By Berit Kjos - Written in 2007 -- Last update: 10-8-09
Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 (H. R. 1913)
October 8, 2009: Hate Crimes Language Prompts Republicans To Vote Against Defense Bill: "Inclusion of an expansion of federal hate crimes legislation in a defense authorization bill prompted nearly all House Republicans to vote against the measure. ...
"'I cannot vote for the Defense authorization bill with this hate crimes legislation attached to it,' Boehner said. 'This is a radical social policy that is being put on the defense authorization bill... because they probably can't pass it on its own.'....It is simply inappropriate to use a defense bill as a vehicle for divisive, liberal social policies, wholly unrelated to our country's national security.... Democrats … are piling liberal social priorities onto the backs of our soldiers.' ...
"Pence also said he viewed the hate crimes provisions as an assault on freedom of speech.... 'I disdain discrimination.... But these hate crimes provisions … are broad enough to encompass legitimate beliefs, and protecting the rights of freedom of speech and religion must be first and foremost and paramount on the floor of this chamber.'
"Despite nearly uniform Republican opposition, the Defense bill passed 234 to 188."[1]
Obama Declares War on Free Speech: "The Obama Administration has now actually co-sponsored an anti-free speech resolution at the United Nations. Approved by the U.N. Human Rights Council last Friday, the resolution, cosponsored by the U.S. and Egypt, calls on states to condemn and criminalize 'any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.'...
"'Incitement' and 'hatred' are in the eye of the beholder -- or more precisely, in the eye of those who make such determinations. The powerful can decide to silence the powerless by classifying their views as 'hate speech.'
"The resolution also condemns 'negative stereotyping of religions...,' which is of course an oblique reference to accurate reporting about the jihad doctrine and Islamic supremacism....
"But we still have the First Amendment, right? ...'If the U.S. backs a resolution that urges the suppression of some speech,' he explains, 'presumably we are taking the view that all countries -- including the U.S. -- should adhere to this resolution."
"...the real danger of 'hate crime' laws is that they criminalize thoughts and beliefs.'"[2] Prescription for tyranny
"Practitioners of homosexual, cross-dressing, transvestism, and transsexualism become federally-protected minority groups...."[3] Congress denying equal protection
"The notion of the 'hate crime' has now been established in English law. Thanks to the mullahs, anyone daring to subject the Muslim faith to the same kind of harsh analysis brought to bear on Christianity or Judaism could be convicted as a 'hate criminal.'"[4] The Menace of the Lobby
"How did America go from Pilgrims seeking freedom to express their Judeo-Christian beliefs to today’s discrimination against those very beliefs in the name of tolerance?"[5] "The faith that gave birth to tolerance is no longer tolerated!"
This legislation may be the most ominous attack on "free speech" and Christianity since the founding of our nation. Yet, the silence of the mainstream media is disturbing. It suggests that many of our most powerful leaders want these bills passed behind closed doors, freed from any public accountability. Even so, the public is awakening to the facts.
On April 25, 2007, a House of Representatives committee approved a measure to add homosexuality to the list of groups "protected" by hate crimes laws. The Senate has prepared a twin bill, S. 1105. Except for the addition of the name Matthew Shepard, its title is the same."[6] House panel OKs hate crimes bill
Matthew Shepard? Few Americans could miss the shocking details of this young homosexual's horrible death in 1998. The media published that story 3007 times -- 45 times in the New York Times alone. It made Matthew a martyr for the cause of gay rights, hate-crimes legislation, and anti-Christian sentiment."[7]
Did you read about Jesse Dirkhising's torture and murder at the hands of two homosexual lovers eleven months later? Probably not. The thirteen-year-old boy was drugged, strapped down, sodomized, tortured, and killed by two adults living in an apartment that 'reeked of excrement and was littered with drug paraphernalia.'[7] Like Matthew's murder, it was a horrible crime -- almost unfit to print. But that's not why most newspapers across the country refused to tell the story. The real reason? It didn't fit their agenda! It wasn't politically correct!
Nor is the Bible. Its unchanging standards can't be adapted to the new global guidelines for holistic spirituality and politically correct tolerance. So when eleven Christians shared the gospel as well as warning about homosexuality during Philadelphia's 2004 homosexual 'OutFest', they were promptly arrested and temporarily "charged under [Pennsylvania's] hate crimes legislation."[8]
Christians aren't the only ones vulnerable. On April 11, a Maine Middle School student did something really foolish on a dare: He put some ham -- considered "unclean" by Muslims -- on a cafeteria table occupied by Muslim students. As punishment, the school suspended him. School principal, Maureen Lachapelle, sent a report of this incident to the Attorney General's office and to the County District Attorney “because the ham incident was perceived as a hate/bias crime.”[9]
A crime? Does this line up with the fast-track Hate Crimes Bill in Congress? And if so, why?
A quick review of HR 1592 might, at first, suggest a negative answer. Section 7(2), like the corresponding Senate Bill, defines "Hate crime acts" as:
“(A) In general.—Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability of any person—"
But, you might argue, the boy neither caused nor intended "bodily injury."
True! But consider another key word, one that's part of the title in both bills. That all-important word is "prevention!" We're looking at the "Hate Crimes Prevention Act," not simply a law against "hate crimes." And the concept of prevention (or pre-emption) is open-ended. Its wide range of interpretations could be used in almost any situation to silence offending voices and to intimidate critics of useful "protected" groups such as homosexuals and Muslims -- long before any signs of actual violence.
For example, a Canadian pastor was concerned about the overt promotion of Islam at a local high school. It not only distributed copies of the Quran, it also offered Muslim students a room for prayer during school hours. Of course, Christian and Jewish students had no such "freedom." But when Pastor Mark Harding began handing out leaflets protesting this strange favoritism, he was charged with having "willfully promoted hatred." Having violated a new Canadian hate-crimes law, he was sentenced to 340 hours of "community service" at the Islamic Society of North America.
Pastor Harding claimed to be motivated by love for Muslim students, not hate. According to worldnetdaily.com, he expressed that love in a recorded phone call. Yet his own phone was swamped with more than three thousand real hate calls, including many death threats. When his trial began, the police protected him from the crowds of Muslims chanting "Infidels, you will burn in hell."[10]
What is going on? Who is behind this unequal and borderless "protection" system?
Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 (H. R. 1913)
October 8, 2009: Hate Crimes Language Prompts Republicans To Vote Against Defense Bill: "Inclusion of an expansion of federal hate crimes legislation in a defense authorization bill prompted nearly all House Republicans to vote against the measure. ...
"'I cannot vote for the Defense authorization bill with this hate crimes legislation attached to it,' Boehner said. 'This is a radical social policy that is being put on the defense authorization bill... because they probably can't pass it on its own.'....It is simply inappropriate to use a defense bill as a vehicle for divisive, liberal social policies, wholly unrelated to our country's national security.... Democrats … are piling liberal social priorities onto the backs of our soldiers.' ...
"Pence also said he viewed the hate crimes provisions as an assault on freedom of speech.... 'I disdain discrimination.... But these hate crimes provisions … are broad enough to encompass legitimate beliefs, and protecting the rights of freedom of speech and religion must be first and foremost and paramount on the floor of this chamber.'
"Despite nearly uniform Republican opposition, the Defense bill passed 234 to 188."[1]
Obama Declares War on Free Speech: "The Obama Administration has now actually co-sponsored an anti-free speech resolution at the United Nations. Approved by the U.N. Human Rights Council last Friday, the resolution, cosponsored by the U.S. and Egypt, calls on states to condemn and criminalize 'any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.'...
"'Incitement' and 'hatred' are in the eye of the beholder -- or more precisely, in the eye of those who make such determinations. The powerful can decide to silence the powerless by classifying their views as 'hate speech.'
"The resolution also condemns 'negative stereotyping of religions...,' which is of course an oblique reference to accurate reporting about the jihad doctrine and Islamic supremacism....
"But we still have the First Amendment, right? ...'If the U.S. backs a resolution that urges the suppression of some speech,' he explains, 'presumably we are taking the view that all countries -- including the U.S. -- should adhere to this resolution."
"...the real danger of 'hate crime' laws is that they criminalize thoughts and beliefs.'"[2] Prescription for tyranny
"Practitioners of homosexual, cross-dressing, transvestism, and transsexualism become federally-protected minority groups...."[3] Congress denying equal protection
"The notion of the 'hate crime' has now been established in English law. Thanks to the mullahs, anyone daring to subject the Muslim faith to the same kind of harsh analysis brought to bear on Christianity or Judaism could be convicted as a 'hate criminal.'"[4] The Menace of the Lobby
"How did America go from Pilgrims seeking freedom to express their Judeo-Christian beliefs to today’s discrimination against those very beliefs in the name of tolerance?"[5] "The faith that gave birth to tolerance is no longer tolerated!"
This legislation may be the most ominous attack on "free speech" and Christianity since the founding of our nation. Yet, the silence of the mainstream media is disturbing. It suggests that many of our most powerful leaders want these bills passed behind closed doors, freed from any public accountability. Even so, the public is awakening to the facts.
On April 25, 2007, a House of Representatives committee approved a measure to add homosexuality to the list of groups "protected" by hate crimes laws. The Senate has prepared a twin bill, S. 1105. Except for the addition of the name Matthew Shepard, its title is the same."[6] House panel OKs hate crimes bill
Matthew Shepard? Few Americans could miss the shocking details of this young homosexual's horrible death in 1998. The media published that story 3007 times -- 45 times in the New York Times alone. It made Matthew a martyr for the cause of gay rights, hate-crimes legislation, and anti-Christian sentiment."[7]
Did you read about Jesse Dirkhising's torture and murder at the hands of two homosexual lovers eleven months later? Probably not. The thirteen-year-old boy was drugged, strapped down, sodomized, tortured, and killed by two adults living in an apartment that 'reeked of excrement and was littered with drug paraphernalia.'[7] Like Matthew's murder, it was a horrible crime -- almost unfit to print. But that's not why most newspapers across the country refused to tell the story. The real reason? It didn't fit their agenda! It wasn't politically correct!
Nor is the Bible. Its unchanging standards can't be adapted to the new global guidelines for holistic spirituality and politically correct tolerance. So when eleven Christians shared the gospel as well as warning about homosexuality during Philadelphia's 2004 homosexual 'OutFest', they were promptly arrested and temporarily "charged under [Pennsylvania's] hate crimes legislation."[8]
Christians aren't the only ones vulnerable. On April 11, a Maine Middle School student did something really foolish on a dare: He put some ham -- considered "unclean" by Muslims -- on a cafeteria table occupied by Muslim students. As punishment, the school suspended him. School principal, Maureen Lachapelle, sent a report of this incident to the Attorney General's office and to the County District Attorney “because the ham incident was perceived as a hate/bias crime.”[9]
A crime? Does this line up with the fast-track Hate Crimes Bill in Congress? And if so, why?
A quick review of HR 1592 might, at first, suggest a negative answer. Section 7(2), like the corresponding Senate Bill, defines "Hate crime acts" as:
“(A) In general.—Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability of any person—"
But, you might argue, the boy neither caused nor intended "bodily injury."
True! But consider another key word, one that's part of the title in both bills. That all-important word is "prevention!" We're looking at the "Hate Crimes Prevention Act," not simply a law against "hate crimes." And the concept of prevention (or pre-emption) is open-ended. Its wide range of interpretations could be used in almost any situation to silence offending voices and to intimidate critics of useful "protected" groups such as homosexuals and Muslims -- long before any signs of actual violence.
For example, a Canadian pastor was concerned about the overt promotion of Islam at a local high school. It not only distributed copies of the Quran, it also offered Muslim students a room for prayer during school hours. Of course, Christian and Jewish students had no such "freedom." But when Pastor Mark Harding began handing out leaflets protesting this strange favoritism, he was charged with having "willfully promoted hatred." Having violated a new Canadian hate-crimes law, he was sentenced to 340 hours of "community service" at the Islamic Society of North America.
Pastor Harding claimed to be motivated by love for Muslim students, not hate. According to worldnetdaily.com, he expressed that love in a recorded phone call. Yet his own phone was swamped with more than three thousand real hate calls, including many death threats. When his trial began, the police protected him from the crowds of Muslims chanting "Infidels, you will burn in hell."[10]
What is going on? Who is behind this unequal and borderless "protection" system?
THE UN "CULTURE OF PREVENTION"
The UN has established a massive, worldwide, inter-agency program of "prevention." Through the coordinated efforts of UNESCO, The World Health Organization, The World Bank and countless other UN agencies, its agenda is transforming not only beliefs and values everywhere, but also schools, churches, communities and nations. Words like "war" and "genocide" have been used for more than fifty years to persuade the world to participate in "peace-building" ventures that would create a climate of prevention everywhere. This cultural atmosphere is defined by UN declarations such as UNESCO's Declaration on Tolerance and Declaration of Principles on Religion in a Culture of Peace.[11]
The UN policy of prevention requires "lifelong learning," re-learning, group-learning and service-learning. Continual progress must be measured through unceasing assessments that monitor compliance with new global standards for human resource development. What counts is progress toward the envisioned solidarity -- a global community where no one takes a stand contrary to UN ideology -- and where everyone is willing to compromise their beliefs, seek common ground, and flow with the group consensus.[12]
While Biblical Christianity hinders such universal solidarity, the war against "hate" supports it. After all, it provides the incentive needed to intimidate and persuade the masses that they must change and conform.
In 1999, the United Nations published a pamphlet by Secretary-General Kofi Annan titled, "Facing the Humanitarian Challenge: Towards a Culture of Prevention." In it, Mr. Annan states:
"...the common thread running through almost all conflict prevention policies is the need to pursue what we in the United Nations refer to as good governance. In practice, good governance involves promoting the rule of law, tolerance of minority and opposition groups.... Above all, good governance means respect for human rights... [See Whose Rights?]
"Long-term prevention strategies, in addressing the root causes of conflict, seek to prevent destructive conflicts from arising in the first place. They embrace the same holistic approach to prevention that characterizes post-conflict peace-building...."[13]
Do you wonder what he means by a holistic approach? It has to do with the vision of unity, wholism, solidarity, interconnectedness, or -- as the new global management puts it -- a systems approach based on "General Systems Theory." It tolerates no Christian "separatist" views. As Al Gore said at a 1992 Communitarian Conference, "Seeing ourselves as separate is the central problem in our political thinking."[14]
But "peace-building" implies more specific action than simply a holistic approach. An UNESCO publication I picked up in Istanbul during the 1996 UN Conference on Human Settlements (See Habitat II) clarifies a broader issue. Ponder the following excerpts from Our Creative Diversity: Report on the World Commission on Culture and Development. The first paragraph was written by former UN Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar:
"An ounce of prevention is better than a ton of punishment.... Imagination, innovation, vision and creativity are required.... It means an open mind, and open heart and a readiness to seek fresh definitions, reconcile old opposites, and help draw new mental maps."
"Universalism is the fundamental principle of a global ethics."
"Religion... has affected and sometimes poisoned the relations between majorities and minorities.... Extreme doctrinaire views [Biblical Christianity?] look to an imagined past, seen as both simpler and more stable, thus preparing the ground not only for a variety of overtly violent acts but also for the intimidation of individuals and indeed entire communities in matters of thought, behavior and belief, coercing them into accepting a single 'orthodox' point of view.... The challenge today, as in the past is to... distinguish between the beliefs and activities of the peaceful majority... and a minority of extremists...."[15]
The UN has established a massive, worldwide, inter-agency program of "prevention." Through the coordinated efforts of UNESCO, The World Health Organization, The World Bank and countless other UN agencies, its agenda is transforming not only beliefs and values everywhere, but also schools, churches, communities and nations. Words like "war" and "genocide" have been used for more than fifty years to persuade the world to participate in "peace-building" ventures that would create a climate of prevention everywhere. This cultural atmosphere is defined by UN declarations such as UNESCO's Declaration on Tolerance and Declaration of Principles on Religion in a Culture of Peace.[11]
The UN policy of prevention requires "lifelong learning," re-learning, group-learning and service-learning. Continual progress must be measured through unceasing assessments that monitor compliance with new global standards for human resource development. What counts is progress toward the envisioned solidarity -- a global community where no one takes a stand contrary to UN ideology -- and where everyone is willing to compromise their beliefs, seek common ground, and flow with the group consensus.[12]
While Biblical Christianity hinders such universal solidarity, the war against "hate" supports it. After all, it provides the incentive needed to intimidate and persuade the masses that they must change and conform.
In 1999, the United Nations published a pamphlet by Secretary-General Kofi Annan titled, "Facing the Humanitarian Challenge: Towards a Culture of Prevention." In it, Mr. Annan states:
"...the common thread running through almost all conflict prevention policies is the need to pursue what we in the United Nations refer to as good governance. In practice, good governance involves promoting the rule of law, tolerance of minority and opposition groups.... Above all, good governance means respect for human rights... [See Whose Rights?]
"Long-term prevention strategies, in addressing the root causes of conflict, seek to prevent destructive conflicts from arising in the first place. They embrace the same holistic approach to prevention that characterizes post-conflict peace-building...."[13]
Do you wonder what he means by a holistic approach? It has to do with the vision of unity, wholism, solidarity, interconnectedness, or -- as the new global management puts it -- a systems approach based on "General Systems Theory." It tolerates no Christian "separatist" views. As Al Gore said at a 1992 Communitarian Conference, "Seeing ourselves as separate is the central problem in our political thinking."[14]
But "peace-building" implies more specific action than simply a holistic approach. An UNESCO publication I picked up in Istanbul during the 1996 UN Conference on Human Settlements (See Habitat II) clarifies a broader issue. Ponder the following excerpts from Our Creative Diversity: Report on the World Commission on Culture and Development. The first paragraph was written by former UN Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar:
"An ounce of prevention is better than a ton of punishment.... Imagination, innovation, vision and creativity are required.... It means an open mind, and open heart and a readiness to seek fresh definitions, reconcile old opposites, and help draw new mental maps."
"Universalism is the fundamental principle of a global ethics."
"Religion... has affected and sometimes poisoned the relations between majorities and minorities.... Extreme doctrinaire views [Biblical Christianity?] look to an imagined past, seen as both simpler and more stable, thus preparing the ground not only for a variety of overtly violent acts but also for the intimidation of individuals and indeed entire communities in matters of thought, behavior and belief, coercing them into accepting a single 'orthodox' point of view.... The challenge today, as in the past is to... distinguish between the beliefs and activities of the peaceful majority... and a minority of extremists...."[15]
"PREVENTION" AS A PLOY TO SILENCE CHRISTIANS
Some of the same warnings were sounded by the respective founding directors of both UNESCO (Julian Huxley) and the World Health Organization (Dr. Brock Chisholm). Both were determined to wipe out the "poisonous certainties" of Biblical Christianity in their quest for UN solidarity. Notice Dr. Chisholm's emphasis on prevention back in 1946:
"We must... find and take sure steps to prevent wars in the future.... The re-interpretation and eventually eradication of the concept of right and wrong which has been the basis of child training... these are the belated objectives of practically all effective psychotherapy.... The pretense is made [by uncompromising Christians who cling to old standards] that to do away with right and wrong would produce uncivilized people, immorality, lawlessness and social chaos....
"When [infectious diseases] were attacked at the preventative level, some martyrs had to be sacrificed to the cause of humanity, because reactionary forces fought back.... The problem is no longer the germ of diphtheria, but rather the attitudes of parents who are incapable of accepting and using proven knowledge for the protection of their children. Surely the training of children in home and schools should be of at least as great public concern as their vaccination.... [See Homosexuals brainwashing our children in elementary schools]
"For the very survival of large parts of the human race, world understanding, tolerance, and forbearance have become absolutely essential.... If it cannot be done gently, it may have to be done roughly or even violently."[16]
Today, more than half a century later, the world is rapidly conforming to this UN agenda touted by Chisholm and Huxley in the 1940s. The global network of "lifelong learning" aims to prevent anything that would hinder "positive" collective thinking. Few notice how effectively its tentacles now reach into community [mental] health programs in over 130 nations around the world.[17]
During his 1997 White House Conference on Hate-Crimes, former President Clinton suggested that "The Justice Department will make its own hate crimes training curriculum available. A lot of hate crimes still go unreported.... If a crime is unreported, that gives people an excuse to ignore it."[18] Then he announced a Justice Department website which invites children to tell "trusted adults" about "hateful" or exclusive attitudes they see in their relatives at home or in friends in school.
Hard to believe? It all makes sense when you consider the history of the UN. Ponder the words of Federico Mayor, former Director-General of UNESCO:
"We have witnessed... the growth of fundamentalism and of religious and ethnic intolerance. The roots of exclusion and hatred have shown themselves even deeper and more tenacious than we had feared... Peace... requires, in the words of the Constitution, 'the intellectual and moral solidarity of mankind'."[19]
Today's well-funded champions for boundless sexual "freedom" are fighting an all-out war against those who resist. Their efforts are pushing America toward inconceivable lawlessness, bondage (to their own sensuality), and social chaos, which will surely be countered by more intensified surveillance and control. (See Total transformation)
They are no respecter of persons. Even Marine General Peter Pace - war hero and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - is under "rapid fire assault from his extreme left-flank." His "crime"? When interviewed by the Chicago Tribune, he said that “homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral.”
J. Matt Barber describes the battle in his article Pro-’Gay’ Bullies Pick Up the Pace:
"Not surprisingly, many of those non-judgmental, freedom-loving moral-relativists on the left are up-in-arms, demanding that Pace apologize and offer a full retraction or be fired.... Their carefully crafted propaganda is peppered with provocative and sensational code-words like “hate,” “violence,” “bigot,” “homophobia” — and on and on, ad infinitum. They are militant, organized, extremely powerful and well funded. Through clever semantics and shrewd political subterfuge they cynically play to honorable notions of freedom and fair-play in order to push a deceptive and activist agenda.
"They are the radical homosexual lobby.... Theirs is a carefully orchestrated and skillfully executed scheme not only to undermine, but to abolish from public discourse, any words — or even thoughts — which might stem from the traditional Judeo-Christian worldview upon which our great nation was founded.
"Their agenda: To mandate that only a secular-humanist worldview may be properly entertained or referenced. That worldview is one in which morality is entirely relative, and any reference to traditional notions of natural human sexuality, the natural family, or any fixed lines of demarcation between right and wrong are “hateful,” “discriminatory,” and to be strictly forbidden by force of law."[20]
GOD REIGNS IN THE MIDST OF THE BATTLE
America's dangerous drift brings sobering consequences. Long ago, God warned us that when people mock His ways, He will "give them over" to their own futile resources. Rejecting His guidelines, they lose His protection and are driven by the passions of their own capricious nature. Notice the descent into depravity and social chaos:
"...the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth....
"Professing to be wise, they became fools.... "Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves.... "God gave them up to vile passions.... committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. "And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind.... being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness. They are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful...." Romans 1:18-32
The good news is that those who do turn to the Light in the midst of the spreading darkness will find peace and strength in Christ. "My peace I give to you," said Jesus, "not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid." John 14:27-28
See also Adapting the Constitution to a Global Consensus
Ban truth - Reap Tyranny The UN Plan for your Mental Health
Clinton's War on Hate Bans Christian Values
Endnotes:
1. RTT News, www.rttnews.com/ArticleView.aspx?Id=1089080&pageNum=2716_3026_2, October 8, 2009.
2. Robert Knight, "'Hate crimes' bill: Prescription for tyranny," 5-29-04. wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38708
3. Congress denying equal protection, www.crossroad.to/articles2/007/edwatch/4-27-hate-crime.htm
4. Paul Johnson, "The Menace of the Lobby," Forbes, 4-23-07.
5. "The faith that gave birth to tolerance is no longer tolerated!" http://shop.wnd.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=1912
6. "House panel OKs hate crimes bill, Baptist Press, 4-26-2007. www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=25504
7. The Mainstream Media, http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/media.htm
8. Christians arrested at homosexual event, http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40929
9. Sher Zieve, Lewiston School Plays Down Muslim Ham, MichNews.com, 4-26-07. "As of May 2, 2007 the Maine Attorney General "says he will not file any charges against the student who allegedly placed a ham steak on a lunch table where muslin children were eating." http://www.wgme.com/News/story_12.shtml
10. Harding, http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54125
11. Declaration on Tolerance and Declaration of Principles on Religion in a Culture of Peace
12. Trading US Rights for UN Rules, www.crossroad.to/text/articles/turfur12-98.html
13. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, Facing the Humanitarian Challenge: Towards a Culture of Prevention, a pamphlet published by the UN, 1999.
14. Corinne McLaughlin and Gordon Davidson, Spiritual Politics (New York: Ballantine Books, 1994), 147.
15. Our Creative Diversity: Report on the World Commission on Culture and Development (Paris: UNESCO, 1996), pages 11-12, 45-46, 67-68.
16. Dr. G. Brock Chisholm, "The Re-Establishment of Peacetime Society," Psychiatry, February 1946.
17.www.crossroad.to/text/articles/MentalHealth2-99.html and www.Excerpts/chronologies/mind-control.htm
18. Clinton's War on Hate Bans Christian Values, www./text/articles/cwhbcv3-98.html
19. Federico Mayor, "Worldwide Action in Education, Education and Human Development, UNESCO, 1993.
20. J. Matt Barber, Pro-’Gay’ Bullies Pick Up the Pace, March 29, 2007.
