danforth's obstetrics and gynecology (10th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. pp. 586–603. ISBN 978-0-7817-6937-2.
    31.^ "Abortion statistics, England and Wales: 2010". London: Department of Health, United Kingdom. 24 May 2011. Retrieved 2011-11-22.
    32.^ "Abortion statistics, year ending 31 December 2010". Edinburgh: ISD, NHS Scotland. 31 May 2011. Retrieved 2011-11-22.
    33.^ Vilain A, Mouquet M-C (22 June 2011). "Voluntary terminations of pregnancies in 2008 and 2009". Paris: DREES, Ministry of Health, France. Retrieved 2011-11-22.
    34.^ . (5 July 2011). "Abortions in Switzerland 2010". Neuchâtel: Office of Federal Statistics, Switzerland. Retrieved 2011-11-22.
    35.^ Gissler M, Heino A (21 February 2011). "Induced abortions in the Nordic countries 2009". Helsinki: National Institute for Health and Welfare, Finland. Retrieved 2011-11-22.
    36.^ Jones RK, Kooistra K (March 2011). "Abortion incidence and access to services in the United States, 2008". Perspect Sex Reprod Health 43 (1): 41–50. doi:10.1363/4304111. PMID 21388504. Retrieved 2011-11-22.
    37.^ a b c Templeton, A.; Grimes, D. A. (2011). "A Request for Abortion". New England Journal of Medicine 365 (23): 2198–2204. doi:10.1056/NEJMcp1103639.
    38.^ Hammond C, Chasen ST (2009). "Dilation and evacuation". In Paul M, Lichtenberg ES, Borgatta L, Grimes DA, Stubblefield PG, Creinin MD (eds.). Management of unintended and abnormal pregnancy: comprehensive abortion care. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 178–192. ISBN 1-4051-7696-2.
    39.^ Healthwise (2004). "Manual and vacuum aspiration for abortion". WebMD. Archived from the original on 28 October 2008. Retrieved 2008-12-05.
    40.^ World Health Organization (2003). "Dilatation and curettage". Managing Complications in Pregnancy and Childbirth: A Guide for Midwives and Doctors. Geneva: World Health Organization. ISBN 978-92-4-154587-7. OCLC 181845530. Retrieved 2008-12-05.
    41.^ McGee, Glenn; Jon F. Merz. "Abortion". Encarta. Microsoft. Archived from the original on 31 October 2009. Retrieved 2008-12-05.
    42.^ Riddle, John M. (1997). Eve's herbs: a history of contraception and abortion in the West. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-27024-4. OCLC 36126503.[page needed]
    43.^ Ciganda C, Laborde A (2003). "Herbal infusions used for induced abortion". J. Toxicol. Clin. Toxicol. 41 (3): 235–239. doi:10.1081/CLT-120021104. PMID 12807304.
    44.^ Smith, J. (1998). "Risky choices: The dangers of teens using self-induced abortion attempts". Journal of Pediatric Health Care 12 (3): 147–151. doi:10.1016/S0891-5245(98)90245-0. PMID 9652283. edit
    45.^ a b c Potts, M.; Graff, M.; Taing, J. (2007). "Thousand-year-old depictions of massage abortion". Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care 33 (4): 233–234. doi:10.1783/147118907782101904. PMID 17925100.
    46.^ Thapa, S. R.; Rimal, D.; Preston, J. (2006). "Self induction of abortion with instrumentation". Australian Family Physician 35 (9): 697–698. PMID 16969439.
    47.^ "The Prevention and Management of Unsafe Abortion" (PDF). World Health Organization. April 1995. Archived from the original on 30 May 2010. Retrieved 1 June 2010.
    48.^ Grimes, DA; Creinin, MD (2004). "Induced abortion: an overview for internists". Ann. Intern. Med. 140 (Cool: 620–6. doi:10.1001/archinte.140.5.620. PMID 15096333.
    49.^ Raymond, E. G.; Grimes, D. A. (2012). "The Comparative Safety of Legal Induced Abortion and Childbirth in the United States". Obstetrics & Gynecology 119 (2, Part 1): 215–219. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e31823fe923. PMID 22270271.
    50.^ Grimes DA (January 2006). "Estimation of pregnancy-related mortality risk by pregnancy outcome, United States, 1991 to 1999". Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 194 (1): 92–4. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2005.06.070. PMID 16389015.
    51.^ Bartlett LA, Berg CJ, Shulman HB et al. (April 2004). "Risk factors for legal induced abortion-related mortality in the United States". Obstet Gynecol 103 (4): 729–37. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000116260.81570.60. PMID 15051566.
    52.^ Trupin, Suzanne (27 May 2010). "Elective Abortion". eMedicine. Retrieved 1 June 2010. "At every gestational age, elective abortion is safer for the mother than carrying a pregnancy to term."
    53.^ Pittman, Genevra (23 January 2012). "Abortion safer than giving birth: study". Reuters. Retrieved 4 February 2012.
    54.^ Westfall JM, Sophocles A, Burggraf H, Ellis S (1998). "Manual vacuum aspiration for first-trimester abortion". Arch Fam Med 7 (6): 559–62. doi:10.1001/archfami.7.6.559. PMID 9821831.
    55.^ ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins—Gynecology (May 2009). "ACOG practice bulletin No. 104: antibiotic prophylaxis for gynecologic procedures". Obstet Gynecol 113 (5): 1180–9. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181a6d011. PMID 19384149.
    56.^ Sawaya GF, Grady D, Kerlikowske K, Grimes DA (May 1996). "Antibiotics at the time of induced abortion: the case for universal prophylaxis based on a meta-analysis". Obstet Gynecol 87 (5 Pt 2): 884–90. PMID 8677129.
    57.^ Grossman D (3 September 2004). "Medical methods for first trimester abortion: RHL commentary". Reproductive Health Library. Geneva: World Health Organization. Retrieved 2011-11-22.
    58.^ Chien P, Thomson M (15 December 2006). "Medical versus surgical methods for first trimester termination of pregnancy: RHL commentary". Reproductive Health Library. Geneva: World Health Organization. Archived from the original on 17 May 2010. Retrieved 2010-06-01.
    59.^ a b Jasen P (October 2005). "Breast cancer and the politics of abortion in the United States". Med Hist 49 (4): 423–44. PMC 1251638. PMID 16562329.
    60.^ Position statements of major medical bodies on abortion and breast cancer include: World Health Organization: "Induced abortion does not increase breast cancer risk (Fact sheet N°240)". World Health Organization. Archived from the original on 13 February 2011. Retrieved 6 January 2011.
    National Cancer Institute: "Abortion, Miscarriage, and Breast Cancer Risk". National Cancer Institute. Archived from the original on 21 December 2010. Retrieved 11 January 2011.
    American Cancer Society: "Is Abortion Linked to Breast Cancer?". American Cancer Society. 23 September 2010. Archived from the original on 5 June 2011. Retrieved 20 June 2011. "At this time, the scientific evidence does not support the notion that abortion of any kind raises the risk of breast cancer."
    Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists: "The Care of Women Requesting Induced Abortion" (PDF). Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. p. 9. Retrieved 29 June 2008. "Induced abortion is not associated with an increase in breast cancer risk."
    American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: "ACOG Finds No Link Between Abortion and Breast Cancer Risk". American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. 31 July 2003. Archived from the original on 2 January 2011. Retrieved 11 January 2011.

    61.^ Cockburn, Jayne; Pawson, Michael E. (2007). Psychological Challenges to Obstetrics and Gynecology: The Clinical Management. Springer. p. 243. ISBN 978-1-84628-807-4.
    62.^ Adler, NE; David, HP; Major, BN; Roth, SH; Russo, NF; Wyatt, GE (1990). "Psychological responses after abortion". Science 248 (4951): 41–4. doi:10.1126/science.2181664. PMID 2181664.
    63.^ "APA Task Force Finds Single Abortion Not a Threat to Women's Mental Health" (Press release). American Psychological Association. 12 August 2008. Retrieved 7 September 2011.
    64.^ "Report of the APA Task Force on Mental Health and Abortion". Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. 13 August 2008.
    65.^ Steinberg, J. R. (2011). "Later Abortions and Mental Health: Psychological Experiences of Women Having Later Abortions—A Critical Review of Research". Women's Health Issues 21 (3): S44–S48. doi:10.1016/j.whi.2011.02.002. PMID 21530839.
    66.^ See, for example: Grimes, DA; Creinin, MD (2004). "Induced abortion: an overview for internists". Ann Intern Med 140 (Cool: 620–6. doi:10.1001/archinte.140.5.620. PMID 15096333. "Abortion does not lead to an increased risk for breast cancer or other late psychiatric or medical sequelae. ... The alleged 'postabortion trauma syndrome' does not exist."
    Stotland, NL (2003). "Abortion and psychiatric practice". J Psychiatr Pract 9 (2): 139–149. doi:10.1097/00131746-200303000-00005. PMID 15985924. "Currently, there are active attempts to convince the public and women considering abortion that abortion frequently has negative psychiatric consequences. This assertion is not borne out by the literature: the vast majority of women tolerate abortion without psychiatric sequelae."
    Stotland NL (October 1992). "The myth of the abortion trauma syndrome". J Am Med Assoc 268 (15): 2078–9. doi:10.1001/jama.268.15.2078. PMID 1404747.

    67.^ Okonofua, F. (2006). "Abortion and maternal mortality in the developing world" (PDF). Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada 28 (11): 974–979. PMID 17169222.
    68.^ Haddad, LB.; Nour, NM. (2009). "Unsafe abortion: unnecessary maternal mortality". Rev Obstet Gynecol 2 (2): 122–6. PMC 2709326. PMID 19609407.
    69.^ Darney, Leon Speroff, Philip D. (2010). A clinical guide for contraception (5th ed. ed.). Philadelphia, Pa.: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. p. 406. ISBN 1-60831-610-6.
    70.^ a b Berer M (2000). "Making abortions safe: a matter of good public health policy and practice". Bull. World Health Organ. 78 (5): 580–92. PMC 2560758. PMID 10859852.
    71.^ Sedgh G, Henshaw S, Singh S, Ahman E, Shah IH (2007). "Induced abortion: estimated rates and trends worldwide". Lancet 370 (9595): 1338–45. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61575-X. PMID 17933648.
    72.^ a b "Unsafe abortion: Global and regional estimates of the incidence of unsafe abortion and associated mortality in 2003" (PDF). World Health Organization. 2007. Archived from the original on 16 February 2011. Retrieved 7 March 2011.
    73.^ Berer M (November 2004). "National laws and unsafe abortion: the parameters of change". Reprod Health Matters 12 (24 Suppl): 1–8. doi:10.1016/S0968-8080(04)24024-1. PMID 15938152.
    74.^ Jewkes R, Rees H, Dickson K, Brown H, Levin J (March 2005). "The impact of age on the epidemiology of incomplete abortions in South Africa after legislative change". BJOG 112 (3): 355–9. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00422.x. PMID 15713153.
    75.^ Bateman C (December 2007). "Maternal mortalities 90% down as legal TOPs more than triple". S. Afr. Med. J. 97 (12): 1238–42. PMID 18264602.
    76.^ "Facts on Investing in Family Planning and Maternal and Newborn Health" (PDF). Guttmacher Institute. 2010. Retrieved 24 May 2012.
    77.^ a b Boland, R.; Katzive, L. (2008). "Developments in Laws on Induced Abortion: 1998–2007". International Family Planning Perspectives 34 (3): 110–120. doi:10.1363/ifpp.34.110.08. PMID 18957353.
    78.^ Maclean, Gaynor (2005). "XI. Dimension, Dynamics and Diversity: A 3D Approach to Appraising Global Maternal and Neonatal Health Initiatives". In Balin, Randell E. Trends in Midwifery Research. Nova Publishers. pp. 299–300. ISBN 978-1-59454-477-4.
    79.^ Salter, C., Johnson, H.B., and Hengen, N. (1997). "Care for Postabortion Complications: Saving Women's Lives". Population Reports (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health) 25 (1). Archived from the original on 1 September 2011.
    80.^ UNICEF, United Nations Population Fund, WHO, World Bank (2010). "Packages of interventions: Family planning, safe abortion care, maternal, newborn and child health". Retrieved 31 December 2010.
    81.^ Shah I, Ahman E (December 2009). "Unsafe abortion: global and regional incidence, trends, consequences, and challenges". J Obstet Gynaecol Can 31 (12): 1149–58. PMID 20085681. "However, a woman's chance of having an abortion is similar whether she lives in a developed or a developing region: in 2003 the rates were 26 abortions per 1000 women aged 15 to 44 in developed areas and 29 per 1000 in developing areas. The main difference is in safety, with abortion being safe and easily accessible in developed countries and generally restricted and unsafe in most developing countries"
    82.^ Rosenthal, Elizabeth (12 October 2007). "Legal or Not, Abortion Rates Compare". The New York Times. Retrieved 18 July 2011.
    83.^ "Facts on Investing in Family Planning and Maternal and Newborn Health" (PDF). Guttmacher Institute. November 2010. Retrieved 24 October 2011.
    84.^ Sedgh, G.; Singh, S.; Henshaw, S. K.; Bankole, A. (2011). "Legal Abortion Worldwide in 2008: Levels and Recent Trends". Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 43 (3): 188–198. doi:10.1363/4318811. PMID 21884387.
    85.^ Strauss, L. T.; Gamble, S. B.; Parker, W. Y.; Cook, D. A.; Zane, S. B.; Hamdan, S.; Centers for Disease Control Prevention (2006). "Abortion surveillance—United States, 2003". Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Surveillance Summaries 55 (SS11): 1–32. PMID 17119534.
    86.^ a b "The Limitations of U.S. Statistics on Abortion". Issues in Brief. New York: The Guttmacher Institute. 1997.
    87.^ Finer, L. B.; Henshaw, S. K. (2003). "Abortion Incidence and Services in the United States in 2000". Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 35 (1): 6–15. doi:10.1363/3500603. PMID 12602752.
    88.^ Department of Health (2007). "Abortion statistics, England and Wales: 2006". Retrieved 2007-10-12.
    89.^ Cheng L. "Surgical versus medical methods for second-trimester induced abortion : RHL commentary" (last revised: 1 November 2008). The WHO Reproductive Health Library; Geneva: World Health Organization.
    90.^ a b Bankole, Akinrinola; Singh, Susheela; Haas, Taylor (1998). "Reasons Why Women Have Induced Abortions: Evidence from 27 Countries". International Family Planning Perspectives 24 (3): 117–127; 152.
    91.^ Finer, L. B.; Frohwirth, L. F.; Dauphinee, L. A.; Singh, S.; Moore, A. M. (2005). "Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives". Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 37 (3): 110–118. doi:10.1111/j.1931-2393.2005.tb00045.x. PMID 16150658.
    92.^ Jones, R. K.; Darroch, J. E.; Henshaw, S. K. (2002). "Contraceptive Use Among U.S. Women Having Abortions in 2000–2001" (PDF). Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 34 (6): 294–303. doi:10.2307/3097748. PMID 12558092.
    93.^ Susan A. Cohen: Abortion and Women of Color: The Bigger Picture, Guttmacher Policy Review, Summer 2008, Volume 11, Number 3.
    94.^ a b c d e f g h i Joffe, Carole (2009). "1. Abortion and medicine: A sociopolitical history" (PDF). In MPaul, ES Lichtenberg, L Borgatta, DA Grimes, PG Stubblefield, MD Creinin. Management of Unintended and Abnormal Pregnancy (1st ed.). Oxford, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. ISBN 978-1-4443-1293-5. Archived from the original on 21 October 2011.
    95.^ Miles, Steven (2005). The Hippocratic Oath and the Ethics of Medicine. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-518820-2.
    96.^ Carrick, Paul (2001). Medical Ethics in the Ancient World. Georgetown University Press. ISBN 978-0-87840-849-8.
    97.^ Rackham, H. (1944). "Aristotle, Politics". Harvard University Press. Retrieved 2011-06-21.
    98.^ Brind'Amour, Katherine (2007). "Effraenatam". Embryo Project Encyclopedia. Arizona State University. Archived from the original on 1 February 2012.
    99.^ "Religions – Islam: Abortion". BBC. Retrieved 2011-12-10.
    100.^ Dabash, Rasha; Roudi-Fahimi, Farzaneh (2008). "Abortion in the Middle East and North Africa" (PDF). Population Research Bureau. Archived from the original on 8 July 2011.
    101.^ "Abortion Law, History & Religion". Childbirth By Choice Trust. Archived from the original on 8 February 2008. Retrieved 2008-03-23.
    102.^ For sources describing abortion policy in Nazi Germany, see: Friedlander, Henry (1995). The origins of Nazi genocide: from euthanasia to the final solution. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. p. 30. ISBN 978-0-8078-4675-9. OCLC 60191622.
    Proctor, Robert (1988). Racial Hygiene: Medicine Under the Nazis. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. pp. 122, 123 and 366. ISBN 978-0-674-74578-0. OCLC 20760638.
    Arnot, Margaret L.; Cornelie Usborne (1999). Gender and Crime in Modern Europe. New York: Routledge. p. 231. ISBN 978-1-85728-745-5. OCLC 186748539.
    DiMeglio, Peter M. (1999). "Germany 1933–1945 (National Socialism)". In Helen Tierney. Women's studies encyclopedia. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press. p. 589. ISBN 978-0-313-31072-0. OCLC 38504469.

    104.^ World Abortion Policies 2007, United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division.
    105.^ Theodore J. Joyce, Stanley K. Henshaw, Amanda Dennis, Lawrence B. Finer and Kelly Blanchard (April 2009). "The Impact of State Mandatory Counseling and Waiting Period Laws on Abortion: A Literature Review" (PDF). Guttmacher Institute. Archived from the original on 14 January 2011. Retrieved 31 December 2010.
    106.^ "European delegation visits Nicaragua to examine effects of abortion ban". Ipas. 26 November 2007. Archived from the original on 17 April 2008. Retrieved 2009-06-15. "More than 82 maternal deaths had been registered in Nicaragua since the change. During this same period, indirect obstetric deaths, or deaths caused by illnesses aggravated by the normal effects of pregnancy and not due to direct obstetric causes, have doubled."
    107.^ "Nicaragua: "The Women's Movement Is in Opposition"". Montevideo: Inside Costa Rica. IPS. 28 June 2008.
    108.^ "Surgical Abortion: History and Overview". National Abortion Federation. Archived from the original on 22 September 2006. Retrieved 2006-09-04.
    109.^ Nations MK, Misago C, Fonseca W, Correia LL, Campbell OM. (1997-06). "Women's hidden transcripts about abortion in Brazil". Soc Sci Med 44 (12): 1833–45. PMID 9194245. Retrieved 2012-12-17. "Two folk medical conditions, "delayed" (atrasada) and "suspended" (suspendida) menstruation, are described as perceived by poor Brazilian women in Northeast Brazil. Culturally prescribed methods to "regulate" these conditions and provoke menstrual bleeding are also described ..."
    110.^ Henshaw, S. K. (1991). "The Accessibility of Abortion Services in the United States". Family Planning Perspectives 23 (6): 246–263. doi:10.2307/2135775.
    111.^ Marcy Bloom (25 February 2008). "Need Abortion, Will Travel". RH Reality Check. Retrieved 2009-06-15.
    112.^ Ross, Jen (12 September 2006). "In Chile, free morning-after pills to teens". The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved 2006-12-07.
    113.^ Gallardoi, Eduardo (26 September 2006). "Morning-After Pill Causes Furor in Chile". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2006-12-07.
    114.^ Banister, Judith. (16 March 1999). Son Preference in Asia – Report of a Symposium. Retrieved 2006-01-12.
    115.^ Reaney, Patricia. "Selective abortion blamed for India's missing girls". Reuters. Archived from the original on 20 February 2006. Retrieved 2008-12-03.
    116.^ Sudha, S.; Rajan, S. Irudaya (July 1999). "Female Demographic Disadvantage in India 1981–1991: Sex Selective Abortions and Female Infanticide". Development and Change 30 (3): 585–618. doi:10.1111/1467-7660.00130. PMID 20162850. Archived from the original on 1 January 2003. Retrieved 2008-12-03.
    117.^ "Sex Selection & Abortion: India". Library of Congress. 4 April 2011. Retrieved 18 July 2011.
    118.^ "China Bans Sex-selection Abortion." (22 March 2002). Xinhua News Agency.'.' Retrieved 2006-01-12.
    119.^ Graham, Maureen J.; Larsen; Xu (June 1998). "Son Preference in Anhui Province, China". International Family Planning Perspectives 24 (2): 72–77. doi:10.2307/2991929. Archived from the original on 21 October 2011.
    120.^ a b "Preventing gender-biased sex selection". UNFPA. Retrieved 1 November 2011.
    121.^ "Prenatal sex selection". PACE. Retrieved 27 April November 2012.
    122.^ Smith, G. Davidson (Tim) (1998). "Single Issue Terrorism Commentary". Canadian Security Intelligence Service. Archived from the original on 15 October 2007. Retrieved 1 September 2011.
    123.^ Wilson, M.; Lynxwiler, J. (1988). "Abortion clinic violence as terrorism". Studies in Conflict & Terrorism 11 (4): 263–273. doi:10.1080/10576108808435717.
    124.^ Burghardt, Tom. "ANTI-ABORTION COP USES POLICE COMPUTER TO TRACK CLINIC WORKERS". Holy Smoke. Bay Area Coalition for Our Reproductive Rights. Retrieved 26 February 2013.
    125.^ "The Death of Dr. Gunn". New York Times. 12 March 1993.
    126.^ "Incidence of Violence & Disruption Against Abortion Providers in the U.S. & Canada" (PDF). National Abortion Federation. 2009. Retrieved 9 February 2010.
    127.^ Borger, Julian (3 February 1999). "The bomber under siege". The Guardian (London).
    128.^ Mould R (1996). Mould's Medical Anecdotes. CRC Press. p. 406. ISBN 978-0-85274-119-1.
    129.^ "Art theft linked to pro-life drive Abortion foe hints painting's return hinges on TV film". 18 February 1994. Retrieved 2010-09-25.
    130.^ "Principally relating to Xiao Yu's work Ruan". Other Shore Artfile. Retrieved 2010-06-27.
    131.^ Soupcoff, Marni (17 April 2008). "Marni Soupcoff's Zeitgeist: Photofiddle,, Mandie Brady and Aliza Shvarts". Full Comment. National Post. Retrieved 2008-04-30.
    132.^ John Irving (1985). The Cider House Rules. New York: William Morrow. ISBN 978-0-688-03036-0.
    133.^ Marge Piercy (1997). Braided Lives. New York: Ballantine Books. ISBN 978-0-449-00091-5.
    134.^ Susan Wicklund (2007). This Common Secret: My Journey as an Abortion Doctor. New York: PublicAffairs. ISBN 978-1-58648-480-4.
    135.^ Irene Vilar (2009). Impossible Motherhood: Testimony of an Abortion Addict. Other Press. ISBN 978-1-59051-320-0.
    136.^ Finch, Annie (2010). Among the Goddesses. California: Red Hen Press. ISBN 978-1-59709-161-9.
    137.^ "Godfather II". 1974. Retrieved 2011-12-27. "Oh, Michael. Michael, you are blind. It wasn't a miscarriage. It was an abortion. An abortion, Michael. Just like our marriage is an abortion. Something that's unholy and evil. I didn't want your son, Michael! I wouldn't bring another one of you sons into this world! It was an abortion, Michael! It was a son Michael! A son! And I had it killed because this must all end!"
    138.^ "films that discuss Abortion ... a movie list". Archived from the original on 26 July 2010. Retrieved 2010-06-13.
    139.^ Wyatt, Edward (22 October 2009). "NBC's 'Law & Order' to Take on Abortion Issue". New York Times. Archived from the original on 26 July 2011. Retrieved 26 July 2011.
    140.^ Spencer, James (1911). Sheep Husbandry in Canada. p. 124.
    141.^ "Beef cattle and Beef production: Management and Husbandry of Beef Cattle". Encyclopaedia of New Zealand. 1966.
    142.^ Myers, Brandon; Beckett, Jonathon (2001). "Pine needle abortion". Animal Health Care and Maintenance. Tucson, AZ: Arizona Cooperative Extension, University of Arizona. pp. 47–50. Retrieved 10 April 2013.
    143.^ Kim, Ill-Hwa; Choi, Kyung-Chul; An, Beum-Soo; Choi, In-Gyu; Kim, Byung-Ki; Oh, Young-Kyoon; Jeung, Eui-Bae (2003). "Effect on abortion of feeding Korean pine needles to pregnant Korean native cows". Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research (Canadian Veterinary Medical Association) 67 (3): 194–197. PMC 227052. Retrieved 10 April 2013.
    144.^ Overton, Rebecca (2003-03). "By a Hair". Paint Horse Journal. Retrieved 2012-12-19.
    145.^ "Herpesvirus in Dog Pups". petMD. Retrieved 2012-12-18.
    146.^ "Spaying Pregnant Females". Carol's Ferals. Retrieved 2012-12-17.
    147.^ Coates, Jennifer (7 May 2007). "Feline abortion: often an unnerving necessity". petMD. Retrieved 2012-12-18.
    148.^ Khuly, Patty (1 April 2011). "Feline abortion: often an unnerving necessity (Part 2)". petMD. Retrieved 2012-12-18.
    149.^ McKinnon, Angus O.; Voss, James L. (1993). Equine Reproduction. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 563. ISBN 0-8121-1427-2.
    150.^ Berger, Joel W; Vuletić, L; Boberić, J; Milosavljević, A; Dilparić, S; Tomin, R; Naumović, P (5 May 1983). "Induced abortion and social factors in wild horses". Nature 303 (5912): 59–61. doi:10.1038/303059a0. PMID 7 668248 7.
    151.^ Pluháček, Jan; Bartos, L (2000). "Male infanticide in captive plains zebra, Equus burchelli". Animal Behaviour 59 (4): 689–694. doi:10.1006/anbe.1999.1371. PMID 10792924.
    152.^ Pluháček, Jan (2005). "Further evidence for male infanticide and feticide in captive plains zebra, Equus burchelli". Folia Zool. 54 (3): 258–262.
    153.^ Kirkpatrick, J. F.; Turner, J. W. (1991). "Changes in Herd Stallions among Feral Horse Bands and the Absence of Forced Copulation and Induced Abortion". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 29 (3): 217–219. doi:10.1007/BF00166404. JSTOR 4600608.
    154.^ Agoramoorthy, G.; Mohnot, S. M.; Sommer, V.; Srivastava, A. (1988). "Abortions in free ranging Hanuman langurs (Presbytis entellus) — a male induced strategy?". Human Evolution 3 (4): 297–308. doi:10.1007/BF02435859.


    1.^ Definitions of abortion, as with many words, vary from source to source. The following is a partial list of definitions as stated by obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN) textbooks, dictionaries, and other encyclopedias: Major OB/GYN textbooks The National Center for Health Statistics defines an "abortus" as "[a] fetus or embryo removed or expelled from the uterus during the first half of gestation—20 weeks or less, or in the absence of accurate dating criteria, born weighing < 500 g." They also define "birth" as "[t]he complete expulsion or extraction from the mother of a fetus after 20 weeks' gestation. ... in the absence of accurate dating criteria, fetuses weighing <500 g are usually not considered as births, but rather are termed abortuses for purposes of vital statistics." Cunningham, FG; Leveno, KJ; Bloom, SL; Hauth, JC; Rouse, DJ; Spong, CY, eds. (2010). "1. Overview of Obstetrics". Williams Obstetrics (23 ed.). McGraw-Hill Medical. ISBN 978-0-07-149701-5.

    "[T]he standard medical definition of abortion [is] termination of a pregnancy when the fetus is not viable". Annas, George J.; Elias, Sherman (2007). "51. Legal and Ethical Issues in Obstetric Practice". In Gabbe, Steven G.; Niebyl, Jennifer R.; Simpson, Joe Leigh. Obstetrics: Normal and Problem Pregnancies (5 ed.). Churchill Livingstone. ISBN 978-0-443-06930-7.

    "Termination of a pregnancy, whether spontaneous or induced." Kottke, Melissa J.; Zieman, Mimi (2008). "33. Management of Abortion". In Rock, John A.; Jones III, Howard W. TeLinde's Operative Gynecology (10 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. ISBN 978-0-7817-7234-1.

    Other OB/GYN textbooks "Termination of pregnancy before 20 weeks' gestation calculated from date of onset of last menses. An alternative definition is delivery of a fetus with a weight of less than 500 g. If abortion occurs before 12 weeks' gestation, it is called early; from 12 to 20 weeks it is called late." Katz, Vern L. (2007). "16. Spontaneous and Recurrent Abortion – Etiology, Diagnosis, Treatment". In Katz, Vern L.; Lentz, Gretchen M.; Lobo, Rogerio A. et al. Katz: Comprehensive Gynecology (5 ed.). Mosby. ISBN 978-0-323-02951-3.

    "Abortion is the spontaneous or induced termination of pregnancy before fetal viability. Because popular use of the word abortion implies a deliberate pregnancy termination, some prefer the word miscarriage to refer to spontaneous fetal loss before viability ... The National Center for Health Statistics, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the World Health Organization (WHO) define abortion as pregnancy termination prior to 20 weeks' gestation or a fetus born weighing less than 500 g. Despite this, definitions vary widely according to state laws." Schorge, John O.; Schaffer, Joseph I.; Halvorson, Lisa M.; Hoffman, Barbara L.; Bradshaw, Karen D.; Cunningham, F. Gary, eds. (2008). "6. First-Trimester Abortion". Williams Gynecology (1 ed.). McGraw-Hill Medical. ISBN 978-0-07-147257-9.

    Major medical dictionaries "The spontaneous or induced termination of pregnancy before the fetus reaches a viable age." "Taber's Medical Dictionary: abortion". Taber's Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary. F.A. Davis. Archived from the original on 14 June 2011. Retrieved 14 June 2011.

    "Expulsion from the uterus an embryo or fetus prior to the stage of viability (20 weeks' gestation or fetal weight <500g). A distinction made between [abortion] and premature birth: premature infants are those born after the stage of viability but prior to 37 weeks." Stedman's Medical Dictionary (27 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. ISBN 0-683-40008-8.

    "[P]remature expulsion from the uterus of the products of conception, either the embryo or a nonviable fetus." Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary (31 ed.). Saunders. 2007. ISBN 978-1-4160-2364-7.

    Other medical dictionaries "[T]he termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus". "Medical Dictionary". Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary. Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster. Archived from the original on 15 June 2011. Retrieved 15 June 2011.

    "Induced termination of pregnancy, involving destruction of the embryo or fetus." "abortion." The American Heritage Science Dictionary. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 2005. ISBN 978-0-618-45504-1.

    "Interruption of pregnancy before the fetus has attained a stage of viability, usually before the 24th gestational week." "abortion." Cambridge Dictionary of Human Biology and Evolution. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press. 2005. OCLC 54374716.

    "[A] spontaneous or deliberate ending of pregnancy before the fetus can be expected to survive." "abortion." Mosby's Emergency Dictionary. Philadelphia: Elsevier Health Sciences. 1998. OCLC 37553784.[verification needed]

    "[A] situation where a fetus leaves the uterus before it is fully developed, especially during the first 28 weeks of pregnancy, or a procedure which causes this to happen ... [T]o have an abortion to have an operation to make a fetus leave the uterus during the first period of pregnancy." ""abortion"". Dictionary of Medical Terms. London: A & C Black. 2005. OCLC 55634250.

    "1. Induced termination of a pregnancy with destruction of the fetus or embryo; therapeutic abortion. 2. Spontaneous abortion." The American Heritage Medical Dictionary (reprint ed.). Houghton Mifflin. 2008. p. 2. ISBN 0-618-94725-6. OCLC 608212441.

    "Although the term abortion is generic and implies a premature termination of pregnancy for any reason, the lay public better understands the word 'miscarriage' for involuntary fetal loss or fetal wastage." The Dictionary of Modern Medicine. Parthenon Publishing. 1992. p. 3. ISBN 1-85070-321-3.

    "The termination of pregnancy or premature expulsion of the products of conception by any means, usually before fetal viability." Churchill's Medical Dictionary. Churchill Livingstone. 1989. p. 3. ISBN 0-443-08691-5.

    Major English dictionaries (general-purpose) "1. a. The expulsion or removal from the womb of a developing embryo or fetus, spec. (Med.) in the period before it is capable of independent survival, occurring as a result either of natural causes (more fully spontaneous abortion) or of a deliberate act (more fully induced abortion); the early or premature termination of pregnancy with loss of the fetus; an instance of this." "abortion, n.". Oxford English Dictionary (Third ed.). Oxford University Press. September 2009; online version September 2011.

    "[A]n operation or other procedure to terminate pregnancy before the fetus is viable" or "[T]he premature termination of pregnancy by spontaneous or induced expulsion of a nonviable fetus from the uterus". "abortion". Collins English Dictionary – Complete & Unabridged 11th Edition. HarperCollins Publishers. Retrieved 7 October 2012.

    "[T]he removal of an embryo or fetus from the uterus in order to end a pregnancy" or "[A]ny of various surgical methods for terminating a pregnancy, especially during the first six months." "abortion". Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 27 June 2011.

    "[T]he termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: as (a) spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation (b) induced expulsion of a human fetus (c) expulsion of a fetus by a domestic animal often due to infection at any time before completion of pregnancy." Merriam-Webster Dictionary, from Merriam-Webster, an Encyclopedia Brittanica Company.

    "1. medicine the removal of an embryo or fetus from the uterus before it is sufficiently developed to survive independently, deliberately induced by the use of drugs or by surgical procedures. Also called termination or induced abortion. 2. medicine the spontaneous expulsion of an embryo or fetus from the uterus before it is sufficiently developed to survive independently. Also called miscarriage, spontaneous abortion." Chambers 21st Century Dictionary. London: Chambers Harrap, 2001.

    "a medical operation to end a pregnancy so that the baby is not born alive". Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, online edition.

    Other dictionaries "The deliberate termination of a pregnancy, usually before the embryo or fetus is capable of independent life." The American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy (3rd ed.). Houghton Mifflin Company. 2005.

    "A term that, in philosophy, theology, and social debates, often means the deliberate termination of pregnancy before the fetus is able to survive outside the uterus. However, participants in these debates sometimes use the term abortion simply to mean the termination of pregnancy before birth, regardless of whether the fetus is viable or not." "abortion." Dictionary of World Philosophy. London: Routledge, 2001.

    "1. An artificially induced termination of a pregnancy for the purpose of destroying an embryo or fetus. 2. The spontaneous expulsion of an embryo or fetus before viability;" Garner, Bryan A. (June 2009). Black's Law Dictionary (9th ed.). Thomson West. ISBN 978-0-314-19949-2.

    Encyclopedias "[T]he expulsion of a fetus from the uterus before it has reached the stage of viability (in human beings, usually about the 20th week of gestation)." "Abortion (pregnancy)". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica. 2011. Archived from the original on 26 June 2011. Retrieved 26 June 2011.

    "Expulsion of the products of conception before the embryo or fetus is viable. Any interruption of human pregnancy prior to the 28th week is known as abortion." "Abortion". The Columbia Encyclopedia. New York: Columbia University Press. 2008.

    "The expulsion or removal of a fetus from the womb before it is capable of independent survival." "Abortion". Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. 2008.

    "[Abortion] is commonly misunderstood outside medical circles. In general terms, the word 'abortion' simply means the failure of something to reach fulfilment or maturity. Medically, abortion means loss of the fetus, for any reason, before it is able to survive outside the womb. The term covers accidental or spontaneous ending, or miscarriage, of pregnancy as well as deliberate termination. The terms 'spontaneous abortion' and 'miscarriage' are synonymous and are defined as loss of the fetus before the twenty-eighth week of pregnancy. This definition implies a legal perception of the age at which a fetus can survive out of the womb. With great advances in recent years in the ability to keep very premature babies alive, this definition is in need of revision." "Abortion and miscarriage". The Royal Society of Medicine Health Encyclopedia. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. 2000.

    "Abortion is the intentional removal of a fetus or an embryo from a mother's womb for purposes other than that of either producing a live birth or disposing of a dead embryo." "Abortion". Encyclopedia of Human Rights Issues since 1945 (1 ed.). Santa Barbara, California: Routledge. 1999. ISBN 978-1-57958-166-4.

    2.^ By 1930, medical procedures in the US had improved for both childbirth and abortion but not equally, and induced abortion in the first trimester had become safer than childbirth. In 1973, Roe vs. Wade acknowledged that abortion in the first trimester was safer than childbirth: "The 1970s". Time communication 1940–1989: retrospective. Time, Inc. 1989. "Blackmun was also swayed by the fact that most abortion prohibitions were enacted in the 19th century when the procedure was more dangerous than now."

    Will, George (1990). Suddenly: the American idea abroad and at home, 1986–1990. Free Press. p. 312. ISBN 0-02-934435-2.
    Lewis, J.; Shimabukuro, Jon O. (28 January 2001). "Abortion Law Development: A Brief Overview". Congressional Research Service. Archived from the original on 14 May 2011. Retrieved 1 May 2011.
    *Schultz, David Andrew (2002). Encyclopedia of American law. Infobase Publishing. p. 1. ISBN 0-8160-4329-9.
    Lahey, Joanna N. (24 September 2009). "Birthing a Nation: Fertility Control Access and the 19th Century Demographic Transition" (PDF; preliminary version). Colloquium. Pomona College.


    Posts : 7949
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The University of Solar System Studies

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 29, 2013 10:03 am

    You've Come a Long Way Baby. Consider Rowe v Wade. My take on this madness is that probably 99% of all abortions should NOT occur. There are reasonable exceptions to most rules. Doctors, parents, attorneys, clergy, social-workers, ethics-committees, et al would have to sort out which abortions might be ABSOLUTELY necessary -- but it seems to me that second and third trimester abortions should almost NEVER occur. Abortion seems to be an Irresponsible-Activity to Deal with an Irresponsible Activity. We Need to Teach RESPONSIBILITY. I almost threw-up making this post. Aren't we just so goddamn civilized and sophisticated??!! Speaking of God -- with Three Jewish, and Six Roman Catholic Supreme Court Justices -- why in the hell is Rowe v Wade still the Law of the Land??!! Which God do these Supreme Court Justices answer to (and/or take orders from)?? There will be a helluva lot of weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth in the Final Judgment IMHO. Perhaps it is high-time to utter those dreadful words "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still." I do NOT desire the extermination of humanity or the souls animating humanity -- but justice must somehow be served -- and righteousness must be reestablished in this solar system. Perhaps a Workers-Purgatory Prison-Planet Titan might serve as at least a temporary remedy for sin -- while a more permanent solution is sought. Just a thought.

    Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of abortion. Decided simultaneously with a companion case, Doe v. Bolton, the Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that right must be balanced against the state's two legitimate interests in regulating abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting women's health. Arguing that these state interests became stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the trimester of pregnancy.

    The Court later rejected Roe's trimester framework, while affirming Roe's central holding that a person has a right to abortion until viability.[1] The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid", adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks."[2]

    In disallowing many state and federal restrictions on abortion in the United States,[3][4] Roe v. Wade prompted a national debate that continues today, about issues including whether and to what extent abortion should be legal, who should decide the legality of abortion, what methods the Supreme Court should use in constitutional adjudication, and what the role should be of religious and moral views in the political sphere. Roe v. Wade reshaped national politics, dividing much of the United States into pro-choice and pro-life camps, while activating grassroots movements on both sides.


    History of abortion laws in the United States

    According to the Court, "the restrictive criminal abortion laws in effect in a majority of States today are of relatively recent vintage." In 1821, Connecticut passed the first state statute criminalizing abortion. Every state had abortion legislation by 1900.[5] In the United States, abortion was sometimes considered a common law crime,[6] though Justice Blackmun would conclude that the criminalization of abortion did not have "roots in the English common-law tradition."[7]

    Prior history of the case

    In June 1969, Norma L. McCorvey discovered she was pregnant with her third child. She returned to Dallas, Texas, where friends advised her to assert falsely that she had been raped in order to obtain a legal abortion (with the understanding that Texas law allowed abortion in cases of rape and incest). However, this scheme failed because there was no police report documenting the alleged rape. She attempted to obtain an illegal abortion, but found the unauthorized site had been closed down by the police. Eventually, she was referred to attorneys Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington.[8] (McCorvey would give birth before the case was decided.)

    In 1970, Coffee and Weddington filed suit in a U.S. District Court in Texas on behalf of McCorvey (under the alias Jane Roe). The defendant in the case was Dallas County District Attorney Henry Wade, representing the State of Texas. McCorvey was no longer claiming her pregnancy was the result of rape, and later acknowledged that she had lied about having been raped.[9][10] "Rape" is not mentioned in the judicial opinions in this case.[11]

    The district court ruled in McCorvey's favor on the legal merits of her case, and declined to grant an injunction against the enforcement of the laws barring abortion.[11] The district court's decision was based upon the 9th Amendment, and the court relied upon a concurring opinion by Justice Arthur Goldberg in the 1965 Supreme Court case of Griswold v. Connecticut,[12] finding in the decision for a right to privacy.[13]

    Before the Supreme Court

    Roe v. Wade reached the Supreme Court on appeal in 1970. The Justices delayed taking action on Roe and a closely related case, Doe v. Bolton, until they decided Younger v. Harris, as they felt that the appeals raised difficult questions on judicial jurisdiction, and United States v. Vuitch, where they considered the constitutionality of a District of Columbia statute that criminalized abortion except where the mother's life or health was endangered. In Vuitch, the Court narrowly upheld the statute, though in doing so, it treated abortion as a medical procedure and stated that the physician must be given room to determine what suffices as a danger to (physical or mental) health. The day after they announced their decision in Vuitch, they voted to hear both Roe and Doe.[14]

    Arguments were scheduled by the full Court for December 13, 1971. Before the Court could hear the oral arguments, Justices Black and Harlan retired. Chief Justice Burger asked Justices Stewart and Blackmun to determine whether Roe and Doe, among others, should be heard as scheduled. According to Blackmun, Stewart felt that the cases were a straightforward application of Younger v. Harris and recommended that the Court move forward as scheduled.[15]

    Following a first round of arguments, all seven Justices tentatively agreed that the law should be struck down, but for varying reasons.[16] Burger assigned the role of writing the Court's opinion in Roe (as well as Doe) to Blackmun, who began drafting a preliminary opinion that emphasized what he saw as the Texas law's vagueness.[17] Justices Rehnquist and Powell joined the Supreme Court too late to hear the first round of arguments. Additionally, Blackmun felt that his opinion was an inadequate reflection of his liberal colleagues' opinions.[18] In May 1972, Blackmun proposed that the case be reargued. Justice Douglas threatened to write a dissent from the reargument order (he and the other liberal Justices were suspicious that Rehnquist and Powell would vote to uphold the statute), but was coaxed out of the action by his colleagues, and his dissent was merely mentioned in the reargument order without further statement or opinion.[19][20] The case was reargued on October 11, 1972. Weddington continued to represent Roe, and Texas Assistant Attorney General Robert C. Flowers stepped in to replace Jay Floyd for Texas.

    Blackmun continued work on his opinions in both cases over the summer recess, despite the fact that there was no guarantee that he would be assigned to write the opinions again. Over the recess, Blackmun spent a week researching the history of abortion at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, where he had worked in the 1950s. After the Court heard the second round of arguments, Powell stated that he would agree with Blackmun's conclusion but pushed for Roe to be the lead of the two abortion cases being considered. Powell also suggested that the Court strike down the Texas law on privacy grounds. White was unwilling to sign on to Blackmun's opinion, and Rehnquist had already decided to dissent.[21]

    Supreme Court decision

    Harry Blackmun wrote the Court’s opinion. The Court issued its decision on January 22, 1973, with a 7-to-2 majority vote in favor of Roe. Burger and Douglas' concurring opinions and White's dissenting opinion were issued along with the Court's opinion in Doe v. Bolton (announced on the same day as Roe v. Wade). The Court deemed abortion a fundamental right under the United States Constitution, thereby subjecting all laws attempting to restrict it to the standard of strict scrutiny.[22]

    Right to privacy

    The Court declined to adopt the district court's Ninth Amendment rationale, and instead asserted that the "right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the district court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy."[23] Douglas, in his concurring opinion in the companion case Doe v. Bolton, stated more emphatically that, "The Ninth Amendment obviously does not create federally enforceable rights."[24]

    The Court asserted that the government had two competing interests – protecting the mother's health and protecting the "potentiality of human life". Following its earlier logic, the Court stated that during the first trimester, when the procedure is more safe than childbirth, the decision to abort must be left to the mother and her physician. The State has the right to intervene prior to fetal viability only to protect the health of the mother, and may regulate the procedure after viability so long as there is always an exception for preserving maternal health. The Court additionally added that the primary right being preserved in the Roe decision was that of the physician's right to practice medicine freely absent a compelling state interest – not women's rights in general.[25] The Court explicitly rejected a fetal "right to life" argument.[26]

    The Justices had discussed the trimester framework extensively. Powell had suggested that the point where the State could intervene be placed at viability, which Marshall supported as well.[27] Blackmun wrote of the majority decision he authored: "You will observe that I have concluded that the end of the first trimester is critical. This is arbitrary, but perhaps any other selected point, such as quickening or viability, is equally arbitrary."[28] Douglas preferred the first trimester line,[29] while Stewart said the lines were "legislative" and wanted more flexibility and consideration paid to the state legislatures, though he joined Blackmun's decision.[30] Brennan proposed abandoning frameworks based on the age of the fetus and instead allowing states to regulate the procedure based on its safety for the mother.[29]


    An aspect of the decision that attracted comparatively little attention was the Court's disposition of the issues of standing and mootness. Under the traditional interpretation of these rules, Jane Roe's appeal was "moot" because she had already given birth to her child and thus would not be affected by the ruling; she also lacked "standing" to assert the rights of other pregnant women.[31] As she did not present an "actual case or controversy" (a grievance and a demand for relief), any opinion issued by the Supreme Court would constitute an advisory opinion, a practice forbidden by Article III of the United States Constitution.

    The Court concluded that the case came within an established exception to the rule; one that allowed consideration of an issue that was "capable of repetition, yet evading review".[32] This phrase had been coined in 1911 by Justice Joseph McKenna.[33] Blackmun's opinion quoted McKenna, and noted that pregnancy would normally conclude more quickly than an appellate process: "If that termination makes a case moot, pregnancy litigation seldom will survive much beyond the trial stage, and appellate review will be effectively denied."[34]


    Justices Byron R. White and William H. Rehnquist wrote emphatic dissenting opinions in this case. White wrote:

    I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court's judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant women and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes. The upshot is that the people and the legislatures of the 50 States are constitutionally disentitled to weigh the relative importance of the continued existence and development of the fetus, on the one hand, against a spectrum of possible impacts on the woman, on the other hand. As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today; but, in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court.[35][36]

    White asserted that the Court "values the convenience of the pregnant mother more than the continued existence and development of the life or potential life that she carries." Despite White suggesting he "might agree" with the Court's values and priorities, he wrote that he saw "no constitutional warrant for imposing such an order of priorities on the people and legislatures of the States." White criticized the Court for involving itself in this issue by creating "a constitutional barrier to state efforts to protect human life and by investing mothers and doctors with the constitutionally protected right to exterminate it." He would have left this issue, for the most part, "with the people and to the political processes the people have devised to govern their affairs."

    Rehnquist elaborated upon several of White's points, by asserting that the Court's historical analysis was flawed:

    To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.[37][38][39]

    From this historical record, Rehnquist concluded that, "There apparently was no question concerning the validity of this provision or of any of the other state statutes when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted." Therefore, in his view, "the drafters did not intend to have the Fourteenth Amendment withdraw from the States the power to legislate with respect to this matter."



    The most prominent organized groups that mobilized in response to Roe are the National Abortion Rights Action League and the National Right to Life Committee.


    Advocates of Roe describe it as vital to the preservation of women's rights, personal freedom, and privacy. Denying the abortion right has been equated to compulsory motherhood, and some scholars (not including any member of the Supreme Court) have argued that abortion bans therefore violate the Thirteenth Amendment:

    When women are compelled to carry and bear children, they are subjected to 'involuntary servitude' in violation of the Thirteenth Amendment….[E]ven if the woman has stipulated to have consented to the risk of pregnancy, that does not permit the state to force her to remain pregnant.[40]

    Some opponents of abortion maintain that personhood begins at fertilization (also referred to as conception), and should therefore be protected by the Constitution;[41] the dissenting justices in Roe instead wrote that decisions about abortion "should be left with the people and to the political processes the people have devised to govern their affairs."[35]

    The majority opinion allowed states to protect "fetal life after viability" even though a fetus is not "a person within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment". Supporters of Roe contend that the decision has a valid constitutional foundation, or contend that justification for the result in Roe could be found in the Constitution but not in the articles referenced in the decision.[41][40]


    Every year on the anniversary of the decision, opponents of abortion march up Constitution Avenue to the Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C. in the March for Life.[42] Around 250,000 people attend the march each year.[43][44]

    Opponents of Roe[who?] have asserted that the decision lacks a valid constitutional foundation. Like the dissenters in Roe, they have maintained that the Constitution is silent on the issue, and that proper solutions to the question would best be found via state legislatures and the legislative process, rather than through an all-encompassing ruling from the Supreme Court.[citation needed]

    A prominent argument against the Roe decision is that, in the absence of consensus about when meaningful life begins, it is best to avoid the risk of doing harm.[45]

    In response to Roe v. Wade, most states enacted or attempted to enact laws limiting or regulating abortion, such as laws requiring parental consent for minors to obtain abortions, parental notification laws, spousal mutual consent laws, spousal notification laws, laws requiring abortions to be performed in hospitals but not clinics, laws barring state funding for abortions, laws banning intact dilation and extraction (also known as partial-birth abortion), laws requiring waiting periods before abortion, and laws mandating women read certain types of literature and watch a fetal ultrasound before undergoing an abortion.[46] Congress in 1976 passed the Hyde Amendment, barring federal funding of abortions (except in the cases of rape, incest, or a threat to the life of the mother) for poor women through the Medicaid program. The Supreme Court struck down several state restrictions on abortions in a long series of cases stretching from the mid-1970s to the late 1980s, but upheld restrictions on funding, including the Hyde Amendment, in the case of Harris v. McRae (1980).[47]

    Perhaps the most notable opposition to Roe comes from Roe herself; in 1995, Norma L. McCorvey revealed that she became pro-life and is now a vocal opponent of abortion.[48]


    The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (April 2012)

    Harry Blackmun, who authored the decision, became inexorably attached to the decision. Despite his initial reluctance, he eventually became the decision's chief champion and protector during his later years on the Court.[49] Others have joined him in support of Roe, including Judith Jarvis Thomson, who before the decision had offered an influential defense of abortion.[50]

    Liberal and feminist legal scholars have had various reactions to Roe, not always giving the decision unqualified support. One reaction has been to argue that Justice Blackmun reached the correct result but went about it the wrong way.[51] Another reaction has been to argue that the end achieved by Roe does not justify the means.[52]

    Justice John Paul Stevens, while agreeing with the decision, has suggested that it should have been more narrowly focused on the issue of privacy. According to Stevens, if the decision had avoided the trimester framework and simply stated that the right to privacy included a right to choose abortion, "it might have been much more acceptable" from a legal standpoint.[53] His colleague Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had, before joining the Court, criticized the decision for terminating a nascent movement to liberalize abortion law through legislation.[54] Watergate prosecutor Archibald Cox wrote: "[Roe’s] failure to confront the issue in principled terms leaves the opinion to read like a set of hospital rules and regulations.... Neither historian, nor layman, nor lawyer will be persuaded that all the prescriptions of Justice Blackmun are part of the Constitution."[55]

    In a highly-cited 1973 article in the Yale Law Journal,[56] Professor John Hart Ely criticized Roe as a decision which "is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be."[57] Ely added: "What is frightening about Roe is that this super-protected right is not inferable from the language of the Constitution, the framers’ thinking respecting the specific problem in issue, any general value derivable from the provisions they included, or the nation’s governmental structure." Professor Laurence Tribe had similar thoughts: "One of the most curious things about Roe is that, behind its own verbal smokescreen, the substantive judgment on which it rests is nowhere to be found."[58] Liberal law professors Alan Dershowitz,[59] Cass Sunstein,[60] and Kermit Roosevelt[61] have also expressed disappointment with Roe.

    Jeffrey Rosen[62] and Michael Kinsley[63] echo Ginsburg, arguing that a legislative approach movement would have been the correct way to build a more durable consensus in support of abortion rights. William Saletan wrote that "Blackmun’s [Supreme Court] papers vindicate every indictment of Roe: invention, overreach, arbitrariness, textual indifference."[64] Benjamin Wittes has written that Roe "disenfranchised millions of conservatives on an issue about which they care deeply".[65] And Edward Lazarus, a former Blackmun clerk who "loved Roe’s author like a grandfather" wrote: "As a matter of constitutional interpretation and judicial method, Roe borders on the indefensible....Justice Blackmun’s opinion provides essentially no reasoning in support of its holding. And in the almost 30 years since Roe’s announcement, no one has produced a convincing defense of Roe on its own terms."[66]

    The assertion that the Supreme Court was making a legislative decision is often repeated by opponents of the Court's decision.[67] The "viability" criterion, which Blackmun acknowledged was arbitrary, is still in effect, although the point of viability has changed as medical science has found ways to help premature babies survive.[68]

    Public opinion

    A Gallup poll conducted in May 2009 indicates that a minority of Americans, 37%, believe that abortion should be legal in any or most circumstances, compared to 41% in May 2008.[69] Similarly, an April 2009 Pew Research Center poll showed a softening of support for legal abortion compared to the previous years of polling. People who said they support abortion in all or most cases dropped from 54% in 2008 to 46% in 2009.[70]

    In contrast, an October 2007 Harris poll on Roe v. Wade asked the following question:

    In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that states laws which made it illegal for a woman to have an abortion up to three months of pregnancy were unconstitutional, and that the decision on whether a woman should have an abortion up to three months of pregnancy should be left to the woman and her doctor to decide. In general, do you favor or oppose this part of the U.S. Supreme Court decision making abortions up to three months of pregnancy legal?[71]

    In reply, 56 percent of respondents indicated favour while 40 percent indicated opposition. The Harris organization concluded from this poll that "56 percent now favours the U.S. Supreme Court decision." Pro-life activists have disputed whether the Harris poll question is a valid measure of public opinion about Roe's overall decision, because the question focuses only on the first three months of pregnancy.[72][73] The Harris poll has tracked public opinion about Roe since 1973:[71][74]

    Regarding the Roe decision as a whole, more Americans support it than support overturning it.[75] When pollsters describe various regulations that Roe prevents legislatures from enacting, support for Roe drops.[75][76]

    Role in subsequent decisions and politics

    Opposition to Roe on the bench grew when President Reagan—who supported legislative restrictions on abortion—began making federal judicial appointments in 1981. Reagan denied that there was any litmus test: "I have never given a litmus test to anyone that I have appointed to the bench…. I feel very strongly about those social issues, but I also place my confidence in the fact that the one thing that I do seek are judges that will interpret the law and not write the law. We've had too many examples in recent years of courts and judges legislating."[77]

    In addition to White and Rehnquist, Reagan appointee Sandra Day O'Connor began dissenting from the Court's abortion cases, arguing in 1983 that the trimester-based analysis devised by the Roe Court was "unworkable."[78] Shortly before his retirement from the bench, Chief Justice Warren Burger suggested in 1986 that Roe be "reexamined";[79] the associate justice who filled Burger's place on the Court—Justice Antonin Scalia—vigorously opposed Roe. Concern about overturning Roe played a major role in the defeat of Robert Bork's nomination to the Court in 1987; the man eventually appointed to replace Roe-supporter Lewis Powell was Anthony M. Kennedy.

    The Supreme Court of Canada used the rulings in both Roe and Doe v. Bolton as grounds to find Canada's federal law restricting access to abortions unconstitutional. That Canadian case, R. v. Morgentaler, was decided in 1988.[80]

    Webster v. Reproductive Health Services

    In a 5–4 decision in 1989's Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, Chief Justice Rehnquist, writing for the Court, declined to explicitly overrule Roe, because "none of the challenged provisions of the Missouri Act properly before us conflict with the Constitution."[81] In this case, the Court upheld several abortion restrictions, and modified the Roe trimester framework.[81]

    In concurring opinions, O'Connor refused to reconsider Roe, and Justice Antonin Scalia criticized the Court and O'Connor for not overruling Roe.[81] Blackmun – author of the Roe opinion – stated in his dissent that White, Kennedy and Rehnquist were "callous" and "deceptive," that they deserved to be charged with "cowardice and illegitimacy," and that their plurality opinion "foments disregard for the law."[81] White had recently opined that the majority reasoning in Roe v. Wade was "warped."[79]

    Planned Parenthood v. Casey

    During initial deliberations for Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), an initial majority of five Justices (Rehnquist, White, Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas) were willing to effectively overturn Roe. Kennedy changed his mind after the initial conference,[82] and O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter joined Blackmun and Stevens to reaffirm the central holding of Roe,[83] saying, "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life."[84] Only Justice Blackmun would have retained Roe entirely and struck down all aspects of the statute at issue in Casey.

    Scalia's dissent acknowledged that abortion rights are of "great importance to many women", but asserted that it is not a liberty protected by the Constitution, because the Constitution does not mention it, and because longstanding traditions have permitted it to be legally proscribed. Scalia concluded: "[B]y foreclosing all democratic outlet for the deep passions this issue arouses, by banishing the issue from the political forum that gives all participants, even the losers, the satisfaction of a fair hearing and an honest fight, by continuing the imposition of a rigid national rule instead of allowing for regional differences, the Court merely prolongs and intensifies the anguish."[84]

    Stenberg v. Carhart

    During the 1990s, Nebraska attempted to ban a certain second-trimester abortion procedure known as intact dilation and extraction (sometimes called partial birth abortion). The Nebraska ban allowed other second-trimester abortion procedures called dilation and evacuation abortions. Ginsburg (who replaced White) stated, "this law does not save any fetus from destruction, for it targets only 'a method of performing abortion'."[85] The Supreme Court struck down the Nebraska ban by a 5–4 vote in Stenberg v. Carhart (2000), citing a right to use the safest method of second trimester abortion.

    Kennedy, who had co-authored the 5-4 Casey decision upholding Roe, was among the dissenters in Stenberg, writing that Nebraska had done nothing unconstitutional.[85] Kennedy described the second trimester abortion procedure that Nebraska was not seeking to prohibit: "The fetus, in many cases, dies just as a human adult or child would: It bleeds to death as it is torn from limb from limb. The fetus can be alive at the beginning of the dismemberment process and can survive for a time while its limbs are being torn off." Kennedy wrote that since this dilation and evacuation procedure remained available in Nebraska, the state was free to ban the other procedure sometimes called "partial birth abortion."[85]

    The remaining three dissenters in Stenberg – Thomas, Scalia, and Rehnquist – disagreed again with Roe: "Although a State may permit abortion, nothing in the Constitution dictates that a State must do so."

    Gonzales v. Carhart

    In 2003, Congress passed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, which led to a lawsuit in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart. The Court had previously ruled in Stenberg v. Carhart that a state's ban on "partial birth abortion" was unconstitutional because such a ban would not allow for the health of the woman. The membership of the Court changed after Stenberg, with John Roberts and Samuel Alito replacing Rehnquist and O'Connor, respectively. Further, the ban at issue in Gonzales v. Carhart was a clear federal statute, rather than a relatively vague state statute as in the Stenberg case.

    On April 18, 2007, the Supreme Court handed down a 5 to 4 decision upholding the constitutionality of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. Kennedy wrote the majority opinion, asserting that Congress was within its power to generally ban the procedure, although the Court left the door open for as-applied challenges. Kennedy's opinion did not reach the question whether the Court's prior decisions in Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and Stenberg v. Carhart were valid, and instead the Court said that the challenged statute is consistent with those prior decisions whether or not those prior decisions were valid.

    Joining the majority were Chief Justice John Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito. Ginsburg and the other three justices dissented, contending that the ruling ignored Supreme Court abortion precedent, and also offering an equality-based justification for that abortion precedent. Thomas filed a concurring opinion, joined by Scalia, contending that the Court's prior decisions in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey should be reversed, and also noting that the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act may exceed the powers of Congress under the Commerce Clause.

    Activities of Norma McCorvey

    Norma McCorvey became a member of the pro-life movement in 1995; she now supports making abortion illegal. In 1998, she testified to Congress:

    It was my pseudonym, Jane Roe, which had been used to create the "right" to abortion out of legal thin air. But Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee never told me that what I was signing would allow women to come up to me 15, 20 years later and say, "Thank you for allowing me to have my five or six abortions. Without you, it wouldn't have been possible." Sarah never mentioned women using abortions as a form of birth control. We talked about truly desperate and needy women, not women already wearing maternity clothes.[10]

    As a party to the original litigation, she sought to reopen the case in U.S. District Court in Texas to have Roe v. Wade overturned. However, the Fifth Circuit decided that her case was moot, in McCorvey v. Hill.[86] In a concurring opinion, Judge Edith Jones agreed that McCorvey was raising legitimate questions about emotional and other harm suffered by women who have had abortions, about increased resources available for the care of unwanted children, and about new scientific understanding of fetal development, but Jones said she was compelled to agree that the case was moot. On February 22, 2005, the Supreme Court refused to grant a writ of certiorari, and McCorvey's appeal ended.

    Presidential positions

    President Richard Nixon did not publicly comment about the decision.[87] In private conversation later revealed as part of the Nixon tapes, Nixon said "There are times when an abortion is necessary, I know that. When you have a black and a white" (a reference to interracial pregnancies) "or a rape."[88][89] However, Nixon was also concerned that greater access to abortions would foster "permissiveness," and said that "it breaks the family."[88]

    Generally, presidential opinion has been split between major party lines. The Roe decision was opposed by Presidents Gerald Ford,[90] Ronald Reagan,[91] and George W. Bush.[92] President George H.W. Bush also opposed Roe, though he had supported abortion rights earlier in his career.[93][94]

    President Jimmy Carter supported legal abortion from an early point in his political career, in order to prevent birth defects and in other extreme cases; he encouraged the outcome in Roe and generally supported abortion rights.[95] Roe was also supported by President Bill Clinton.[96] President Barack Obama has taken the position that "Abortions should be legally available in accordance with Roe v. Wade."[97]

    State laws regarding Roe

    Since 2010 there has been an increase in state restrictions on abortion.
    Several states have enacted so-called trigger laws which would take effect in the event that Roe v. Wade is overturned. Those states include Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Dakota and South Dakota.[98] Additionally, many states did not repeal pre-1973 statutes that criminalized abortion, and some of those statutes could again be in force if Roe were reversed.[99]

    Other states have passed laws to maintain the legality of abortion if Roe v. Wade is overturned. Those states include California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Nevada and Washington.[98]

    The Mississippi Legislature has attempted to make abortion infeasible without having to overturn Roe v. Wade. However the law is currently being challenged in Federal courts and has been temporarily blocked.[100]

    See also

    Birth control movement in the United States
    Doe v. Bolton
    List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 410
    A, B and C v Ireland [2010], the leading decision on abortion in the European Court of Human Rights


    1.^ "Roe v. Wade and Beyond", Frontline, PBS (2006-01-19): "while reaffirming the central holding of Roe v. Wade, the court rejected 'Roe's rigid trimester framework'...."
    2.^ Wood, Mary and Hawkins, Lisa. "State Regulation of Late Abortion and the Physician's Duty of Care to the Viable Fetus", 45 Mo. L. Rev. 394 (1980).
    3.^ Mears, William; Franken, Bob (2003-01-22). "30 years after ruling, ambiguity, anxiety surround abortion debate". CNN. "In all, the Roe and Doe rulings impacted laws in 46 states."
    4.^ Greenhouse 2005, p. 72
    5.^ Cole, George; Frankowski, Stanislaw. Abortion and protection of the human fetus : legal problems in a cross-cultural perspective, page 20 (1987): "By 1900 every state in the Union had an anti-abortion prohibition." Via Google Books. Retrieved (2008-04-08).
    6.^ Wilson, James, "Of the Natural Rights of Individuals" (1790–1792): "In the contemplation of law, life begins when the infant is first able to stir in the womb." Also see Blackstone, William. Commentaries (1765): "Life ... begins in contemplation of law as soon as an infant is able to stir in the mother's womb."
    7.^ Greenhouse 2005, p. 92
    8.^ McCorvey, Norma and Meisler, Andy. I Am Roe: My Life, Roe V. Wade, and Freedom of Choice (Harper Collins 1994).
    9.^ Richard Ostling. "A second religious conversion for 'Jane Roe' of Roe vs. Wade", Associated Press (1998-10-19): "She confessed that her tale of rape a decade before had been a lie; she was simply an unwed mother who later gave the child up for adoption.".
    10.^ a b McCorvey, Norma. Testimony to the Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution, Federalism and Property Rights (1998-01-21), also quoted in the parliament of Western Australia (PDF) (1998-05-20): "The affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court didn’t happen the way I said it did, pure and simple." Retrieved 2007-01-27
    11.^ a b Roe v. Wade, 314 F. Supp. 1217 (1970): "On the merits, plaintiffs argue as their principal contention that the Texas Abortion Laws must be declared unconstitutional because they deprive single women and married couple of their rights secured by the Ninth Amendment to choose whether to have children. We agree." Retrieved 2008-09-04.
    12.^ O'Connor, Karen. Testimony before U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, "The Consequences of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton", via (2005-06-23). Retrieved 2007-01-30
    13.^ Greenhouse 2005, pp. 78–79
    14.^ Greenhouse 2005, pp. 77–79
    15.^ Greenhouse 2005, p. 80
    16.^ Greenhouse 2005, p. 81
    17.^ Schwartz 1988, p. 103
    18.^ Greenhouse 2005, pp. 81–88
    19.^ Garrow 1994, p. 556
    20.^ Greenhouse 2005, p. 89
    21.^ Greenhouse 2005, pp. 93–95
    22.^ Although abortion is still considered a fundamental right under current jurisprudence, subsequent cases, notably Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Stenberg v. Carhart, and Gonzales v. Carhart have affected the legal standard.
    23.^ Chase, H. et al. Supplement to Edward S. Corwin's The constitution and what it means today: Supreme Court decisions of 1973, 1974, and 1975, page 36 (Princeton University Press 1975): "The abortion cases afforded the Supreme Court another opportunity to caress the Ninth Amendment without embracing it."
    24.^ Devins, Neal and Watson, Wendy. Judicial Nominations, page 225 (1995).
    25.^ Greenhouse 2005, pp. 98–99
    26.^ Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, Section IX (S. Ct. 1973).
    27.^ Greenhouse 2005, pp. 96–97
    28.^ Woodward, Bob. "The Abortion Papers", Washington Post (1989-01-22). Retrieved 2007-02-03.
    29.^ a b Greenhouse 2005, p. 97
    30.^ Kmiec, Douglas. "Testimony Before Subcommittee on the Constitution, Judiciary Committee, U.S. House of Representatives" (1996-04-22), via the "Abortion Law Homepage". Retrieved 2007-01-23.
    31.^ Abernathy, M. et al., Civil Liberties Under the Constitution (U. South Carolina 1993), page 4. Retrieved 2007-02-04.
    32.^ Chemerinsky, Erwin (2003). Federal Jurisdiction. Introduction to Law (4th ed.). Aspen Publishers. p. 132. ISBN 978-0-7355-2718-8.
    33.^ Southern Pacific v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 219 U.S. 498 (1911). Retrieved 2007-01-26
    34.^ Roe v. Wade 410 U.S. 113, 125 (1973); see also Schwartz 1988, pp. 108–109
    35.^ a b Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973). Retrieved 2007-01-26.
    36.^ Potts, Malcolm et al. Abortion, page 347 (1977).
    37.^ Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1972). Retrieved 2007-01-26
    38.^ Currie, David (1994). The Constitution in the Supreme Court: The Second Century, 1888–1986 2. University of Chicago Press. p. 470.
    39.^ "Rehnquist's legacy", The Economist (2005-06-30).
    40.^ a b Koppelman, Andrew. "Forced Labor: A Thirteenth Amendment Defense of Abortion", Northwestern Law Review, Volume 84, page 480 (1990).
    41.^ a b What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said; The Nation’s Top Legal Experts Rewrite America’s Most Controversial decision, Jack Balkin Ed. (NYU Press 2005). Retrieved 2007-01-26
    42.^ Shimron, Yonat. "Democratic Gains Spur Abortion Foes into Action," The News & Observer (2009-01-18): "The annual March for Life procession is already among Washington's largest rallies, drawing an estimated 200,000 people."
    43.^ Harper, Jennifer. "Pro-life marchers lose attention," Washington Times (2009-01-22): "the event has consistently drawn about 250,000 participants since 2003."
    44.^ Johnston, Laura. "Cleveland's first March for Life anti-abortion event draws 200," The Plain Dealer (2009-01-18): "the Washington March for Life…draws 200,000 annually on the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision."
    45.^ Reagan, Ronald. Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation, (Nelson 1984): "If you don't know whether a body is alive or dead, you would never bury it. I think this consideration itself should be enough for all of us to insist on protecting the unborn." Retrieved 2007-01-26
    46.^ Guttmacher Institute, "State Policies in Brief, An Overview of Abortion Laws (PDF)", published 2007-01-01. Retrieved 2007-01-26.
    47.^ Harris v. McRae, 448 U.S. 297 (1980). Retrieved 2007-01-26.
    48.^ McCorvey, Norma, with Andy Meisler. 1994. I Am Roe: My Life, Roe v. Wade, and Freedom of Choice. New York: Harper-Collins.
    49.^ Greenhouse 2005, pp. 183–206; 250
    50.^ Thomson, Judith. "A Defense of Abortion", in Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 1, no. 1 (1971), pp. 47–66.
    51.^ Balkin, Jack. Bush v. "Gore and the Boundary Between Law and Politics", 110 Yale Law Journal 1407 (2001): "Liberal and feminist legal scholars have spent decades showing that the result was correct even if Justice Blackmun’s opinion seems to have been taken from the Court’s Cubist period."
    52.^ Cohen, Richard. "Support Choice, Not Roe", Washington Post, (2005-10-19): "If the best we can say for it is that the end justifies the means, then we have not only lost the argument — but a bit of our soul as well." Retrieved 2007-01-23.
    53.^ Rosen, Jeffrey. "The Dissenter", The New York Times Magazine (2007-09-23). Rosen notes that Stevens is "the oldest and arguably most liberal justice."
    54.^ Ginsburg, Ruth. "Some Thoughts on Autonomy and Equality in Relation to Roe v. Wade", 63 North Carolina Law Review 375 (1985): "The political process was moving in the early 1970s, not swiftly enough for advocates of quick, complete change, but majoritarian institutions were listening and acting. Heavy-handed judicial intervention was difficult to justify and appears to have provoked, not resolved, conflict." Retrieved 2007-01-23.
    55.^ Cox, Archibald. The Role of the Supreme Court in American Government, 113–114 (Oxford U. Press 1976), via Google Books. Retrieved 2007-01-26. Stuart Taylor has argued that "Roe v. Wade was sort of conjured up out of very general phrases and was recorded, even by most liberal scholars like Archibald Cox at the time, John Harvey Link – just to name two Harvard scholars – as kind of made-up constitutional law." See Stuart Taylor Jr., Online News Hour, PBS 2000-07-13.
    56.^ Greenhouse 2005, pp. 135–136
    57.^ Ely, John Hart. "The Wages of Crying Wolf", 82 Yale Law Journal 920 (1973). Retrieved 2007-01-23. Professor Ely "supported the availability of abortion as a matter of policy." See Liptak, Adam. "John Hart Ely, a Constitutional Scholar, Is Dead at 64", New York Times (2003-10-27). Ely is generally regarded as having been a "liberal constitutional scholar." Perry, Michael (1999). We the People: The Fourteenth Amendment and the Supreme Court at Google Books Archived June 25, 2007 at the Wayback Machine
    58.^ Tribe, Laurence (1973). "The Supreme Court, 1972 Term—Foreword: Toward a Model of Roles in the Due Process of Life and Law". Harvard Law Review 87: 1 [p. 7]. doi:10.2307/1339866. Quoted in Morgan, Richard Gregory (1979). "Roe v. Wade and the Lesson of the Pre-Roe Case Law". Michigan Law Review (The Michigan Law Review Association) 77 (7): 1724–1748. doi:10.2307/1288040. JSTOR 1288040.
    59.^ Dershowitz, Alan. Supreme Injustice: How the High Court Hijacked Election 2000 (Oxford U. Press 2001): "Judges have no special competence, qualifications, or mandate to decide between equally compelling moral claims (as in the abortion controversy)...." quoted by Green, "Bushed and Gored: A Brief Review of Initial Literature", in The Final Arbiter: The Consequences of Bush V. Gore for Law And Politics, ed. Banks C, Cohen D & Green J., editors, page 14 (SUNY Press 2005), via Google Books. Retrieved 2007-01-26.
    60.^ Sunstein, Cass. Quoted by McGuire, New York Sun (2005-11-15): "What I think is that it just doesn't have the stable status of Brown or Miranda because it's been under internal and external assault pretty much from the beginning....As a constitutional matter, I think Roe was way overreached." Retrieved 2007-01-23. Sunstein is a "liberal constitutional scholar." See Herman, Eric. "Former U of C law prof on everyone's short court list", Chicago Sun-Times (2005-07-11). Archived December 23, 2007 at the Wayback Machine
    61.^ Roosevelt, Kermit. "Shaky Basis for a Constitutional ‘Right’", Washington Post, (2003-01-22): "[I]t is time to admit in public that, as an example of the practice of constitutional opinion writing, Roe is a serious disappointment. You will be hard-pressed to find a constitutional law professor, even among those who support the idea of constitutional protection for the right to choose, who will embrace the opinion itself rather than the result….This is not surprising. As constitutional argument, Roe is barely coherent. The court pulled its fundamental right to choose more or less from the constitutional ether. It supported that right via a lengthy, but purposeless, cross-cultural historical review of abortion restrictions and a tidy but irrelevant refutation of the straw-man argument that a fetus is a constitutional ‘person’ entitled to the protection of the 14th Amendment....By declaring an inviolable fundamental right to abortion, Roe short-circuited the democratic deliberation that is the most reliable method of deciding questions of competing values." Retrieved 2007-01-23. Archived March 19, 2007 at the Wayback Machine
    62.^ Rosen, Jeffrey. "Why We’d Be Better off Without Roe: Worst Choice", The New Republic via (2003-02-24): "In short, 30 years later, it seems increasingly cle