collective podiums

Like A Boss – Donald Trump Delivered Stunningly Impressive “America First” Remarks in Mexico…

Posted on August 31, 2016 by sundance

A fearless American went to Mexico and unapologetically nailed his position on the relationship between the U.S. and Mexico.

How good were the remarks? 

Well, lets just say… we can fully anticipate the liberal U.S. media to go into combat mode; because candidate Donald J Trump articulated a full-throated, unapologetic and yet resoundingly ‘diplomatic’ America-First message to Mexican President Peña Neito….
….and that’s what he did publicly.



When Donald Trump and President Neito came to their collective podiums Trump was in hostile territory.  Neito speaking Spanish without a formal translator provided, and without presenting his remarks in advance to candidate Donald Trump, was obviously speaking to his domestic audience more than an American one.

Yet somehow, after Neito’s lengthy and highly politically nuanced comments – Trump was able to simply fillet the parseltongue using fewer, stronger, and far more deliberate words.
It really was stunning to witness.

For the first time in decades a foreign diplomat was standing on a stage with an American politician whose essential DNA is unapologetic ally American.   Trump does not pretend himself to be, nor is he, a life time career politician.  In essence he is the globalists worst nightmare.



A remarkable contrast not just optics, but in the recognition of a new strong and bold beginning for a very probable Trump presidency.

The remarks by Donald Trump were so succinctly on-point the U.S. media are left with no other option than to attack ridiculous details viciously.  Apparently the U.S. media were anticipating that Mexico would cut a check for the border wall today…. or something similarly silly.

Quite frankly, most of the the MSM have never known a patriotic president.  Candidate Trump’s mere existence cuts against the very fabric of their educational teaching.

However, all you need to see to recognize who held the stronger authority in this meeting is the immediate ‘triggered‘ reaction from Univision’s Jorge Ramos:

expensive real estate

https://youtu.be/RZIHzuCfzSI
Sputnik reports In the United States, the wealthy have taken steps to obscure their opulent villas and extravagant estates from Google Maps, reports the real estate magazine Luxury Listings. Many owners of expensive real estate have set up special devices that detect signals from GPS systems and immediately block them.  HUH??


WOW there is no real racism in the USA - it is Rich-ism Protection Plan to save the wealthy!
Gee does it look like all the gun stuff, race stuff, health stuff, political strangling stuff, -
it is a move on the destruction of the American society in order to protect the wealthy classes??

It has been going on for a while..

It has been relevant all through out history by the Royalty to control the masses and keep their privileges...

Duckweed?

Hi Kermit, 

Where Can I Buy Some Seeds to Grow a Navel Orange Tree?
This is a question that has probably been asked a million times.  Joe Urbach hears it all the time.  And for this particular question, there’s only one right answer.  I’ll give you a hint… if someone tries to sell you some seeds to grow a navel orange tree, you should hold on to your money! 

“Just the other day I was asked that question.  I’ve often been asked that question – after all, the navel orange is the most popular orange in the United States so it is not odd that people want to grow their own.  But I always have to answer the same way, ‘Sorry, but you can’t get seeds to grow a navel orange tree.  It cannot be grown from seed!’”  Read Joe’s article at this link:
http://thegrownetwork.com/can-buy-seeds-grow-navel-orange-tree/

Free Soup for Fall and Winter
Here’s an article that was sent in to our writing contest last year.  It was one of my favorite entries, so I was happy when the author won all the prizes for second place!  This article is about making good use of your harvest, and not letting anything go to waste. 

“Free soup can be the everyday cook’s way of having free meals a few times a month.  And, if you have a houseful of eaters that show up hungry 3 times a day, free is good.  Free is really, really good.”  You can read the whole article here:
http://thegrownetwork.com/free-soup-for-fall-and-winter/

Do Ducks Like Duckweed?
In last week’s episode of Homesteading Basics, we took a long look at duckweed – the popular permaculture plant that can serve many different functions on the homestead.  Even after doing some experiments to find the best growing conditions for duckweed, Marjory still had one burning question that hadn’t been answered yet…  Do ducks actually like duckweed? 

This week, we’ve got the answer to that question.  In the new Homesteading Basics video, Marjory puts duckweed to the test by unleashing her flock on a small pond that is covered in duckweed.  I won’t spoil it for you – but if you watch the video you’ll definitely know whether or not ducks like duckweed.  You can watch Marjory’s newest video here:
http://thegrownetwork.com/homesteading-basics-ducks-like-duckweed/
I'll be back in touch on Friday.
Michael
Editor
The Grow Network

Race is not ????

When someone claims "inherent racism" against a certain group of people with a particular shade of melanin... they are the only racists in the game.

End racism against everyone which includes non-blacks!

 By that we mean, stop saying that only blacks can be discriminated against, or that someone is inherently racist because they were not born black.

more valuable than gold

Mark 14:3 "And being in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at meat, there came a woman having an alabaster box of ointment of spikenard very precious; and she brake the box, and poured it on his head."

MARK 14:3-6
³ While he was in Bethany, reclining at the table in the home of Simon the Leper, a woman came with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, made of pure ointment of spikenard.
 She broke the jar open and poured the perfume on his head.
⁴ Some of those present were saying indignantly to one another, “Why this waste of perfume? ⁵ It could have been sold for more than a year’s wages^[a] and the money given to the poor.” And they rebuked her harshly.
⁶ “Leave her alone,” said Jesus. “Why are you bothering her? She has done a beautiful thing to me.

Footnotes:   Mark 14:5 Greek than three hundred denarii

The spikenard was a fragrant plant, and its roots were used in Jesus' day to make an aromatic, costly perfume and ointment. The plant, itself, grows in the Himalaya mountains at an elevation of 11,000 to 17,000 feet. For centuries, it was used by Hindus as a medicine and perfume and was an actively traded commodity. Its great cost stemmed from that it had to be transported over 6,000 miles to reach Palestine, and depending on quality, it sold for as much as 400 denarii per pound (or $750 an ounce, is the modern purchasing equivalent).

 That made it more valuable than gold. This ointment was worth at least two and one-half times more than the thirty pieces of silver that Judas received for betraying the Lord, which is why Judas was so upset. This perfume was worth two and one-half times what Judas thought Jesus was worth.

Judas didn't care about the poor. He wanted to have the money that the perfume could have been sold for in his bag (he was the treasurer for Jesus) so he could steal it. This is a very serious crime that Jesus no doubt knew about, but scripture never mentions Him confronting Judas.

Judas' reaction to this act of pure worship is typical of the reaction toward worship of many people today. Judas and some of the other disciples, thought this was a waste.
That was only because they didn't value Jesus as highly as Mary did. Mary had seen Jesus raise her brother from the dead and her heart was overflowing with love and worship. The disciples were looking on the outward things while Jesus was looking at Mary's heart (1 Sam. 16:7).

 Those who cannot see beyond the physical realm will be offended at others' displays of worship. True worship comes from the heart.

Natural Health Newsletter - #2

Dr. Ben Kim's Natural Health Newsletter
August 30, 2016

Dear Reader,

I'll always be thankful to the retired naturopathic
physician who told me about the Epley maneuver, a protocol
that one can use to successfully treat a type of vertigo
called benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV).  I forget
his name, but in coming in to the teaching clinic where I was
an intern at 23 years of age, after receiving chiropractic
treatment, he shared a few protocols that he had used over the
years, the Epley maneuver being the one that he was clearly
most excited to demonstrate.

If you know anyone who struggles with intermittent dizziness
that doesn't have an obvious cause (typically related to the
cardiovascular system - hypotension, congestive issues), it
may be worth suggesting that they ask their physician to
consider the possibility of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo.

You can learn more about BPPV and the Epley maneuver that one
can use to address this type of dizziness here:

https://drbenkim.com/epley-maneuver-dizziness-bppv.htm

In some cases, the Epley maneuver can provide an immediate
cure for vertigo.  I have experienced 3 such cases over the
years and remember each one vividly - the first was a mechanic
in his late 40s in Barrow, Alaska, the second was a nurse
in her early 60s in Nobleton, Ontario, and the third was
an attorney in her 50s from Dallas who came to stay at our
fasting clinic for a few weeks back in 2005.  When a one-minute
procedure fixes a chronic health issue for someone, it feels
like magic, and such moments are forever seared into one's
memory.  :)

***

The other night, I was on the floor stretching and doing some
mobility work while our boys were watching a Tim Allen movie
when a song from the film's soundtrack enveloped my tired
mind and brought back some lovely memories from my stay in
the Bay area back in the early 2000s.

I've long found music to be immensely therapeutic, so I share
the song here with hope that it provides a pleasant stroll
into the memory bank for even one person within our readership:

Superman (It's Not Easy), by Five for Fighting:

https://youtu.be/GRz4FY0ZcwI

***

Being the last full week of summer vacation for our boys, I'm
planning on taking some time off of work over the next few days,
so this may be the only time you hear from me until after
Labour Day.  I still plan on enjoying the back and forth sharing
and learning at Instagram and Facebook, so if you aren't already
connected with me, please feel free to via the following pages:

@Instagram:  https://www.instagram.com/dr.ben.kim/

@Facebook:  https://facebook.com/drbenkim

Wishing you and your loved ones all good things,

Ben Kim

Thought of the Moment:

Stay close to anything that makes you glad to be alive.

- Hafez


***

P.S.  If you're making use of our Vision Support formula, designed
to prevent progression of age-related macular degeneration and
cataracts, please note that we are offering a complimentary bottle
for qualifying orders for the next few days - details can be found
in the header area here:

https://drbenkim.com/sunshop/index.php?l=product_detail&p=106





http://drbenkim.com
3035 Appleby Line, #25003, Burlington, ON  L7M 0V8

What pleases God? (Heb. 11:6)

Luke 19:26 "For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him."

What was it that this wicked servant didn't have that caused his master to take back the money he had given him?

It wasn't the tangible money that he had been given. He had kept that laid up in a napkin and he still possessed it. What he was missing and what the other servant had that caused the lord to give this pound to him was faithfulness. Those who are faithful with what God has given them will be given more, and those who are wasteful will have what God has given them taken away and given to another.

Christians will one day stand before the Lord for the purpose of receiving rewards, and all our actions will be revealed, whether they were our own doings or directed by the Spirit of God. Those who were not governed by the Holy Spirit in their actions will see all their good works burned up in that day when we stand before the Lord and He tries our works.
Those who acted only under the guidance of the Holy Spirit will find that their works will endure the test and they will receive a reward.

Many people choose to do good things thinking that God will be pleased.
But our positive response to God's direction (faith) is what pleases God (Heb. 11:6).

Hebrews 11:6 (NKJV)

⁶ But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.

   --------------------------------------------------------------------

 We were created with a purpose and every individual has a God-given plan for his life.
 We need to let God work in and through us and faithfully fulfill what He has called us to do.

  ***  Have you taken time to find your God-given plan and purpose yet? 

     AWMI.org

*No Lawyers Allowed In Public Office*

*No Lawyers Allowed In Public Office*

*** the 13th Amendment was published in Laws of the United States, 1st Vol., prematurely, by accident, in anticipation of Virginia’s ratification, or as part of a plot to discredit the Amendment by making it appear that only twelve States had ratified. Whether the Laws of the United States Vol. 1 (carrying the 13th Amendment) was re-called or made-up is unknown. ***

Date:   7/21/2016  17:27:56



Jul  21
The Missing 13th Amendment: *No Lawyers Allowed In Public Office*




The Missing 13th Amendment: *No Lawyers Allowed In Public Office*

Covert Plot That Altered The U.S. Constitution Exposed, Conspiracy To Subvert The American Republic Uncovered

TMR Editor’s Note:
The following investigative research project is of paramount importance. It is perhaps the most consequential ever undertaken regarding the foundational documents of the United States of America.

Truly, it doesn’t get any more serious than the stunning revelations which have emerged from this clandestine plot to wrongfully alter the U.S. Constitution and subvert the American Republic.

Should this British conspiracy to subjugate the USA, which was directly responsible for the excising of the original 13th Amendment ever become common knowledge, virtually the entire U.S. Congress would be deemed illegitimate. In view of the current state of Congressional affairs, it’s no wonder that lawyers and attorneys could not be trusted to responsibly handle the people’s business.

Their loyalties have always lied elsewhere.
It’s now a well-known fact of life that the legal class of the USA has degenerated into the most untrustworthy and treasonous, deceitful and dishonest. This certain eventuality was deeply feared by the Founding Fathers of the American Republic. It was for this very reason that the original 13th Amendment was carefully deliberated and legally ratified. However, it was then unlawfully removed from the U.S. Constitution “during the tumult of the Civil War” (after being completely ignored for decades). As follows:
Screen Shot 2015-10-24 at 9.34.08 PM(Source: http://www.w3f.com/patriots/13/13th-01.html)

*CAVEAT: It is because lawyers and attorneys formally registered with the BAR (British Accredited Registry) that they could not be trusted to hold public office in the USA. By implicitly pledging their allegiance to an entity of a foreign government, they could not be trusted to act in the best interest of the American Republic or its citizens.
The Millennium Report

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Missing 13th Amendment:
*No Lawyers Allowed In Public Office*
13th Amendment — Missing

Written by David M. Dodge, Researcher
Date: 08/01/91

In the winter of 1983, archival research expert David Dodge, and former Baltimore police investigator Tom Dunn, were searching for evidence of government corruption in public records stored in the Belfast Library on the coast of Maine.

By chance, they discovered the library’s oldest authentic copy of the Constitution of the United States (printed in 1825). Both men were stunned to see this document included a 13th Amendment that no longer appears on current copies of the Constitution. Moreover, after studying the Amendment’s language and historical context, they realized the principle intent of this “missing” 13th Amendment was to prohibit lawyers from serving in government. So began a seven year, nationwide search for the truth surrounding the most bizarre Constitutional puzzle in American history — the unlawful removal of a ratified Amendment from the Constitution of the United States.

Since 1983, Dodge and Dunn have uncovered additional copies of the Constitution with the “missing” 13th Amendment printed in at least eighteen separate publications by ten different states and territories over four decades from 1822 to 1860. In June of this year (1991), Dodge uncovered the evidence that this missing 13th Amendment had indeed been lawfully ratified by the state of Virginia and was therefore an authentic Amendment to the American Constitution. If the evidence is correct and no logical errors have been made, a 13th Amendment restricting lawyers from serving in government was ratified in 1819 and removed from the U.S. Constitution during the tumult of the Civil War. Since the Amendment was never lawfully repealed, it is still the Law today. The implications are
enormous.

The story of this “missing” Amendment is complex and at times confusing because the political issues and vocabulary of the American Revolution were different from our own. However, there are essentially two issues: What does the Amendment mean? and, Was the Amendment ratified? Before we consider the issue of ratification, we should first understand the Amendment’s meaning and consequent current relevance.

MEANING of the 13th Amendment
The “missing” 13th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:
“If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them.”

At the first reading, the meaning of this 13th Amendment (also called the “title of nobility” Amendment) seems obscure; unimportant. The references to “nobility,” “honour,” “emperor,” “king,” and “prince,” lead us to dismiss this Amendment as a petty post-revolution act of spite directed against the British monarchy. The U.S. modern world of Lady Di and Prince Charles, make anti-royalist sentiments seem so archaic and quaint, that the Amendment can be ignored.

Not so. Consider some evidence of its historical significance: First, “titles of nobility” were prohibited in both Article VI of the Articles of Confederation (1777) and in Article I, Sections 9 and 10 of the Constitution of the United States (1787);

Second, although already prohibited by the Constitution, an additional “title of nobility” amendment was proposed in 1789, again in 1810, and according to Dodge, finally ratified in 1819. Clearly, the founding fathers saw such a serious threat in “titles of nobility” and “honors” that anyone receiving them would forfeit their citizenship. Since the government prohibited “titles of nobility” several times over four decades, and went through the amending process (even though “titles of nobility” were already prohibited by the Constitution), it’s obvious that the Amendment carried much more significance for our founding fathers than is readily apparent today.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

To understand the meaning of this “missing” 13th Amendment, we must understand its historical context — the era surrounding the American Revolution. We tend to regard the notion of “Democracy” as benign, harmless, and politically unremarkable. But at the time of the American Revolution, King George III and the other monarchies of Europe saw Democracy as an unnatural, ungodly ideological threat, every bit as dangerously radical as Communism was once regarded by modern Western nations. Just as the 1917 Communist Revolution in Russia spawned other revolutions around the world, the American Revolution provided an example and incentive for people all over the world to overthrow their European monarchies.

Even though the Treaty of Paris ended the Revolutionary War in 1783, the simple fact of our existence threatened the monarchies. The United States stood as a heroic role model for other nations, that inspired them to also struggle against oppressive monarchies.

The French Revolution (1789-1799) and the Polish national uprising (1794) were in part encouraged by the American Revolution. Though we stood like a beacon of hope for most of the world, the monarchies regarded the United States as a political typhoid Mary, the principal source of radical democracy that was destroying monarchies around the world.

The monarchies must have realized that if the principal source of that infection could be destroyed, the rest of the world might avoid the contagion and the monarchies would be saved. Their survival at stake, the monarchies sought to destroy or subvert the American system of government. Knowing they couldn’t destroy us militarily, they resorted to more covert methods of political subversion, employing spies and secret agents skilled in bribery and legal deception — it was, perhaps, the first “cold war”.

Since governments run on money, politicians run for money, and money is the usual enticement to commit treason, much of the monarchy’s counter-revolutionary efforts emanated
from English banks.

DON’T BANK ON IT (Modern Banking System)

The essence of banking was once explained by Sir Josiah Stamp, a former president of the Bank of England:”The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in inequity and born in sin… Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them but leave them the power to create money, and, with a flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again…

Take this great power away from them, or if you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.”

The last great abuse of the U.S. banking system caused the depression of the 1930’s. Today’s abuses may cause another. Current S&L and bank scandals illustrate the ongoing relationships between banks, lawyers, politicians, and government agencies (look at the current BCCI bank scandal, involving lawyer Clark Clifford, politician Jimmy Carter, the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, and even the CIA).

These scandals are the direct result of years of law-breaking by an alliance of bankers and lawyers using their influence and money to corrupt the political process and rob the public. (Think you’re not being robbed? Guess who’s going to pay the bill for the excesses of the S&L’s, U.S.-taxpayer? You are.)

The systematic robbery of productive individuals by parasitic bankers and
lawyers is not a recent phenomenon. This abuse is a human tradition that predates the Bible and spread from Europe to America despite early colonial prohibitions.

When the first United States Bank was chartered by Congress in 1790, there were only three state banks in existence. At one time, banks were prohibited by law in most states because many of the early settlers were all too familiar with the practices of the European goldsmith banks. Goldsmith banks were safe-houses used to store client’s gold.

In exchange for the deposited gold, customers were issued notes (paper money) which were redeemable in gold. The goldsmith bankers quickly succumbed to the temptation to issue “extra” notes, (unbacked by gold). Why?

Because the “extra” notes enriched the bankers by allowing them to buy property with notes for gold that they did not own, gold that did not even exist. Colonists knew that bankers occasionally printed too much paper money, found themselves over-leveraged, and caused a “run on the bank”. If the bankers lacked sufficient gold to meet the demand, the paper money became worthless and common citizens left holding the paper were ruined. Although over-leveraged bankers were sometime hung, the bankers continued printing extra money to increase their fortunes at the expense of the productive members of society.

(The practice continues to this day, and offers “sweetheart” loans to bank insiders, and even provides the foundation for deficit spending and the U.S. Federal government’s unbridled growth.)

PAPER MONEY

If the colonists forgot the lessons of goldsmith bankers, the American Revolution refreshed their memories. To finance the war, Congress authorized the printing of continental bills of credit in an amount not to exceed $200,000,000. The States issued another $200,000,000 in paper notes. Ultimately, the value of the paper money fell so low that they were soon traded on speculation from 5000 to 1000 paper bills for one coin. It’s often suggested that the U.S. Constitution’s prohibition against a paper economy —
“No State shall… make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a tender in Payment of Debts” — was a tool of the wealthy to be worked to the disadvantage of all others.
But only in a “paper” economy can money reproduce itself and increase the claims of the wealthy at the expense of the productive.

“Paper money,” said Pelatiah Webster, “polluted the equity of our laws, turned them into engines of oppression, corrupted the justice of our public administration, destroyed the fortunes of thousands who had confidence in it, enervated the trade, husbandry, and manufactures of U.S. country, and went far to destroy the morality of U.S. people.”

CONSPIRACIES

A few examples of the attempts by the monarchies and banks that almost succeeded in destroying the United States:
According to the Tennessee Laws (1715-1820, vol. II, p. 774), in the 1794 Jay Treaty, the United States agreed to pay 600,000 pounds sterling to King George III, as reparations for the American revolution. The Senate ratified the treaty in secret session and ordered that it not be published.

When Benjamin Franklin’s grandson published it anyway, the exposure and resulting public uproar so angered the Congress that it passed the Alien and Sedition Acts (1798) so federal judges could prosecute editors and publishers for reporting the truth about the government. Since we had won the Revolutionary War, why would U.S. Senators agree to pay reparations to the loser?
And why would they agree to pay 600,000 pounds sterling, eleven years after the war ended?
It doesn’t make sense, especially in light of Senate’s secrecy and later fury over being exposed, unless we assume U.S. Senators had been bribed to serve the British monarchy and betray the American people. That’s subversion.

The United States Bank had been opposed by the Jeffersonians from the beginning, but the Federalists (the pro-monarchy party) won out in its establishment. The initial capitalization was $10,000,000 — 80% of which would be owned by foreign bankers. Since the bank was authorized to lend up to $20,000,000 (double its paid in capital), it was a profitable deal for both the government and the bankers since they could lend, and collect interest on, $10,000,000 that didn’t exist.

However, the European bankers outfoxed the government and by 1796, the government owed the bank $6,200,000 and was forced to sell its shares. (By 1802, the U.S. government owned no stock in the United States Bank.)
The sheer power of the banks and their ability to influence representative government by economic manipulation and outright bribery was exposed in 1811, when the people discovered that European banking interests owned 80% of the bank. Congress therefore refused to renew the bank’s charter.


This led to the withdrawal of $7,000,000 in specie by European investors, which in turn, precipitated an economic recession, and the War of 1812. That’s destruction.

There are undoubtedly other examples of the monarchy’s efforts to subvert or destroy the United States; some are common knowledge, others remain to be disclosed to the public.

*** For example, David Dodge discovered a book called “2 VA LAW” in the Library of Congress Law Library. According to Dodge, “This is an UN-catalogued book in the rare book section that reveals a plan to overthrow the constitutional government by secret agreements engineered by the lawyers. That is one of the reasons why this Amendment was ratified by Virginia and the notification was lost in the mail.
There is no public record that this book exists.” That may sound surprising, but according to The Gazette (5/10/91), “the Library of Congress has 349,402 un-catalogued rare books and 13.9 million un-catalogued rare manuscripts.”
There may be secrets buried in that mass of documents even more astonishing than a missing Constitutional Amendment.

TITLES OF NOBILITY
In seeking to rule the world and destroy the United States, bankers committed many crimes. Foremost among these crimes were fraud, conversion, and plain old theft.

To escape prosecution for their crimes, the bankers did the same thing any career criminal does. They hired and formed alliances with the best lawyers and judges money could buy. These alliances, originally forged in Europe (particularly in Great Britain), spread to the colonies, and later into the newly formed United States of America.

Despite their criminal foundation, these alliances generated wealth, and ultimately, respectability. Like any modern member of organized crime, English bankers and lawyers wanted to be admired as “legitimate businessmen”. As their criminal fortunes grew so did their usefulness, so the British monarchy legitimized these thieves by granting them “titles of nobility”.

Historically, the British peerage system referred to knights as “Squires” and to those who bore the knight’s shields as “Esquires”. As lances, shields, and physical violence gave way to the more civilized means of theft, the pen grew mightier (and more profitable) than the sword, and the clever wielders of those pens (bankers and lawyers) came to hold titles of nobility. The most common title was “Esquire” (used, even today, by some lawyers).

INTERNATIONAL BAR ASSOCIATION

In Colonial America, attorneys trained attorneys but most held no “title of nobility” or “honor”. There was no requirement that one be a lawyer to hold the position of district attorney, attorney general, or judge; a citizen’s “counsel of choice” was not restricted to a lawyer; there were no state or national bar associations. The only organization that certified lawyers was the International Bar Association (IBA), chartered by the King of England, headquartered in London, and closely associated with the international banking system. Lawyers admitted to the IBA received the rank “Esquire” — a “title of nobility”.

“Esquire” was the principle title of nobility which the 13th Amendment sought to prohibit from the United States.

Why?
Because the loyalty of “Esquire” lawyers was suspect. Bankers and lawyers with an “Esquire” behind their names were agents of the monarchy, members of an organization whose principal purposes were political, not economic, and regarded with the same wariness that some people today reserve for members of the KGB or the CIA.

Article 1, Sect. 9 of the Constitution sought to prohibit the International Bar Association (or any other agency that granted titles of nobility) from operating in America.
But the Constitution neglected to specify a penalty, so the prohibition was ignored, and agents of the monarchy continued to infiltrate and influence the government (as in the Jay Treaty and the US Bank charter incidents).

Therefore, a “title of nobility” amendment that specified a penalty (loss of citizenship) was proposed in 1789, and again in 1810. The meaning of the amendment is seen in its intent to prohibit persons having titles of nobility and loyalties to foreign governments and bankers from voting, holding public office, or using their skills to subvert the government.

HONOR

The missing Amendment is referred to as the “title of nobility” Amendment, but the second prohibition against “honour” (honor), may be more significant.

According to David Dodge, Tom Dunn, and Webster’s Dictionary, the archaic definition of “honor” (as used when the 13th Amendment was ratified) meant anyone “obtaining or having an advantage or privilege over another”. A contemporary example of an “honor” granted to only a few Americans is the privilege of being a judge: Lawyers can be judges and exercise the attendant privileges and powers; non-lawyers cannot.

By prohibiting “honors”, the missing Amendment prohibits any advantage or privilege that would grant some citizens an unequal opportunity to achieve or exercise political power. Therefore, the second meaning (intent) of the 13th Amendment was to ensure political equality among all American citizens, by prohibiting anyone, even government officials, from claiming or exercising a special privilege or power (an “honor”) over other citizens.

If this interpretation is correct, “honor” would be the key concept in the 13th Amendment. Why?
Because, while “titles of nobility” may no longer apply in today’s political system, the concept of “honor” remains relevant. For example, anyone who had a specific “immunity” from lawsuits which were not afforded to all citizens, would be enjoying a separate privilege, an “honor”, and would therefore forfeit his right to vote or hold public office.
Think of the “immunities” from lawsuits that U.S. judges, lawyers, politicians, and bureaucrats currently enjoy. As another example, think of all the “special interest” legislation the U.S. government passes: “special interests” are simply euphemisms for “special privileges” (honors).

WHAT IF? (Implications if Restored)

If the missing 13th Amendment were restored, “special interests” and “immunities” might be rendered unconstitutional. The prohibition against “honors” (privileges) would compel the entire government to operate under the same laws as the citizens of this nation. Without their current personal immunities (honors), US judges and I.R.S. agents would be unable to abuse common citizens without fear of legal liability. If this 13th Amendment were restored, the entire U.S. Government would have to conduct itself according to the same standards of decency, respect, law, and liability as the rest of the nation. If this Amendment and the term “honor” were applied today, U.S. Government’s ability to systematically coerce and abuse the public would be all but eliminated.

Imagine! A government without special privileges or immunities. How could we describe it? It would be … almost like … a government … of the people … by the people … for the people! Imagine: a government … whose members were truly accountable to the public; a government that could not systematically exploit its own people! It’s unheard of … it’s never been done before. Not ever in the entire history of the world.

Bear in mind that Senator George Mitchell of Maine and the U.S. National Archives concede this 13th Amendment was proposed by Congress in 1810. However, they explain that there were seventeen states when Congress proposed the “title of nobility” Amendment; that ratification required the thirteen states, but since only twelve states supported the Amendment, it was not ratified. The Government Printing Office agrees; it currently prints copies of the Constitution of the United States which include the
“title of nobility” Amendment as proposed, but un-ratified.

Even if this 13th Amendment were never ratified, even if Dodge and Dunn’s research or reasoning is flawed or incomplete, it would still be an extraordinary story.
Can you imagine, can you understand how close the US came to having a political paradise, right here on Earth?
Do you realize what an extraordinary gift our forebears tried to bequeath us?
And how close we came?
One vote. One state’s vote.

The federal government concedes that twelve states voted to ratify this Amendment between 1810 and 1812. But they argue that ratification require thirteen states, so the Amendment lays stillborn in history, unratified for lack of a just one more state’s support. One vote. David Dodge, however, says one more state did ratify, and he claims he has the evidence to prove it.

PARADISE LOST, RATIFICATION FOUND

In 1789, the House of Representatives compiled a list of possible Constitutional Amendments, some of which would ultimately become our Bill of Rights.
The House proposed seventeen; the Senate reduced the list to twelve. During this process that Senator Tristrain Dalton (Mass.) proposed an Amendment seeking to prohibit and provide a penalty for any American accepting a “title of Nobility” (RG 46 Records of the U.S. Senate). Although it wasn’t passed, this was the first time a “title of nobility” amendment was proposed.

Twenty years later, in January, 1810, Senator Reed proposed another “Title of Nobility” Amendment (History of Congress, Proceedings of the Senate, p. 529-530). On April 27, 1810, the Senate voted to pass this 13th Amendment by a vote of 26 to 1; the House resolved in the affirmative 87 to 3; and the following resolve was sent to the States for ratification:

“If any citizen of the United States shall Accept, claim, receive or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall, without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them.”
The Constitution requires three-quarters of the states to ratify a proposed amendment before it may be added to the Constitution.

When Congress proposed the “Title of Nobility” Amendment in 1810, there were states, thirteen of which would have to ratify for the Amendment to be adopted. According to the National Archives, the following is a list of the twelve states that ratified, and their dates of ratification:
Maryland, Dec. 25, 1810
Kentucky, Jan. 31, 1811
Ohio, Jan. 31, 1811
Delaware, Feb. 2, 1811
Pennsylvania, Feb. 6, 1811
New Jersey, Feb. 13, 1811
Vermont, Oct. 24, 1811
Tennessee, Nov. 21, 1811
Georgia, Dec. 13, 1811
North Carolina, Dec. 23, 1811
Massachusetts, Feb. 27, 1812
New Hampshire, Dec. 10, 1812

Before a thirteenth state could ratify, the War of 1812 broke out with England. By the time the war ended in 1814, the British had burned the Capitol, the Library of Congress, and most of the records of the first 38 years of government. Whether there was a connection between the proposed “title of nobility” amendment and the War of 1812 is not known.

However, the momentum to ratify the proposed Amendment was lost in the tumult of war.

Then, four years later, on December 31, 1817, the House of Representatives resolved that President Monroe inquire into the status of this Amendment.
In a letter dated February 6, 1818, President Monroe reported to the House that the Secretary of State Adams had written to the governors of Virginia, South Carolina and Connecticut to tell them that the proposed Amendment had been ratified by twelve States and rejected by two (New York and Rhode Island), and asked the governors to notify him of their legislature’s position. (House Document No. 76)

(This, and other letters written by the President and the Secretary of State during the month of February, 1818, note only that the proposed Amendment had not yet been ratified. However, these letters would later become crucial because, in the absence of additional information they would be interpreted to mean the amendment was never ratified).

On February 28, 1818, Secretary of State Adams reported the rejection of the Amendment by South Carolina. [House Doc. No. 129]. There are no further entries regarding the ratification of the 13th Amendment in the Journals of Congress; whether Virginia ratified is neither confirmed nor denied.
Likewise, a search through the executive papers of Governor Preston of Virginia does not reveal any correspondence from Secretary of State Adams. (However, there is a journal entry in the Virginia House that the Governor presented the House with an official letter and documents from Washington within a time frame that conceivably includes receipt of Adams’ letter.) Again, no evidence of ratification; none of denial.

However, on March 10, 1819, the Virginia legislature passed Act No. 280 (Virginia Archives of Richmond, “misc.’ file, p. 299 for micro-film): “Be it enacted by the General Assembly, that there shall be published an edition of the Laws of this Commonwealth in which shall be contained the following matters, that is to say: the Constitution of the united States and the amendments thereto…” This act was the specific legislated instructions on what was, by law, to be included in the re-publication (a special edition) of the Virginia Civil Code. The Virginia Legislature had already agreed that all Acts were to go into effect on the same day —
the day that the Act to re-publish the Civil Code was enacted. Therefore, the 13th Amendment’s official date of ratification would be the date of re-publication of the Virginia Civil Code: March 12, 1819.

The Delegates knew Virginia was the last of the 13 States that were necessary for the ratification of the 13th Amendment. They also knew there were powerful forces allied against this ratification so they took extraordinary measures to make sure that it was published in sufficient quantity (4,000 copies were ordered, almost triple their usual order), and instructed the printer to send a copy to President James Monroe as well as James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. (The printer, Thomas Ritchie, was bonded. He was required to be extremely accurate in his research and his printing, or he would forfeit his bond.)

In this fashion, Virginia announced the ratification: by publication and dissemination of the Thirteenth Amendment of the Constitution. There is question as to whether Virginia ever formally notified the Secretary of State that they had ratified this 13th Amendment. Some have argued that because such notification was not received (or at least, not recorded), the Amendment was therefore not legally ratified. However, printing by a legislature is prima facie evidence of ratification. Further, there is no Constitutional requirement that the Secretary of State, or anyone else, be officially notified to complete the ratification process. The Constitution only requires that three-fourths of the states ratify for an Amendment to be added to the Constitution. If three-quarters of the states ratify, the Amendment is passed. Period. The Constitution is otherwise silent on what procedure should be used to announce, confirm, or communicate the ratification of amendments.

Knowing they were the last state necessary to ratify the Amendment, the Virginians had every right announce their own and the nation’s ratification of the Amendment by publishing it on a special edition of the Constitution, and so they did.

Word of Virginia’s 1819 ratification spread throughout the States and both Rhode Island and Kentucky published the new Amendment in 1822. Ohio first published in 1824. Maine ordered 10,000 copies of the Constitution with the 13th Amendment to be printed for use in the schools in 1825, and again in 1831 for their Census Edition. Indiana Revised Laws of 1831 published the 13th Article on p. 20. Northwestern Territories published in 1833. Ohio published in 1831 and 1833. Then came the Wisconsin Territory in 1839; Iowa Territory in 1843; Ohio again, in 1848; Kansas Statutes in 1855; and Nebraska Territory six times in a row from 1855 to 1860. So far, David Dodge has identified eleven different states or territories that printed the Amendment in twenty separate publications over forty-one years. And more editions including this 13th Amendment are sure to be discovered. Clearly, Dodge is onto something.

You might be able to convince some of the people, or maybe even all of them, for a little while, that this 13th Amendment was never ratified.
Maybe you can show them that the ten legislatures which ordered it published eighteen times we’ve discovered (so far) consisted of ignorant politicians who don’t know their amendments from their… ahh, articles.
You might even be able to convince the public that our U.S. forefathers never meant to “outlaw” public servants who pushed people around, accepted bribes or special favors to “look the other way.”
Maybe. But before you do, there’s an awful lot of evidence to be explained.

THE AMENDMENT DISAPPEARS

In 1829, the following note appears on p. 23, Vol. 1 of the New York Revised Statutes:
“In the edition of the Laws of the U.S. before referred to, there is an amendment printed as article 13, prohibiting citizens from accepting titles of nobility or honor, or presents, offices, &c. from foreign nations. But, by a message of the president of the United States of the 4th of February, 1818, in answer to a resolution of the house of representatives, it appears that this amendment had been ratified only by 12 states, and therefore had not been adopted. See Vol. IV of the printed papers of the 1st session of the 15th congress, No. 76.” In 1854, a similar note appeared in the Oregon Statutes. Both notes refer to the Laws of the United States, 1st vol. p. 73 (or 74).

It’s not yet clear whether the 13th Amendment was published in Laws of the United States, 1st Vol., prematurely, by accident, in anticipation of Virginia’s ratification, or as part of a plot to discredit the Amendment by making it appear that only twelve States had ratified. Whether the Laws of the United States Vol. 1 (carrying the 13th Amendment) was re-called or made-up is unknown. In fact, it’s not even clear that the specified volume was actually printed — 
the Law Library of the Library of Congress has no record of its existence.

LESSON 1 – JUSTIFICATION:

LESSON 1 of 82 – JUSTIFICATION:

*** What can justify your actions? ***

Date:   2/24/2016 10:50:02   

LESSON 1 of 82 – JUSTIFICATION:

** Actually 82 of original - 100 BIBLE LESSONS

These lessons were originally given at Manila, Philippines, in 1958 and 1959 by former missionary to China, Alban Douglas. Give these lessons to people you visit, youth groups, hospital patients, church visitors and new members.

Use them in Sunday School, bus ministry, jail services, nursing homes,
Christian schools, small discussion groups and many other places.
God’s Word will answer your all questions and help solve your problems.

LESSON 1 – JUSTIFICATION:

INTRODUCTION
One of the modern errors of today is to identify justification with pardon. Justification is more than pardon; to justify means to declare righteous. God’s problem in redeeming man was to justify the sinner without condoning or justifying his sin.

God could not compromise in judgment and treat sin lightly.
*** {No more than any concerned parent would allow a 3 year old to play with fire or poison or sharp cutting items - because they would be destructive to the child}
Law and justice demanded the death penalty for every sin.

Ezek. 18:20 - The soul that sins, it shall die.
The mercy of God yearned to rescue the offender in the interests of love. In a human court the Judge justifies the righteous and condemns the wicked.

Dt. 25:1 - Then they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked.
God refuses to justify the guilty.

Ex. 23:7 - For I will not justify the wicked.
God pronounces judgment on human judges that pervert judgment.

Isa. 5:22, 23 - Woe to those … who acquit the guilty for a bribe, but deny justice to the innocent. (NIV)

Luke 16:15, Jesus condemns the Pharisees for justifying themselves before God.
The law, Romans 2:13, said, But the doers of the law shall be justified.
But the question facing God was: “What man could keep the law perfectly?”

Romans 3:23, For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.
The problem was so perplexing that only Infinite Wisdom and the Grace of God were equal to the task of solving it.

God’s solution: Jesus volunteered to be the man to live the perfect life according to the law, gain the righteousness and then give it as a gift to the believing.
Romans 5:17 - … Much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.


Romans 3:22 - This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. (NIV)

I. DEFINITION What is Justification?

Justification is being accounted righteous before God; the sinner puts on the righteousness of Jesus Christ and God sees him perfect in the righteousness of Christ. Henceforth God sees the sinner righteous in the Savior – hidden in His
{Jesus} wonderful Holy Person.

Justification is the judicial act of God whereby those who put faith in Christ are declared righteous in His eyes, and free from guilt and punishment.

Romans 4:3 - What does the Scripture say?
"Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." (NIV)

Romans 4:5 - To the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. (NIV)

II. THE CONTENTS OF JUSTIFICATION :

1. The forgiveness of sin and the removal of its guilt and punishment. For a holy and righteous God to forgive sin is not a small matter; the truth is that God actually delights in forgiving and cleansing iniquity.

Micah 7:18, 19 - Who is a God like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage?

He retaineth not his anger forever, because He delighteth in mercy…He will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea.
In justification all our sins are forgiven and the guilt and punishment thereof removed.

Acts 13:38,39 - Therefore, my brothers, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Through him everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses.

2. The imputation of Christ’s righteousness.

The forgiven sinner is not like a discharged prisoner who has served his term and is discharged from further punishment, but with no rights of citizenship. In Christ Jesus the sinner receives the full rights of citizenship.

Romans 3:22 - This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. (NIV)
The perfect, holy righteousness of Jesus Christ is imputed to the sinner.


III. THE CONDITION OF FORGIVENESS – Faith

The sinner calls out, “How can I receive this gift of righteousness?”
The answer is, “By believing” on the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord."

Gal. 2:16 - know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified. (NIV)

Romans 3:26 - To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

Romans 4:5 - But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
The best of men need to be saved by faith in Jesus Christ and wicked sinners can also be justified in the same way.

IV. THE MEANS OF JUSTIFICATION:

1. By God. He is the author or donor of justification.
Romans 8:33 - Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect?
It is God that justifieth.
Justification is a judicial act performed by God, the Father Almighty.

2. By grace. Grace is the foundation or source of justification.
Romans 3:24 - Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Titus 3:7 - so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life.

3. By blood. The sacrifice of Jesus on the cross is the foundation or ground of justification.
Romans 5:9 - Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

4. By resurrection. Resurrection is the acknowledgment or proclamation of justification.

Romans 4:25 - Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

V. THE EVIDENCE OF JUSTIFICATION - Works
The one who is truly justified will manifest this fact in good works.
James 2:21-23 - Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar?

You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called God's friend. (NIV)

VI. THE RESULTS OF JUSTIFICATION:

1. Peace. Romans 5:1 - Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

2. Access into the presence of God for worship, praise and petition.
Romans 5:2 - By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand…

3. Tribulation. Rev. Samuel Matthew of Madras, India, very carefully pointed out what he considered the two great results of justification: peace with God and tribulation in this world, Rom. 5:3 cf. 2 Tim. 3:12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

CONCLUSION:

We are justified judicially by God. Rom. 8:33, “It is God that justifieth.”
We are justified meritoriously by Christ.

Isa. 53:11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

We are justified meditatively by faith. Rom. 5:1 – “Therefore being justified by faith.”

We are justified evidentially by works.
Jas. 2:14 – “What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works?”

In Luke 8:13-14, the sinner that prayed, “God be merciful to me a sinner,” went home justified, said the Lord Jesus Christ.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:

1. What is the difference between justification and pardon?

2. Define justification.

3. State the two items contained in justification with a Scripture for each.

4. How can you reconcile Exodus 23:7 and 1 Cor. 6:11?

5. What is the condition of justification? (3 Scriptures)

6. List the 3 means of justification (one Scripture for each).

7. What is the connection between resurrection and justification?

8. How can you reconcile James 2:21-23 and Romans 4:3-5?

9. List 5 results of justification from Romans 5:1-3.

10. How is Romans 5:1 a fulfillment of Isaiah 53:11?

The Truth will prevail!

  ***   For all readers  - 

  I post the truth, where ever and whenever I find it.  The Truth will prevail! 

  Seek the truth because the Truth will set you free -

" The Truth will Set You Free

31 So He said to the Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in My word, you are truly My disciples.
 32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
 33 “We are Abraham’s descendants,” they answered. “We have never been slaves to anyone. How can You say we will be set free?”…
{ Actually the Jews were slaves, to the Egyptians, Babylons, Persians, Greeks, and then the Romans}   

The truth is what it is will prevail over all else... 

Stick with the Truth and all the lies will fad...

** So if you want to drop me as a friend  - I wish you the best....

Why Sex can be just Good Mental Health

Seven reasons

*** So let’s talk about ways to maintain good mental health, instead of pretending it’s easy. And better yet, let’s start with a fun one!
Because sex can play an important – even vital role – in maintaining good mental health. ***

Date:   4/22/16    16:42:13 ... viewed 260 times
7 Good Reasons to engage in Sexual Intercourse!


Why Sex is Necessary for Good Mental Health

Posted by: Becky Jansen on April 14, 2016

mental health good

Good mental health is just as important as good physical health.

Yet, while people embrace good physical health, society often whispers about good mental health.
Everyone is just supposed to be okay, all the time, without working on it. Or talking about it. Or admitting to it.

But that’s not reality. The reality is that good mental health takes as much work as good physical health.

So let’s talk about ways to maintain good mental health, instead of pretending it’s easy. And better yet, let’s start with a fun one!
Because sexual intercourse in the proper intended M- W role can play an important – even vital role – in maintaining good mental health.


7 Good Reasons to Have Sex:

While there are many physical benefits to a healthy sex life, these benefits directly affect your mental health…

1. Acts as an antidepressant. Sexual intimacy is mush like chocolate – it causes the body to release feel-good hormones. Your body is literally creating the very chemicals you need to combat depression and maintain good mental health. Plus, unlike chocolate, having sex burns calories.

2. Boosts self-esteem. This is a lovely cycle to get caught in. Having sex makes you feel better about yourself…which makes you have more sex…which makes you feel better about yourself… Knowing a partner you care about finds you desirable and sexy can do wonders for how you see yourself!

3. Creates a deeper emotional connection. One of the cornerstones of good mental health is feeling emotionally connection to other people. Isolation and loneliness can devastate a person’s mental health. And sex is an effective (and fun!) way to connect on an even deeper level with your partner. If it’s a newer relationship, or if you’ve been together for decades, staying sexually active builds an intimacy that’s an important part of staying mentally healthy.

4. Improves your mood. Your mood is a vital part of good mental health, but sometimes it’s not as easy as just deciding to be happy. So feel free to have sex! You know how great you feel after a good workout? That happy, energized feeling comes from the endorphins that are released during exercise. Those same endorphins are released during sex, so you feel that same emotional rush.

5. Reduces pain. Here’s an unexpected benefit to a healthy sex life: less pain. orgasms release a hormone that may actually raise your pain tolerance level. And anyone who’s ever been in pain longer than a moment or two understands how being in pain can take a toll on your mental health.

6. Protects your immune system. Just long on-going pain can affect your mental health, being physical sick can wreak havoc on your mental health.
If it’s feeling as if you’re never going to throw this cold, or a longer, more ongoing illness, it’s nearly impossible to maintain good mental health when you’re sick. But people who are more sexually active have stronger immune systems, and fewer sick days. Which means less time feeling mentally down, too!

7. Reduces stress. Another physical response that impacts your mental health. Short-term stress can make you grumpy. Long-term stress can make you depressed, anxious, and distracted. But a healthy sex life can help reduce stress.

==================================

Don’t Let Sex CAUSE the Stress -
Having sex isn’t the only physical way to help support good mental health, so if it’s not happening right now, that’s okay!

Physical intimacy – even if it’s not sexual intimacy – can be helpful to your mental health as well. You don’t have to be in an intimate, sexual relationship to get the benefits of physical intimacy.

Hug your friends and family. Hold hands with your spouse or children. Even snuggling with a pet has been shown to be helpful when it comes to maintaining good mental health.

And if the problem isn’t about not having a partner, but not being able to respond quite as well as you used to, that’s okay, too. If you haven’t been able to perform quite as well as you’d like, don’t let that send you into a spiral or make you withdraw. Avoiding the problem isn’t good for your mental health, either!

Instead, talk to your partner. Open communication can do wonders for your sex life. 
Admitting you’re nervous about how well you might perform may be all you need to perform!

Stay physically intimate. Even if you aren’t having intercourse, keep touching, snuggling, kissing, caressing… It all feels good and contributes to good mental health. Plus, who knows where a few nights of cuddling could lead.

And don’t be shy about getting a little help. There are many supplements available these days that really do work, like ArgiVive III – a drink designed to increase your stamina and your performance, so you’re firing on all levels.

Many things contribute to good mental health – and a satisfying sex life is definitely one of them. From a gentle touch to a mind-blowing orgasm, it’s all good for your mental health.
So enjoy!

===================================

The information provided in the NorthStar Nutritionals blog is intended for educational purposes only.

Categories: Sexual Health, Stress.

Folks, I caution you

There is a dangerous bit of theater unfolding.

As Written By Allen B. West:

If you haven’t noticed, Barack Obama’s best friend Recip Tayyip Erdogan, President of Turkey, has launched an offensive operation into Syria. There are those who applaud this, under the belief that Turkey is going to take the fight to ISIS. I caution you, because not everything you see on the surface in the Middle East is what it should be.

We recently shared with you the meeting between Erdogan and Russia’s Vladimir Putin; funny, didn’t Turkey shoot down a Russian fighter plane?
There are certain machinations going on in this area, and Obama is a bystander sitting in the corner sucking his thumb.
As reported by the Washington Post, The Turkish government had been planning for more than a year to send troops into Syria to fight the Islamic State before it did so this week, but the intervention was opposed by military officers who later participated in July’s failed attempt to overthrow the government, a senior Turkish official said Thursday. 
He spoke as Turkey dispatched additional tanks across the border to reinforce positions around the Syrian town of Jarabulus, which was captured from the Islamic State on Wednesday by Syrian rebels and Turkish troops in Turkey’s first significant foray into Syria since the war began five years ago.

• Why Does the Media Continue to Ignore This Story About Hillary Clinton?
• Allen West Extends a Hand to Trump On This KEY Issue Ignored By GOP for Years! [Video]

Reluctance within the military to move across the border was reinforced by other issues that subsequently emerged, including Turkey’s November 2015 shoot-down of a Russian jet, which forced Turkey to suspend flights over Syria for fear of Russian retaliation and meant it could not offer air support to any advancing troops. 

The suggestion, however, that military officers who were secretly plotting against the government all along had acted for more than a year to thwart its plans to intervene in Syria offers one possible new explanation for President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s seeming reluctance to fulfill long-standing U.S. demands for Turkey to adopt a more active stance against the Islamic State in Syria. 

Planning for the offensive spearheaded by Turkey on Wednesday against the Islamic State-controlled town of Jarabulus began in June 2015, said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to share information on sensitive issues. However, the proposals were consistently resisted by the Turkish military, he said.

The real issue, if you look at the map accompanying the Washington Post story, is that the objective is not so much to defeat ISIS, but rather stem the Kurdish advance.


Matter of fact, recently the Turkish military was bombing the Kurdish forces Obama claims he’s supporting. As well, it is a very convenient statement to say it was the generals supporting the coup that did not support Turkish actions in Syria.

One must be very concerned about the Erdogan’s long-term objectives. Here’s my assessment. Erdogan met with Putin in order to set a line of demarcation between that which will be reserved for Syria’s Assad and ISIS — which is indeed supported by Erdogan. Erdogan’s original intent to support a Sunni Islamist terrorist action to undermine Assad ran into a little obstacle called the Russians. Putin needs a base of operations in the Middle East and a sure port of call in the Mediterranean Sea — that’s Syria. Assad has been bolstered and Putin is brokering a trade-off.

The real loser in this game of thrones will be the Kurds. Here is a group which could be a solid ally for the United States, along with Jordan, Egypt and Israel, in the region. But, thanks to the disinterested Obama, Russia has become a power broker and since we’re releasing billions of dollars to Iran, they are becoming the regional hegemony. And what does Obama get in return for the billions of dollars — harassment of our Naval vessels in the Persian Gulf.

Russia, Iran and Turkey are in position to put a deadly squeeze on the Kurds, forcing their acquiescence.

And what of ISIS? Well, no one is taking any action against their center of gravity in Raqqa, Syria. And, more importantly, no one is taking action against the ISIS stronghold in Mosul, Iraq. The eastern portion of Mosul and its surrounding villages have fallen under Kurdish control. However, it’s central Mosul and the west that is firmly in the hands of ISIS. Baghdad is controlled by Shia Iran; they’re not launching any operations into Mosul.

So, in the long term, ISIS will be allowed to maintain a caliphate, one it appears Putin and Erdogan agreed will not threaten Assad — but will be able to export its terrorism elsewhere. If we had a strong, resolute, visionary leader in America, he could seize upon this situation and find opportunity. The opportunity would be to firm our relations with the Kurds and set as an objective an independent Kurdistan that would stretch all the way to Iskandrun, a seaport.

If no one’s noticed, this is not about just ISIS, but an axis, an alliance, that is forming. It’s about the growth of the global Islamic jihad which is based in Islamo-fascism. In the end, it is less about Sunni vs. Shia, but rather about a savage, barbaric and antiquated ideology — and Erdogan is a leading candidate for fascist of the year considering his ….

Full Story Here:
Folks, I caution you, things are not as they appear… – Allen B. West – AllenBWest.com

Use wisely what God has given to you.

Luke 19:12-13 "He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and then to return.   And then he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy {take care of these } till I {return}come."

 

LUKE 19:11-27

The Parable of the Minas

¹¹ Now as they heard these things, He spoke another parable, because He was near Jerusalem and because they thought the kingdom of God would appear immediately. ¹² Therefore He said: “A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and to return. 
  ¹³ So he called ten of his servants, delivered to them ten minas,^[a] and said to them, ‘Do business till I come.’  
¹⁴ But his citizens hated him, and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We will not have this man to reign over us.’
¹⁵ “And so it was that when he returned, having received the kingdom, he then commanded these servants, to whom he had given the money, to be called to him, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading. 
  ¹⁶ Then came the first, saying, ‘Master, your mina has earned ten minas.’ 
  ¹⁷ And he said to him, ‘Well done, good servant; because you were faithful in a very little, have authority over ten cities.’ 
  ¹⁸ And the second came, saying, ‘Master, your mina has earned five minas.’  
¹⁹ Likewise he said to him, ‘You also be over five cities.’
²⁰ “Then another came, saying, ‘Master, here is your mina, which I have kept put away in a handkerchief. 
  ²¹ For I feared you, because you are an austere man. You collect what you did not deposit, and reap what you did not sow.’  
²² And he said to him, ‘Out of your own mouth I will judge you, you wicked servant. You knew that I was an austere man, collecting what I did not deposit and reaping what I did not sow. 
  ²³ Why then did you not put my money in the bank, that at my coming I might have collected it with interest?’
²⁴ “And he said to those who stood by, ‘Take the mina from him, and give it to him who has ten minas.’ 
  ²⁵ (But they said to him, ‘Master, he has ten minas.’)
  ²⁶ ‘For I say to you, that to everyone who has will be given; and from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him.
  ²⁷ But bring here those enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, and slay them before me.’”

Footnotes:

1. Luke 19:13 The mina (Greek mna, Hebrew minah) was worth about three months’ salary.

  ========================================

 

The main purpose of this parable is to show that there would be a long period when Jesus would go away before returning to fulfill the prophecy about a physical kingdom on earth.
The nobleman's servants were called to give an account for what they had done with their lord's money that was delivered unto them.
The servants were commanded to "occupy till I come." {which is until I return}
These servants represent the followers of Jesus.

 However, being a follower of Jesus is more than simply not rejecting Him. It is an active commitment to serve Him. One of the ten servants had served himself and not His master. He did nothing with what his lord had given him. This wicked servant was stripped of what he had and it was given to the servant who had used {done wisely with} his lord's money wisely.

This illustrates that the Lord expects us to grow. This is made very clear in the parables of the kingdom which Jesus taught. In nearly every parable, growth or increase is expected. This servant who did nothing with what his lord gave him represents a believer who never grows or brings increase to God's kingdom.

What was it that this wicked servant didn't have that caused his master to take back the money he had given him? It wasn't the tangible money that he received. He had kept that laid up in a napkin and still possessed it. What he was missing and what the other servant had that caused the lord to give this pound to him was faithfulness. Those who are faithful with what God has given them will be given more, and those who are wasteful will have what God has given them taken away and given to another.

 Use wisely what God has given to you.

Knee pain?

Background: Appropriate footwear is recommended for self-management of knee osteoarthritis. Shoes that reduce harmful knee loads are available, but symptomatic effects are uncertain.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of unloading shoes in alleviating knee osteoarthritis symptoms.

Design: Participant- and assessor-blinded comparative effectiveness randomized, controlled trial. (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12613000851763)
Setting: Community.

Participants: 164 persons with medial knee osteoarthritis.
Intervention: Walking shoes with triple-density, variable-stiffness midsoles and mild lateral-wedge insoles designed to unload the medial knee and worn daily (intervention) versus conventional walking shoes (comparator).

Measurements: Primary outcomes were pain with walking (assessed on a numerical rating scale [NRS]) and physical function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were knee pain and stiffness (WOMAC), average pain (NRS), intermittent and constant knee pain (Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain questionnaire), quality of life (Assessment of Quality of Life instrument), physical activity (Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly), and global change in pain and function (Likert scales).

Results: A total of 160 participants (98%) completed primary outcome measures at 6 months. Changes in pain (mean difference, 0.0 units [95% CI, −0.9 to 0.8 unit]) and function (mean difference, 0.3 unit [CI, −3.2 to 3.7 units]) did not differ between groups at 6 months, with both groups showing clinically relevant improvements in function and the intervention group showing clinically relevant improvements in pain. There were no differences in secondary outcomes. Pain was globally improved in 54% of participants, and function was globally improved in 44% to 48%. Unloading shoes were not associated with increased probability of improvement (odds ratios, 0.99 [CI, 0.53 to 1.86] for pain and 0.85 [CI, 0.45 to 1.61] for function).

Limitation: Effects on joint structure were not evaluated.

Conclusion: Shoes with modified midsoles to unload the medial knee conferred no additional benefit over conventional walking shoes. Both improved pain and function by clinically relevant amounts.

Primary Funding Source: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

As you think so you are!

You need to learn exactly what God's Laws and principles are for our lives and then cooperate with them.   This is not just the 10 Commandments, folks...

You can not just sit around watching many of the TV, videos and sports programs which dull the mind, and corrupt our moral senses...  If all you take in is Bad News and movies or books about adultery, robbery and murder which minister depression and doubt - to then suddenly expect joy and happiness in your life!  All of these support your unbelief in the things which God has planned for your heart!

Your life move in the direction which you allow it to go...  You are going to have to think upon things which are true, honest, just, pure, lovely, virtuous, praiseworthy, ad any thing of a good report! - Phil 4:8 
Yet everyday millions of people misunderstand how the principles of the Lord God should work in their lives...  Because your life moves in the direction of your dominate thoughts!

" As a person thinks in their heart so they are! "  Proverbs 23:7

 You will only reap the emotions which are based upon those things which you focus your attention!

" To be carnally minded {self centered} is spiritual death; but to be Spiritually minded {focused upon the Gospel of Christ} is peace and life Eternal! "
  Romans 8:6

So choose this day whom you will follow The Lord God and His Righteousness or the evil found in the world ....   You choice!

"FACT CHECKERS" ??

O.K. You "FACT CHECKERS" go to work, is this true?
 You bet it is!!!    Letter from a Black woman - May 18, 2009


 ==================================

No He Can’t By Anne Wortham 

 

Fellow Americans, 

Please know: I am black; I grew up in the segregated South.

 I did not vote for Barack Obama; I wrote in Ron Paul’s name as my choice for president. Most importantly, I am not race conscious. I do not require a black president to know that I am a person of worth, and that life is worth living.

 I do not require a black president to love the ideal of America . 

I cannot join you in your celebration. I feel no elation. There is no smile on my face. I am not jumping with joy. There are no tears of triumph in my eyes. For such emotions and behavior to come from me, I would have to deny all that I know about the requirements of human flourishing and survival – all that I know about the history of the United States of America , all that I know about American race relations, and all that I know about Barack Obama as a politician.

 I would have to deny the nature of the “change” that Obama asserts has come to America . 

Most importantly, I would have to abnegate my certain understanding that you have chosen to sprint down the road to serfdom that we have been on for over a century. I would have to pretend that individual liberty has no value for the success of a human life. I would have to evade your rejection of the slender reed of capitalism on which your success and mine depend. I would have to think it somehow rational that 94 percent of the 12 million blacks in this country voted for a man because he looks like them (that blacks are permitted to play the race card), and that they were joined by self-declared “progressive” whites who voted for him because he doesn’t look like them.

 I would have to be wipe my mind clean of all that I know about the kind of people who have advised and taught Barack Obama and will fill posts in his administration – political intellectuals like my some of former colleagues at the Harvard University ‘s Kennedy School of Government. 

I would have to believe that “fairness” is the equivalent of justice. I would have to believe that man who asks me to “go forward in a new spirit of service, in a new service of sacrifice” is speaking in my interest. I would have to accept the premise of a man that economic prosperity comes from the “bottom up,” and who arrogantly believes that he can will it into existence by the use of government force. I would have to admire a man who thinks the standard of living of the masses can be improved by destroying the most productive and the generators of wealth. 

Finally, Americans, I would have to erase from my consciousness the scene of 125,000 screaming, crying, cheering people in Grant Park, Chicago irrationally chanting “Yes We Can!” Finally, I would have to wipe all memory of all the times I have heard politicians, pundits, journalists, editorialists, bloggers and intellectuals declare that capitalism is dead – and no one, including especially Alan Greenspan, objected to their assumption that the particular version of the anti-capitalistic mentality that they want to replace with their own version of anti-capitalism is anything remotely equivalent to capitalism. 

So you have made history, Americans. You and your children have elected a black man to the office of the president of the United States , the wounded giant of the world. The battle between John Wayne and Jane Fonda is over – and that Fonda won. Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern must be very happy men. Jimmie Carter, too. And the Kennedy's have at last gotten their Kennedy look-a-like. The self-righteous welfare statistics in the suburbs can feel warm moments of satisfaction for having elected a black person. So, toast yourselves: 60s counter-cultural radicals, 80s yuppies and 90s bourgeois bohemians. 

Toast yourselves, Black America. Shout your glee Harvard, Princeton , Yale, Duke, Stanford, and Berkeley. You have elected not an individual who is qualified to be president, but a black man who, like the pragmatist Franklin Roosevelt, promises to – Do Something! You now have someone who has picked up the baton of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society. But you have also foolishly traded your freedom and mine – what little there is left – for the chance to feel good. 

 There is nothing in me that can share your happy obliviousness. 

Dr. Anne Wortham