Anti-Neocons

what about this guy?
http://www.theinsider.com/news/591359_F ... _Palestine

_________________
"Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of ... [Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness], it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government." –Thomas Jefferson

That's Colin Farrell one of my favorite actors.


He never struck me as the type who got brainwashed by any of this establishment bullshit so hopefully his video on Palestine is closer to factual.

Isn't it a good thing regardless though? They end up having to expose it anyway so we win, actors have a large voice and Farrell I doubt was ever in favor of this. Still we know the 2 state solution is just a cover so the Zionists can expel everyone out of the country, but you have to be really on top of this to know what their agenda is.

Colin Farrell is Irish, there's a lot of support for Palestine in Ireland.

_________________
our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.

Maybe there is, but my point wasn't just about Ireland. My point was some of Colin's own cousins and family is Jewish and he knows that world, he knows hollywood and yet they are against the Zionist colonization project.

It's important to remember this because Hollywood rarely if ever allows a movie like this to come out, that most Jews in general are against communist Zionism. They are AGAINST it, even if Israel is in favor of it.

They do not believe this project is worthwhile and have not been brainwashed, yet there is almost NO push against Hollywood most of the time to show the other side of the story.

Why? Because Hollywood is controlled by, has been taken over by Likud Zionists and they have become the gatekeepers for all the dramas. That is plainly obvious and I think most people are aware of this now, there needs to be movies about Palestine and Kashmir the places we forgot.

There needs to be a full on push back AGAINST Globalization from all sides because its just plain wrong and insane, being promoted by insane Christain Zionists. The only places that effectively have the money and power to kill their propaganda, is independent film and the music industry.

If you look at the facts on the ground Zionists control every other form of media especially the Federal "Mass" Media which keeps people completely oblivious. Real movies on the Palestinian crisis and other tragedies will help to end it, and all it takes is a few.

The MIC and their money people are also in charge of big Pharma. When the number of "aware" AIDS maintenance therapy patients drop, the ad campaigns begin. That or when government is getting ready to cut their funds.

AIDS is probably the biggest medical fraud EVER. Check out this video ..

stream (WMV)
http://209.85.22.6/unyc/aidsinc.s.wmv

download:
ftp://209.85.22.3/unyc/aidsinc.s.wmv

umm, haha, I'm a big fan of Madonna and regarding Palestine, she promoted peace for Israelies and Palestinians since her last documentary I'm Going To Tell You A Secret where she documents her chaotic '04 trip over there. She dedicated her rendition of "Imagine" to the conflict ending it with a Jew and Palestinian kids huging each other. She even ended that same tour Re-invention Tour in '04 with both Palestine & Israel flags side by side. You can watch it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZtwxHg1aPo&feature=related

She is strongly anti-war, the first celeb to be against the Iraq invasion before it became the cool thing to do. I think peace is her agenda these days, I really doubt she's into foreign policy so she doesn't know the logistics or history behind the conflict or who Shimon Piss really is other than winning a Nobel (she met him last year in Israel). I think her perception is that the conflict is about two dueling religions, Jews vs. Muslims, which we all know is not the case.

But I think her intentions are good. And she does recognize Palestine which is what matters. Sorry for the long post, I just love this bitch.

_________________

& all 3 of those are likely frauds. Fuck Hollywood

_________________
"A higher level of cannabinoid activity in the human biochemical distribution in the biosphere may be necessary to prevent human extinction" - Dr. Robert Melamede, PhD

Deborah Orr: I hold no brief for Madonna. But she's been hard done by

She got away with it once, though not without controversy. But Madonna's second attempt to adopt a child from Malawi has been turned down, because she has not been a resident in the country for 18 months. The star's first adoption, of David Banda, went ahead because the residency requirement was waived. But the rules are not being relaxed in the case of this second child, Mercy James.

There's no Mercy for Madonna as court blocks adoption
The rule is in place to discourage the trafficking of children, although clearly Madonna's fame, bitterly cited as the magic quality that allowed her to bend the rules before, is also a cast-iron guarantee that she has no intention of exploiting a child or passing one on to an exploitative third party. There is just no possibility of the whereabouts or treatment of Mercy James becoming murky under Madonna's care.

Yet high-profile overseas adoptions do have some very vexatious consequences. The British charity Save the Children made a statement in opposition to Madonna's latest attempted adoption. The organisation claims that "international adoption can actually exacerbate the problem it hopes to solve. The very existence of orphanages encourages poor parents to abandon children in the hope that they will have a better life".

In a country where there are already more than two million orphans – in Africa children tend to be classed as orphans if the mother is dead but the father is alive – anything that might encourage more children to be abandoned by their extended families and placed in institutional care is viewed as worrying. What might possibly be good for a single child, the argument goes, might be a dead end for others.

Save the Children argues that "the best place for a child is in his or her family in their home community". On the face of it, this seems like good common sense. The charity also suggests that "international adoption and the orphanages that often provide the children to adoptive parents from overseas can divert money that could be better spent keeping families together and preventing children from having to be taken away from their parents in the first place".

Yet Mercy James has not been taken away from her parents. They are both dead. She does have relatives who are in touch with her, and who have expressed distress at the idea of her being removed from the country. But the child, nevertheless, had been in an orphanage for at least two years. Her extended family clearly feels itself unable to care for the three-year-old child full-time.

The orphanage she first met Mercy James at is one that Madonna donates a great deal of money to. Yet, applying Save the Children's logic, this is the wrong thing for the singer to do as well. A well-financed and glitzily supported orphanage, one is invited to conclude, must be a further temptation for struggling extended families.

I hold no great brief for Madonna. Actually, I think she's a bit mad to mount an adoption bid straight after a highly publicised divorce. I find reports that she "has her heart set on Mercy", as if Mercy is a lovely mansion in Connecticut, to be queasily disturbing. But it also seems that whether in the domestic or the international arena, adoption policy tends to deal in impossibly idealistic absolutes, rather than comparative benefit.

Save the Children's own policy, whereby families are supported in keeping their children, must surely have some perverse incentives built into it. In comparatively wealthy Britain, there is much complaint that people are encouraged to have children when they are in no position to support them adequately, and that there is also too much effort made to "keep them in their family in their home community".

The poor condition of a minority of children's upbringing suggests that there is indeed cause for concern in that direction. Yet a major charity is in effect campaigning for this approach to be championed among more vulnerable populations also.

The promotion of contraception is fraught with difficulty. Yet it still seems astounding that the decades in which technology provided humans with the ability to control their fertility have seen a population explosion so huge that it threatens the survival of the human race. Perhaps Madonna might use her fame, her wealth and her fondness for children to better effect if she instead helped to publicise the benefits of careful family planning in the West, and in the developing world.

_________________
Zeitgeist: Addendum
Designing the Future - The Venus Project
Future By Design
Zeitgeist: Moving Forward
When Victims Rule