The United States is presently being run by unelected war criminals. They have somehow suckered a number of people into fervently supporting them as they devastate the working classes of the country. Their greed is without limits and they have no regard for those who they harm. How could we have let this happen? How could a very advanced country now have such numbers cheering; "We hate fags and we love stem cells". Why is our country racing to separate itself from the civilized world?

I know there are those who will look at this latest budget proposal with pride. It's like being really stupid is a source for great pride.

Mark<

I am going to have to work at how to express a pretty outrageous reality and not come across as paranoid. My views are pretty extreme because that is the reality that I am addressing. We have a government that intends great harm to it's citizens. We are here to be exploded by a crime family that is lying to us about everything. I am convinced that they got themselves in office fraudulently. I believe that to be a fact provable with overwhelming evidence. People don't want to believe it. We want to believe in our country and how could our wonderful country get us into a war for profits. But if that is reality then I know that sound mental health dictates that I see it as clearly as I can and say it as clearly as I can. It won't be easy but I so much appreciate your most sincere efforts. I believe you share much of my worst fears.

An added factor that we both have to deal with, and I know that you get called more names then I do since your dealing with them an hour a day, is the fact that even our best elected officials will not address these issues. They are so afraid of all the labels that right wing talk will heap upon them. I am convinced that they know that we are up against much worse then they feel they are able to address honestly. Just can't handle all the flack and spin. So those who can, those not running for office, will have to try to raise even the ugliest of facts to a level of awareness for as many as possible.

Just curious Dave, but what do you think the motive would be to destroy the working class? With no middle class, the rich would only stay rich, not get richer. If there is no middle class, there's no one to buy things and the economy basically goes stagnant. Everyone, even the rich, lose in this situation.

That's the way I see it anyway, how do you see it?

-Nathan

Nathen;

As I can connect the dots it is a plot from the very rich to increase their wealth in so many ways. This was kind of lade out in the PINAC group. It was the plan of the Carlyle group and others who would accomplish their plan by gaining the Congress and White House by whatever means.

They want complete control and all of the power that great wealth could bring to them. The masses should have no means of redress. If there are large numbers competing for a limited number of low wage jobs then the people will be driven by survival needs and will have no protections or powers.

Simply put; any dollars that the very rich do not need to pay to their workers (their peasants), those are dollars they can keep for themselves. I don't believe these are people you would describe as decent, honorable, concerned, charitable or any traits other then selfish exploitation.

We the citizens of the USA have been fortunate to have had some great leaders who wanted to act in ways to benefit the people, the average citizens. Such motivations, I fear, are totally lacking in those who are presently in power by fraud and deception.

The government of the United States has been stolen by a small criminal element element intent on grabbing all that they can. Caring about us just isn't there. I truly wish it was otherwise but all evidence suggests a most unplesent reality that we the people need to see as clearly as we can. I also know that to address this as honestly as I can is to sound paranoid or unbelievable. We have to live with that also as some learn too slowley.

Nathan--short-term greed placed upon a plate is an enticing entre

The Imposter

The imposter poses as a person,
appearing to be a part
of the maddening scene,
yet with motives quite different
from the earthbound mind,
not concerned with the matters of men
as much as the ego would say,
but driven by a purpose
quite alien,

Directed to see a different world
than represented by false façade,
drawn to the battle of deep emotions
in the energy war between love and fear,
fluid, fluctuating thoughts
bogging low and slow,
then dancing high and fast,
scattered then controlled,
to and fro
in the vista beyond good or bad,

Where victory is heaven
and defeat is hell,
from moment to moment,
from glad to sad
and back again.

Strange place this
with needy souls;
the imposter’s cause is to help
and not get caught in the hurt.

Ben and others,

Questions had been left hanging on this very alarming matter and I think we should get back to it. Perhaps someone can address this with facts and not just "I don't want to believe that".

I think it most logical to believe that in a case where a large building has sustained very extensive impact damage, the place of that damage would be where the building would be most vulnerable to failure. Might the damage be so serious that the weight of the floors above that point could no longer be supported? That would be the point to be watching.

What we see on 9-11 is that despite the extensive damage the remaining supports were able to hold the weight above. This was true of the 2 largest towers. Building # 7 had no impact damage.

I do not believe they would have to place explosives on every floor. I know firemen reported hearing multiple explosions but I understand it would only be necessary to blast away main supports at the foundation. That much weight, the entire building, falling even a small distance would undubitably devastatee the entire structure in short order.

A number cameras were rolling at the moment, In both cases the points of impact were still supporting the upper floors. The failures had occurred at the base. That was true in all 3 buildings. This calls for some serious explaining.

I also understand that an order of "pull it" before building # 7 came down. If true that would mean that explosives had positioned over a period of several days prior to 9-11. Did somebody know something? Also prior to such a deliberate demolition one makes sure to clear the area of all people and that didn't happen. I also ask why would you "pull" a building that had only fire damage? I am convinced that building 7 was also a target of that day but at least one of the hijackings didn't come off as planned.

Some might want to check out 9-11citizenwatch.com. I understand they have new evidence and meetings happening all over.

http://www.911citizenswatch.org

Anything else we want to bring up......

Ok, what are your thoughts on requiring prisoners to pay for their "room and board"?

One other thing....

The following ad was spotted in the Salem District of Tamil Nadu, India:

"Pay 500 rupees and save 50,000 rupees later."

An ad suggesting that aborting a female fetus now could save a fortune in wedding expenses in the future. The article (see link below) also contains these grisly facts: "Nearly 60 percent of girls born in Salem District are killed within three days of birth, according to the local social welfare department. That doesn't count the growing number of abortions there to ensure a girl baby won't be carried to term."

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0209/p11s01-wosc.html

Thoughts?

Dave,

I am not sure which video you are watching...but I dont remember 1 video focused on the base of wtc1 or 2 so I am not sure where you are seeing the base fail. Additionally, I remember quite well seeing the building begin to fall directly above the damaged area. So until I see otherwise I am not going to believe your crazy consperacies...they are outrageous. As, for the explosions...a building falling can sound like it is exploding, also the electic lines can cause explosions...there are many systems which could explode. I will go back and review some video I have of the buildings falling...I am going off 4 years of memory, but it is hard to forget.

Just watched some video...its obvious the building begins to colapse at damaged sections...please link the video you are watching dave...

Concerning the ad in India -

I wonder what NOW thinks of this type of abortion rights?

The Romans noticed the Christian minority, because they were the ones that didn't kill their infant daughters...Modern feminists have no clue how much they owe to the Christians (and pro lifers) for establishing that women are of equal worth to men in the eyes of God.

Tracie--is that why the Catholic church destroyed the Books of Mary, called Mary Magdalene a whore, and burned wise women as witches over the centuries?

How much is all that worth?

How could governments, now and throughout history, get away with some of the things that they do to their own people? I guess that countries having dictators long in power, those people have little recourse and punishments for them would be fast and sure so I can't pose this question to them. Perhaps there might have been a time when such a question could have been asked of them. It is, rather, a question to a free people. Those who reside in countries where the people have enjoyed rights and protections. I ask would such a people stand by as they loose their freedoms and a great deal more. Would they stand by as their free press is taken over by special interests? Would they fail to act if their free elections were taken over by some corporate special interests? Would the people of a free country permit their environment, their economy, their health care, securities and jobs to be converted to great profits for a small emerging ruling class? Would they just not see any of this happening? Would those profiting the most be just too skillful at deceiving too many? How could such people gain the support of the people to invade and occupy an oil rich country that had done nothing to them, and in fact posed no threat to their country. Would the people of a free country permit being saddled with a multi-trillion dollar debt as the profits of the few multiply beyond comprehension?

I suppose this question is not a simple one. I guess it has much to do with how skillfully those perpetrating such a coupe are able to keep the people ignorant of their game. It would probably have much to do with how gullible the masses tend to be. Could this kind of a take over plan be accomplished in just any free country? Could they pull it off in Sweden, in Canada of Australia? Could they pull it off in the U.S.A. I wonder.

Perhaps this is just some far out thinking. Nothing like this could ever happen. If anyone would suggest such a thing we would simply refuse to believe it. We would just call such a person all kinds of bad names, that's what we'd do.

By the way, did I just here that 150 social programs just got cut or ended? Did that just come up in some budget proposal?

Did every one go away. No one wants to comment on any of the abov???

Freud, I am not Catholic so don't know what you are referring to as far as The Books of Mary unless these are "extra" books that some have tried to add to the original scriptures? Catholics aren't the only ones who accused MM of being a "whore" - the Bible does identify her as an adulteress but one who came out of that lifestyle. There were probably some innocent women burned as witches and probably some actual "witches" burned - not that I condone that. Do you actually have a point or do you just post things for the sake of argument?

I don't recall where on this blog that Mark questions the fact of an abortion being more dangerous than actual childbirth and I don't have time to go searching for it but since this is the "anything you want to bring up page" I trust I am safe posting the following here.

Here in the United States, most hospital are not required to keep track of deaths that are caused by an abortion. Abortion can and does cause: sepsis, ruptured uterus,hemmoraging (and let's not neglect to include suicide). These deaths will be listed as: sepsis, cause unknown or incomplete miscarraige, hemmorage from miscarrriage ect.

Europe and England do keep such records and their records show that it is safer to give birth than have an abortion. If hospitals here were forced to put the proper cause of death, the numbers would be an eye opener to everyone and that is why the pro abortion people and Planned parenthood fight such records.

This is the general "unofficial" consensus of many medical professionals, including my own personal Dr. At the hospital and especially in the Neo Natal ICU unit, these types of discussions come up often.

I have two links that connect abortion to breast cancer, although I do realize this subject is hotly debated. The information here is worth reading and considering.

http://www.pregnantpause.org/safe/abckahl.htm
http://dianedew.com/aborcanc.htm

Didn't John Kerry state that he personally believes that Life Begins At Conception?

Monty Patterson’s 18-year-old daughter, Holly, died on Sept. 17, 2003, of septic shock caused by inflammation of the uterus. The teen took RU-486 on Sept. 10 to terminate an unplanned pregnancy, Patterson said.

At least two other American women who took the pill in the United States died, although the FDA says it has not definitively tied any death to use of the pill. The agency’s decision to strengthen the drug’s “black box” warnings was triggered by the third death.

Those three deaths were among 676 adverse events reported through Nov. 5 by women who used the abortion pill. The reports include women who felt sick and dizzy to more serious illnesses that required hospitalization, according to the FDA.

Seventeen women who used RU-486 had tubal pregnancies; the drug is not to be used in women with suspected or confirmed ectopic pregnancies. Another 72 women bled so heavily after using the abortion pill that they required blood transfusions. And seven women suffered serious bacterial infections, including sepsis.

RE: The VA Underwear Bill....

Sounds like we're in for another boxer rebellion.

Yes Mark,

I believe you may have touched on a valid insight. I am inclined to believe that you are dealing with some on the blog that are retained by the GOP. They have been retained to divert you from all that needs to be addressed now. If they can tie you up completely debating the actions of a long dead pope (also issues of pro-life vs pro-choice) then they will have succeeded in diverting you from the very real problems pressing on us now. Conceeding all of the moral failings of Pious X11, he is no more a problem.

What is real today?: Criminals stealing our government. Crooked voting machines. Crime family in power that believe that their greedy ends justify any means. Involvement in illegal wars for profit. Saddling the people with massive debts. Attempts to take away Social Security through more slight of hand deceptions. The obvious role that our own corrupt government had to play in bringing 9-11 down on us.

And yes, Mark, while it may be historically informative, they have managed to redirect so much of your attentions away from realities now pressing that call for our full attention. Personally I would be inclined to delete all of the diversionary BS that Mike has or will enter and suggest that the White House reassign him to sabotage some other program. It has been educational observing how they operate but we need to get back to all that they are trying to do to us today.

Tracie--Mary Magdalene was the first person who saw Jesus after his resurrection--in considering the magnetic quality of love this has special significance--Mary Magdalene was one of Jesus' disciples--perhaps his closest disciple--a point that the Catholic church would like to deny in estabishing paternalism within its church, subjugating the position of women to the point of having priests afraid to masturbate, afraid to fuck, and trying to deny they have become pedophiles in trying to mortify the flesh.

Perhaps Mike can research how many of the early popes were killed in the act of adultery, not just killed as a result of their adultery

Lovers

It was just after dawn that Sunday,
when the form appeared

“Why do you weep, Mary?”

“Master?” She recognized him.

“Live the resurrection,” he smiled at her.

She smiled back, “You’ve come to me.”

“I cannot tarry, now,” he replied.
“But testify, I have overcome the world.”

Laughing to Keep from Crying

In the quasi-land where certainty
isn’t so certain,
it’s so hard to know
what’s on the other side of the curtain.
Faith in love is the only defense
against the ego’s devils,
lurking in suspense
within the unknown.

Given what you’re given,
deal with what you feel;
drama doesn’t have to be tragedy.
Joy is ready to jump at you,
in comedy,
at the most unexpected times.

The White Witch’s Brew

I need more space,
to learn about the gap between what I know and what I do.

What’s in my mind is not in my nervous system.

I need sacred time,
to develop my spiritual musculature,

to protect me from my addicted view of the world,

this ancestral depression that is Maya’s false happiness.

The ego speaks first and so loud.

It’s not difficult, just different, to seek heaven instead of hell.
I am so used to my sins,
and am not punished as much for them, as by them.

I need to realize my sin’s lies,
to radically repudiate them,

to claim myself for heaven right now,
realize to think divine thoughts is why I am alive.

Why do I resist God’s spiral path?

I need to close that gap between what I know and what I do.

I need to taste more of that sacred, golden elixir,

Let me take another sip of the white witch’s brew.

Oh Dave - Thanks for the laugh! (Retained by the GOP, indeed!) Did you miss that Mark is the one who brought up the subject of Pius XII on Ash Wednesday?

The pro-life vs the pro-abortion debate could possibly be called a "long-dead issue" as well - especially for those babies legally killed beginning 32 years ago but it's also a very present issue yet today - it's not going away and as more and more people become truly educated on the LIFE of unborn children, they are turning from a "pro-choice" mindset to a Pro-Life mindset! This issue is NEVER going to go away as long as people are legally killing unborn children. You can delete pro-lifers from your pro abortion blogs but we aren't going away. If you think that the possibility of rigged voting machines are more important than the life of unborn children, God help you. (And let me answer your question, in case you've forgotten, "Yes, Dave, I do believe that we should have verifiable voting machines." Does that give you some solace in your anxiety for a brief moment?)

Mark certainly does have the right to address and not address any issue he chooses; I am not denying that. My point is that just because an issue isn't important to YOU, personally, doesn't mean it's not an important issue, ok?

Gordon, if you are referring to a disciple as a follower of Jesus, yes Mary M was a disciple. She was not one of the 12 male disciples that are named in Scripture. I would have to disagree with you on her being "the closest". I do believe Scriptures tell us that would be John and Peter? Not 100% on that - I should check. Your poem about the encounter between Jesus and Mary after his resurrection - I think the fact that she was the first to see him speaks volumes to us about the worth Jesus himself places on the value of women. The title of your poem is misleading if you are implying what I think you are implying.

If what we have for a federal government today is anywhere near as bad as some of us are seeing it then we, the people, need to do all that we can. We need to try to wake up those who know not but who will also surly be victims of those who have gotten themselves into powerful positions and who have a criminal disregard for the normal citizens. I believe they are high placed thief's that are driven only by their own greed.
Please ask yourselves; "why would our government have so many thousands of private voting machines manufactured - Machines that maintain no records"?

Please ask yourself' "Why would Tom Delay and Dennis Hassert (sp?) block all efforts to require these machines to produce verifiable records from coming to a vote on our Congress"?

Why would they do that?

Tracie, for one should attempt to answer these questions. Not just offer insults and say that you don't want about it.

I am speaking of how the USA is no longer a representative democracy. I am talking about how government hackers are now doing our voting for us.

So now we have a government in place that is attempting to deceive us in all ways while they steal us blind. All too soon those most deceived will be wondering what happened to their jobs, to their benefits, to their once healthy environment, to their freedoms, to their free press and their rights as citizens.

All thinking people need fight to regain honest elections. That is the key. Crooked elections can only bring us crooked officials.

The NeoCon's dream was realized in Ethiopia some many years ago. The Empror at the time was, I believe, the richest man in the world. The normal adult full time working male then earned about $20 a year. The Empror was always looking for ways to shift more to himself. (Tough habit to brake, I guess). Most curious to me was that so many Ethiopians worshiped the Empror; some out of fear but many, I fear, knew nothing better.

You're right, Dave, that any further argument with Mike on the Vatican role in the Holocaust is a waste of time. I have made my point and given my sources (which give other sources). And Mike's refusal to address "Also Mark"'s questions speak volumes. If people can forget/justify helping genocide, it is more understandable how these right-wing propagandists can skew and deny everything else. Though admittedly, I know few so right-wing as to defend the abominable conduct of most Churches -- Catholic and Protestant -- during the Holocaust. It speaks to the extreme saintliness and bravery of those Christians and others who did speak up and make a difference, from Pastor Martin Niemoller to Swedish diplomat Raoul Wallenberg to those who concealed Anne Frank and her family.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -Edmund Burke

Vicky,

I am aware that there are many that are truly obcessed with cells and protoplasm that can, and likely will, lead to a human life. I will even conceed that at some point in the process an infant begins to develope and should probably be protected. This is not my all incompassing obcession, however. I believe, rather that it is one of several subjects that our GOP is using to divert us from paying attention to some of the stunts they are attempting. Likewise they have many totaly obcessed about the idea of gays being alowed to get married. Much of this works and our very corrupt government is very likely going to be able to screw the people while we debate our side obcessions. I don't believe you are geting $ from the GOP and I appreciat the minimal attention you give to, what I regard as the overwhelming problem, of voter fraud, Think of where that development is taking us.

Howard Dean will be a move in the direction of honest and credible government. Something that is now totaly lacking. Dean even balances budgets, opposes unnecessary wars and wouldn't be stuffing $ into HalliBurten or loosing billions of dollars. Emagin - character in government.

I think the anti-abortionists do not consider the ultimate effect of an exploding population across the world. I think that they assume that the earth's resourses are infinite. There was even an economic conference right after WW2 that assumed just that. Now 90% of the world's fisheries are depleated and we are reaching the peak of world oil production. The United States hit its peak oil production back in the 70s. So what will happen as these resources are depleated. Massive war and massive death if history is any indication. Why don't the anti-abortionists worry about the premature deaths of the unborn after they are born. Their central nervous systems will at least be fully developed when it hits the fan.

Placing and connecting explosives in a manner that would bring down three large building; that I understand is a task that would involves several weeks of planing. There had to be those in the know, Mark. It is a certanty that building number 7 was "pulled" and all evidence suggests that so were towers 1 and 2.

Very hard to believe we have such government officials, I know.

Why didn't this recent one collapse? The fire was a lot more intense than the ones in the WTC, which by the fire fighters accounts, was out.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050213/photos_wl_afp/050213122848_qsnvm548_photo2

And how about WTC 7 and the WTC owner's statement about "pulling" that building, which was mildly damaged by fire and had no impact damage.

How could the intelligence community be totally ignorant of the upcoming attack while a young Pakastani kid in Brookline knew of it a week in advance?

Is the government capable of allowing these events to happen? It's the way every other major war was started. The sinking of the Maine in order to start the Spanish American war was an action conducted by American forces. The Joint Chiefs of Staff's Northwoods document proposes many ways to initiate a way with Cuba in the 60s. Among them:

"The desired result from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develope an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western hemisphere."

"A series of well coordinated incidents will be planned in and around Guantanamo to give genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces."

"A 'Remember the Maine' incident could be arranged in several formes:

We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame the Cubans

It is possible to create an incidentwhich will demonstate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked has attacked and shot down a chartered airliner"

and it goes on and on.

JFK rejected it and initiated a troop pullout in Vietnam and looked what happened to him.

Maybe we should start "doing away with" people once they hit the age of ? pick a number? 55, 60, or how about retirement age? Maybe let them draw retirement for a year or two and then get the needle out?

Alternatively we should start controlling how many homo sapiens we mass produce here on planet earth. Mother nature will be the ultimate abortionist if we don't learn to control this problem soon. This planet is grossly overpopulated as it is. It took us less than 100 years to consume half the oil on this planet. The rest of the oil is going to disappear a lot quicker since there are more people on this planet and the per capita consumption is much higher.

Alternative plan for Vicky:

If a person produces a kid, then pass out the needle after the kid is 18. The tax breaks go to people who have not fathered or mothered kids. Where's my money (0 kids here)?

Mark you are right politics should be about heart! Caring about people and wanting to help them. I have always heard that in your voice. It is why I have supported and believed in you. I have always heard a person who wanted a larger audience so he could help. You are not about power and prestige. You speak about what this country can be and should be.

Have necrotoriums where people can apply to legally commit suicide--have breeding licenses and child quotas--and we'll extend the cut-of age from "Logan's Run"'s 29 to, say, 60(that will give Social Security a break).

And don't forget--soylent green--is people!

Dave,

I couldn't stop thinking about your "obsessed" comment - if you want to call pro life people "obsessed" feel free and thank you. So you will concede that those "cells and protoplasm will likely lead to a human life"? I was also thinking about what Michael Stoops spoke about in regards to the homeless people in America. He told us that there are 6x as many animal shelters in this country as there are shelters for the homeless! That figure didn't surprise me one bit in what I've learned about the "PETA" mindset of America.

Read what John Piper writes in the "Kairos Journal." He's writing about his family's experience in buying a dog from his local humane shelter.

"We were buying a dog a few years ago. At the humane society I picked up a brochure on the laws of Minnesota concerning animals. Statute 343.2, subdivision 1 says, “No person . . . shall unjustifiably injure, maim, mutilate or kill any animal.” Subdivision 7 says, “No person shall willfully instigate or in any way further any act of cruelty to any animal.” The penalty: “A person who fails to comply with any portion of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor.”This set me to pondering the rights of the unborn. An eight-week-old human fetus has a beating heart, an EKG, brain waves, thumb sucking, pain sensitivity, finger grasping, and genetic humanity, but under our present laws is not a human person with rights under the Fourteenth Amendment, which says that “no state shall deprive any person of life . . . without due process of law.” I wondered, if the unborn do not qualify as persons, it seems that they could at least qualify as animals, say a dog, or at least a cat. Could we not at least charge abortion clinics with cruelty to animals under Statute 343.2, subdivision 7? Why is it legal to “maim, mutilate and kill” a pain-sensitive unborn human being but not an animal? These reflections have confirmed my conviction never to vote for a person who endorses such an evil–even if he could balance the budget tomorrow and end all taxation."

Skip you are starting to suffer from "Dave's" disease...If you have truly been doing finite element analysis for 30 years you should be able to comprehend the differences between a 30 story building with a fire and a 100 story building with massive structural damage and a fire. Additionally, if a plane were to crash into another sky scraper tomorrow would it 100% fall? No. It depends on sooooo many details there is no way to predict the outcome. You are comparing a building with a normal fire to a building burning from jet fuel and structural damage. I gotta ask what you did strucural analysis for, I want to stay away.

Vicky and Tracie and Nathan and Ben (and others),

I've tried very hard to get a National Pro-Life representative to discuss abortion on a future show, along with a Pro-Choice representative. I've left several messages with the National Right to Life organization telling them what I would like, but they've unfortunately been unresponsive (more, I suspect, due to the quality of their help than any poltical reason, but in any event, I do not know because they do not return phone calls).

There are a number of other organizations I could try, but I thought if any of the four of you have a recommendation as to a proper pro-life spokesperson, I would be glad to invite him/her on my show.

And if she/he's local, I would invite him/her to the television studios to be on Channel 10 as well. If not local, I could do the show by telephone (as I do for most of my radio, but not TV, guests).

I know the subject of abortion is very important to the four of you, and I wanted to let you know that I'm working on it, but if you have any suggestions, they would be welcomed.

I'm posting this publicly, rather than privately, because there may be others who read this, other than the four of you, who have ties to Pro-Life Organizations or ideas for good guests with this point of view.

Feel free to respond either publicly via the blog or privately by clicking "Email Mark."

Thanks in advance!

And, to the rest of you, if there's a political issue you'd like to see discussed on THE INSIDE SCOOP, don't hesitate to let me know either publicly on the blog or privately by email. I may reject the idea, if it's too local or too technical, but it never hurts to ask. (Vicky, for example, had the great idea for the show on the homeless.)

This radio show is for you all. Use me as a resource.

--Mark

Ben,

Take a look at pictures of the south tower before its collapse. There are fewer than a dozen floors above the crash site. The one in the article I posted was 30 stories high and it was totally engulfed. If the fire is truely the primary reason for the collapse, it should also have done so with the more serious fire in the article. I can supply you pictures of other steel framed skyscrapers that were even taller with fires that raged for days near their bases. If that fire was so intense, why did the fire fighters that made it to the crash region within an hour or two give a thumbs up for other fire fighters to enter. Most of that fuel escaped through the other side.

An then there is the truely odd seismic recorders at several universities that recorded a massive jolt about the time witnesses heard and felt the explosions. Interestingly, when all the material hit the ground it registered a much smaller seismic signature.

Oh yes, please expain, with all your structural "expertice", how WTC 7 could have collapsed. It suffered absolutely no impact damage and had a minor fire burning. Of course when the owner of the complex said, in a PBS interview, that a decision was made to "pull" the building it came down immediately afterward. Setting those charges would take several months of analysis and testing, but we are to believe it happened in a few hours?

The Pentagon is the most interesting since there are extensive photographs of it before it collapsed. There was absolutely no damage from the wings and the 4 story tall tail like that seen in the twin towers. There is only a 14' diameter hole. What was it? I have no idea. But there were witnesses on live TV that day that said it looked like a cruise missile.

Ah Skip, my sincere sympathy is extended to you on the great loss in your life of 0 children. I mean this.

A couple of things here - I don't normally work on Sundays and I didn't work today...but I stopped in at the hospital as I've been anxious about a premature boy we've got in the Neo Natal Unit....as so often happens in our department, the abortion subject came up and even though we have the democrats and the republicans working together, we find that on the LIFE issue we are agreed. One of the Dr's on call today said he's been practicing (OB/GYN) for 16 years and during that time he's only had 2 cases where the life of the mother was considered "in danger" due to the pregnancy. We're talking of a large city Dr who sees alot of women during their pregnancies. He claims that is an overused argument for the pro abortion people. Overused and greatly exaggerated are the words he used.

Mark, I believe you asked at one time about the issue of the unused embryos - there are adoption services that deal specifically with embryo adoption.

One question for you Mark - someone mentioned that they've heard that the Jewish religion believes that a child isn't a child until the umbilical cord is cut? No one quite believed that this could be true but I told them I was going to ask you. What is the traditional Jewish view on the unborn?

And something that was mentioned in church a couple weeks ago on the Sanctity of Human Life. It was noted that when Mary, pregnant with Jesus, went to visit Elizabeth, pregnant with John, that John - a 6 month old unborn baby - recognized the PERSON in Mary's womb as the soon to be born Savior, Jesus Christ. Scriptures tell us that "the baby in Elizabeth's womb jumped with joy..." (It is believed that at the time Mary was only a couple weeks along in her pregnancy if even that far.)

I can't speak for wtc7...I know nothing about it. If the guy says he decided to pull it then Ill believe it.

Here is the problem...you want to only blame the fire, but there was a large explosion with tremendous force which caused the fire. The plane essentially flew into the middle of the building before it exploded due to 90% of the fuel being in the wings...The building implodes and you want to say the structural damage was not sufficient to bring the building down.

What you say could be right...but I prefer to believe the more likely scenario.

Ben,

Obviously you are capable of viewing objective evidence however much you do not want believe our top elected officials to be capable of such a deed. Would you weigh in your thinking, and you can still look it up, that the PINAC planers espressed more then 10, 12 years ago their intention to invade the Oil Fields of Iraq. They voiced at that time there belief that they would need "A NEW PEARL HARBOR type event to get the people behind their invasion. Are you aware of this Ben and if so would you weigh that in with your thinking? In so many ways the PINAC plans have been proceding as planned.

They needed a justification for invading Iraq. It would need to be so severe that people would rally behind them everywhere. It had exactly that effect and even though Iraq had nothing to do with it they were able to cause a good many to believe they did. Anyway, lets take this mater of logic a piece at a time. Are you aware of the PINAC plan and how they, the Neo-Cons have been implementing it?

The traditional Jewish view on abortion?

Hmm...one wag said that two Jews have three opinions...

But this is what I found from web research, and I'm confining it to traditional, rather than modern, views:

Halacha (Jewish law) does define when a fetus becomes a nefesh (person). "...a baby...becomes a full-fledged human being when the head emerges from the womb. Before then, the fetus is considered a 'partial life.' " 5 In the case of a "feet-first" delivery, it happens when most of the fetal body is outside the mother's body.

Historical Christianity has considered "ensoulment," the point at which the soul enters the body) as the time when abortions should normally be prohibited. Belief about the timing of this event has varied from the instant of fertilization of the ovum, to 90 days after conception, or later. There has been no consensus among historical Jewish sources about when ensoulment happens.

Abortion-related passages in the Hebrew Scriptures & Talmud:
The Babylonian Talmud Yevamot 69b states that: "the embryo is considered to be mere water until the fortieth day." Afterwards, it is considered subhuman until it is born.

"Rashi, the great 12th century commentator on the Bible and Talmud, states clearly of the fetus 'lav nefesh hu--it is not a person.' The Talmud contains the expression 'ubar yerech imo--the fetus is as the thigh of its mother,' i.e., the fetus is deemed to be part and parcel of the pregnant woman's body." 1 This is grounded in Exodus 21:22. That biblical passage outlines the Mosaic law in a case where a man is responsible for causing a woman's miscarriage, which kills the fetus If the woman survives, then the perpetrator has to pay a fine to the woman's husband. If the woman dies, then the perpetrator is also killed. This indicates that the fetus has value, but does not have the status of a person.

There are two additional passages in the Talmud which shed some light on the Jewish belief about abortion. They imply that the fetus is considered part of the mother, and not a separate entity:

One section states that if a man purchases a cow that is found to be pregnant, then he is the owner both of the cow and the fetus.

Another section states that if a pregnant woman converts to Judaism, that her conversion applies also to her fetus.

Abortions needed to save the life of the mother:
A passage from the Mishna quotes a Jewish legal text from the second century CE. It describes the situation in which a woman's life is endangered during childbirth. A D&X procedure (often called Partial Birth Abortion in recent years) might be used under these conditions today. However, this technique was unknown in ancient times. The legal text states that the fetus must be dismembered and removed limb by limb. However, if "the greater part" of the fetus had already been delivered, then the fetus could not be killed. This is based on the belief that the fetus only becomes a person after most of its body emerges from the birth canal. Before personhood has been reached, it may be necessary to "sacrifice a potential life in order to save a fully existent human life, i.e. the pregnant woman in labor." 1 After the forehead emerges from the birth canal, the fetus is regarded as a person. Neither the baby nor the mother can be killed to save the life of the other.

A second consideration is the principle of self-defense. Some Jewish authorities have asserted that if the fetus placed its mother's life at risk, then the mother should be permitted to kill the fetus to save herself, even if the "greater portion [of its body] had already emerged" from the birth canal.

Modern views are perhaps a bit more nuanced than the traditionalist view:

Other abortions:
Some Jewish authorities have ruled in specific cases:

One case involved a woman who becomes pregnant while nursing a child. Her milk supply would dry up. If the child is allergic to all other forms of nutrition except for its mother's milk, then it would starve. An abortion would be permitted in this case. An abortion of the fetus, a potential person, would be justified to save the life of the child, an actual person.
An abortion would be permissible if the woman was suicidal because of her pregnancy.
Jewish authorities differed in a case where a continued pregnancy would leave the mother permanently deaf. She obtained permission for an abortion from the Chief Rabbi of Israel.
Many Jewish authorities permit abortion in the case of a pregnancy resulting from a rape, if needed in order save her great mental anguish.
Most authorities do not permit abortion in the event that the fetus is genetically defective or will probably pick up a disease from its mother. The rationale is that even though the child will be malformed, disabled, or diseased, it would still be formed in the image of the creator. Rabbi Eliezar Waldenberg is one authority who believes otherwise. He "allows first trimester abortion of a fetus which would be born with a deformity that would cause it to suffer, and termination of a fetus with a lethal fetal defect such as Tay Sachs up to the end of the second trimester of gestation." 3
An abortion is sometimes permitted if the woman suffers great emotional pain about the birth of a child who will experience health problems.
Abortions are not permitted for economic reasons, to avoid career inconveniences, or because the woman is unmarried.
In a very unusual case, a woman in New Jersey was pregnant with a hydroencephalic fetus. Its large head prevented a conventional delivery. The physician recommended a Caesarian section. But the woman asked for a D&X procedure on the grounds that the fetus' life was doomed anyway and a C section would weaken her uterus for her next pregnancy. Her rabbinic authorities agreed. 4

Political aspects of abortion access:
Conservative, Reconstructionist and Reform Judaism are formally opposed to government regulation of abortion. They feel that the decision should rest with the woman, her husband, doctor and clergyperson. Some Orthodox authorities agree with this stance.

All recognize that the decision to have an abortion is a difficult one, and is not to be undertaken without considerable thought.

Here's another source...arguably more pro-life:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/abortion.html

And here's a long article, which I have only skimmed, not read:

http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/Cavalier/Forum/abortion/background/judaism1.html

These are all from Google searches. To the extent there is any agreement in Judaism, it is clear that a fetus has value but not equivalent value to a human life and that the fetus must be sacrificed to protect the mother's life or health. Abortion is a weighty decision, not to be taken lightly, and it would seem to me to be against Jewish Law for contraceptive purposes only.

But then again, I do not support imposing ANY religious law in the United States. And I personally do not follow all Jewish laws. So, for me, it's interesting as philosophy/history/tradition/practice rather than as law.

The NeoCon goons assigned to this blog can they win? What is their purpose? Can they successfully divert the attention of the host away from todays issues, todays frauds. Could they successfully tie him up in some abortion debate? I Don't want to think that could happen. Mark appears to know that is their purpose. I bet that Mark Levine isn't going to waste more then even 60 or 70 more hours on such devirsions. I know that Mark knows their game. He will not let them succeed. Not forever I'm pritty sure. I hope not. I believe he will soon return to addressing those issues that the NeoCons want to divert him from. He'll get back, just watch.

Hi Mark,

I am just now finding and reading your post on the show you're planning with a pro life spokesperson and want to tell you that I appreciate your willingness in this area.

Thank you for your offer to us to make recommendations for a pro life spokesperson. I will give this matter some thought and get back to you if I have any ideas or suggestions. Nathan, Tracie and Ben, I encourage all of you to think about this as well and provide help and feedback to Mark on this.

You're a gracious host for being such a left wing nut! ;-)

Skip,

Kind of a personal, off the topic question...but since you told us your age here on this blog, I've been wondering if you were in the service and if so, if you were in Vietnam? I'm assuming probably not as I haven't seen you mention it, but you are between my husband's age and Gordon's age and they were both over there - in fact, they were both there at the same time for a couple of months. Just something I was curious about. I hope that's not being too curious. If so, just ignore me. ;-)

We should control the people who are born on this planet huh Skip? There is birth control available and if people don't opt to use it or if it fails, then what? Kill the children? How about forced sterilization on any woman who gets an abortion? Sterilize the SOB who impregnated her and then persuades her into an abortion. Sterilize the dead beat men who don't take care of the children they help create. Let women decide which men are good candidates for "fatherhood" and sterilize the rest of the jerks.

Wow - the Jewish belief system on abortion,birth etc - didn't realize it was so messed up.

Oh Vicky, Tracie, Ben, Nathan - Don't hold your breath waiting on Mark to "find" a good pro life rep to guest on his show. Can't you see his bias already on knocking the "help" at the NRL center and then telling you if you can find a "proper" spokesperson to let him know. What constitutes "proper" Mark? Someone you know that you and your other pro abortion guest can scream out with your loud shrilly rudeness?

Jen,

"Proper" simply means someone willing to come on the show who passionately believes in pro-Life, knows their stuff (medical and political details) and can debate respectfully someone who is pro-Choice without personal attacks or other unseemly behavior. (This is the standard for all guests, frankly: someone who knows there stuff, feels passionately, and can debate respectfully without personal attacks.)

If you have a name, Jen, or an organization you'd recommend, please let me know.

Jen,

Please don't assume malice until proven otherwise. I have had a lot of guests on my show with whom I personally disagree. Check out my archives if you have any doubt on this.

Also I think a pro-life rep chosen by you (or Vicky or Tracie or Nathan) would be preferable than one chosen by me just so I'm not accused later of getting someone of a specific view (too moderate or too hard-core, too strong or too weak)

Jen--will you be my procreating female? You have passed the psychological profile--but since I am reptilian--it is difficult to say whether offspring will be mammalian enough to breast feed or whether underwater birthing will be necessary

My subordinates will be in touch

Dear God,

Please send your angels
to illumine George Bush's mind.
Give him insight and wisdom
and intelligence and strength.
May the impulses of his higher mind
replace all thoughts of fear.
Forgive me my temptation to forget his innocence,
and help him, please,
to not forget mine.
Bless us both,
and bless everyone.

Amen

Gort - Lay off the sick comments to me and crawl back into your swamp.

Jen--Mr. Beranga will take your response as a definite maybe--perhaps you would be interested in viewing the compensation package?

The Imposter

The imposter poses as a person,
appearing to be a part
of the maddening scene,
yet with motives quite different
from the earthbound mind,
not concerned with the matters of men
as much as the ego would say,
but driven by a purpose
quite alien,

Directed to see a different world
than represented by false façade,
drawn to the battle of deep emotions
in the energy war between love and fear,
fluid, fluctuating thoughts
bogging low and slow,
then dancing high and fast,
sc-ttered then controlled,
to and fro
in the vista beyond good or bad,

Where victory is heaven
and defeat is hell,
from moment to moment,
from glad to sad
and back again.

Strange place this
with needy souls;
the imposter’s cause is to help
and not get caught in the hurt.